War Without End; A. Chafuen

12 Charles Manson family, or in regi mental strength, like the guerrilla troops in the Middle East, Africa and South America. Some terrorists might be classed simply as common criminals who indulge in unlawful activity, commit violations for which punishment is imposed. The guerrilla movement welcomes such recruits who faith fully execute orders of destruction. But there is a risk that they may cause problems of discipline and may embarrass the movement through senseless acts of violence that are devoid of any ideological justification. The world leaders of terrorism do not seek destruction for its own sake. They aim to destroy the pri vate property order and build on its ruin a political command order. But they freely make use of the everWAR WITHOUT END 13 willing criminal element of society which they seek to indoctrinate and organize in the service of ((the cause." The writings of the great leaders of world communism reveal their deep concern about unprinci pled guerrilla action. V. I. Lenin, the Russian revolutionary and first premier of the U.S.S.R., repeatedly warned against it: We would not for one moment assert that individual strokes of heroism are of no importance at all. But it is our duty to utter a strong warning against devoting all attention to terror, against regarding it as the principal method of struggle, as so many at the present time are inclined to do. Terror can never become the regu lar means of warfare; at best, it can only be of use as one of the methods of a final onslaught. 2 It is asserted that partisan actions lower the class-conscious proletariat to the level of drunkards and bums. This is correct. But from this follows only that the party of the proletariat never should consider partisan warfare to be its only or even its chief means of struggle. This particular technique must be integrated with other tactics and be in harmony with the most important methods of combat. Partisan warfare should be en nobled by the enlightening and organiz ing influence of socialism. 3 Mao Tse-tung, the chief theorist of the Chinese Revolution and party chairman, frequently reminded his guerrillas of the importance of party discipline and central leadership. In the words of the Chairman: ((Unor ganized guerrilla warfare cannot contribute to victory and those who attack the movement as a combina tion of banditry and anarchism do not understand the nature of guer rilla action."4 Leon Trotsky, the Russian revolu tionist and theorist of worldwide revolution, openly called for ter rorism: The revolution ((logically" does not demand terrorism, just as ((logically" it does not demand an armed insurrection.

What a profound commonplace! But the revolution does require of the revolu tionary class that it should attain its ends by all methods at its disposal-if necessary, by an armed rising; if re quired, by terrorism. 5 , .. the first condition of salvation is to tear the weapons of domination out of the hands of the bourgeoisie. It is hope less to think of a peaceful arrival to power while the bourgeoisie retains in its hands all the apparatus of power .... There is only one way: to seize power, taking away from the bourgeoisie the material apparatus of government. 6 The Ideological Foundation Why should Marxian terrorists want to seize all political and economic power? They are convinced that capitalism is unjust, that it exploits the working people for the benefit of property owners. It is un just that some people own great wealth while others linger in pov erty and despair. The terrorists hold to a vague ob jective theory of value according to 14 THE FREEMAN January which all economic exchange ought to be made objectively so that everyone gets his ~(fair share."

They are confident that the future belongs to them and that socialism is coming with the inevitability of natural law. They see themselves as the van guard of the coming age. And finally, they are deeply con vinced that socialism will not only eliminate all social injustice, but also will bring greater material wellbeing to all. We need not search here for the roots of these ideas. They were planted by the revolutionaries and social reformers of the 19th century. But how do they grow to bear such violent fruit as terrorism? In the U.S., the notion of injustice in the capitalistic system has gained millions of devotees. The majority of Americans are clamoring for social welfare and economic transfer in order to alleviate the plight of the poor. They are guided not only by economic notions, but also by reli gious doctrines and concepts. Many clergymen piously support the no tion that everyone has an inalien able right to a «(decent" life and a «decent" home. The state is respon sible for a decent minimum wage, minimum health care, education, and so on. Let anyone with doubts about the ideological trend ask him self this simple question: What are the chances in the coming election for any candidate promising cuts in social spending? Many people are demanding reduction of taxes. But who is asking for reduction in social programs?

Equalizing Incomes The revolutionaries make use of the religious belief that every worker is useful to society and that everyone has the same opportunity for attaining heaven. They conclude that the garbage collector is as use ful to society as the. engineer or the doctor, and thus entitled to the same income. Admittedly, they all are equal in the sense that all are use ful. But they do not render equal services. It is one thing to believe that the Creator has given everyone an equal right for attaining heaven. It is quite different to assert that everyone contributes equally to the material wellbeing of society. Marxian terrorists are convinced that economic value is imparted sole ly by physical labor, that to the laborer belong the fruits of all economic activity-wages, interest, profits, or whatever. Otherwise, someone is taking what rightly be longs to the worker. Most people sympathize with this notion be cause they are convinced that they are getting less than they deserve.

Therefore, they are willing and ready to embrace the exploitation theory. Although the terrorists have not 1979 WAR WITHOUT END 15 yet become popular ~~heroes" in the U.S., they certainly are no ordinary criminals. Youths of America still admire their athletes, the baseball and football heroes. But the press carefully reports the achievements of the international ttliberation movements," thereby introducing terrorist heroes to the American public. All over the world college stu dents display posters of ~~Che" Guevara and Salvador Allende next to the Christian cross. There is little awareness that ~~Che" never found popular support for his attempt at conquering Bolivia; the peasants re jected him and few, if any, ever joined his liberation army. The terrorist activity in the United States is still in its first stage, the ideological stage. The people are unaware that an ideolog ical battle is raging over the hearts and minds of their youth. The battle is fought in the schools, churches, and homes.

In Germany, a recent poll of stu dents at Heidelberg University showed that most extreme left-wing students come from educated middle-class backgrounds. They grew up at home, enjoyed all modern conveniences and high standards of living, and were accustomed to a paternalistic society. They received according to middle-class necessity and contributed according to ability, which was very little. They were taught in school and on television that their fathers are exploiters who are feasting on the sweat and blood of the working man. Can it be sur prising that children of weal thy bankers and industrialists are eager to rebel against their parents? In Argentina, the sons of a weal thy businessman recently organized their father's kidnaping. Other chil dren placed bombs in their parents' bedroom. Such acts seem inconceiv able until one discovers that the director of the state university nur sery school was a guerrilla leader.

Seeds of Conflict In order to launch the revolution, terrorists are planting the seeds of conflict in society. Social conflict is their road to victory. They are spreading false doctrines of conflict and clamoring for a gradual realiza tion of socialism as Karl Marx had envisioned it in the Communist Manifesto. This is how Leonard Read describes the procedure: Were I a loyal Russian devoted to the U.S.S.R.-Union of Soviet Socialist Republics-and determined to overcome, subvert, and absorb the U.S.A., what would my tactic be? Drop hydrogen bombs? Probably not! That tactic would be resisted as would an invading army. What then? Would I not try to out maneuver resistance by attractively phrasing and propagandizing the ideas of socialism? I'd play upon such themes as ttFrom each according to his ability, to each according to his need." How would I 16 THE FREEMAN January measure my success? By the extent to which the people of the U.S. adopted my creed, the ten points of the Communist Manifesto. 7 The revolutionaries hold to their type of justice: ((to receive according to what we need, according to our necessities." Their concept is diametrically opposed to that of the private property order: ~~to receive according to what we are entitled; and we are entitled only to what others want to give us freely in ex change for what we give in return."

Only one of these definitions can be correct. What are our necessities? Ifwe could have an objective scale of necessities, then we could possibly find an answer. If economic goods were available in abundance, we could satisfy all our wants. But na ture did not provide us with an infi nite supply of material goods and services. The private property order cannot be blamed for this natural scarcity. As long as nature is meager and miserly, which forces man to value his provisions, volun tary exchange is the only fair and equitable distribution. When we recognize that economic goods are valuable and that we must give something in exchange, the exploi tation theory and the labor theory of value lose any rational justification. In the market order a businessmanmust pay a wage equal to the work er's contribution in order to attract labor. Economists call this the worker's marginal productivity. If a given employer refuses to bid that much, other employers would be willing to hire the worker in order to increase their profits.

It is difficult to argue with ter rorists who sincerely believe that they are an enlightened minority. They cannot blame God for the world of scarcity, so they blame (~evil" individuals and their economic order for man's limita tions. Man lingers in poverty be cause man does not behave as he should. But the revolutionaries aim to change evil men; they aim to save mankind. Is socialism inevitable? Its followers are convinced that they will achieve the utopian maxim ((From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." They are clinging to their beliefs, al though more than sixty years have passed since the Russian Revolution and the Russian people were sup posed to create the Proletarian paradise. And yet, the Russian peo ple continue to linger in poverty and despair. It is ideas that cause man to act. And action makes history. The com ing of socialism depends on ideas.

Whose ideas? Our ideas. We need to study the numerous fallacies that support socialism. But above all, we must learn to appreciate man's work and achievement when he is allowed to be free.

1979 WAR WITHOUT END 17 The Battle Is Ideological When terrorism is disrupting economic life and jeopardizing law and order, the state, which is social authority with power to enforce its laws, seeks to reassert itself. It mobilizes its police power and may call on its armed forces to crush the terror. But the application of brute force rests on the ideological as sumption that the policemen and soldiers approve of the system they are supposed to defend. Without this approval, which grows from an un derstanding of the pri vate property order, they cannot be expected to function. Why should they risk their lives obeying orders to defend a sys tem they despise? Why should .. they confront the terrorists if they them selves are tempted to commit acts of terrorism? The apparatus of state disintegrates and all resistance ceases when police and military join the revolutionaries. When the state enjoys the popular support to prevail over the ter rorists, the latter usually seek and receive international reinforcement.

But this international support con stitutes much less a threat to society than does the ideological attack at home. National considerations pre dispose people against foreign ideologues and their objectives. Surely, ideas have no nationality, but people tend to relate alien ideas to foreigners. Mao Tse-tung made use of this psychological principle to wage war on the Japanese and find supporters for his movement. The Cubans and the Russians are facing the same problem today in Africa they are foreigners. The war against terrorism is a war without end. This ideological struggle occurs in the classrooms in the churches, in the press, on r~dio and television, and on the floors of Congress. Every day the forces of individual freedom and the private property order are engaging the forces of pragmatism and the politi cal command order. They are bat tling for the minds of men. Ii -FOOTNOTESlEncyclopedia Britannica Book of the Year, 1977, p. 218.

2V. I. Lenin, Selected Works (New York: International Publishers, 1943), vol. II, p. 17. 3Lenin, «<The Guerrilla Warfare," Sept., 1906, in Marx, Engels, and Marxism, 7th rev. ed. (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1965). 4MaoTse-tung, On Guerrilla Warfare (New York: F. Praeger, 1961), p. 45. 5Leon Trotsky, Terrorism and Communism paperback ed. (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1961), p. 58. 8Ibid., p. 36. 7Leonard E. Read, Vision (lrvington-on Hudson, N.Y.: The Foundation for Economic Education, Inc., 1978), p. 82.