From the Mouths of Babes; D. Peterson

Only two uni ts earlier we had spent several days discussing the principles of the Declaration of In dependence. I had tried to explain in simple terms the formal writing of Thomas Jefferson. I had placed spe cial emphasis on the importance of the truths deemed "self-evident to all men." Even as the discussion proceeded, I had begun to detect that these self evident truths and inalienable rights were indeed foreign to many of the youngsters. The very idea that the main purpose of government was the defense of individuals' lives, liber ties, and properties seemed entirely Mr. Peterson of East Greenville, Pennsylvania, teaches economics and history in junior high school. Dennis L. Peterson From the Mouths of Babes new to many of them. This was con firmed when I rhetorically asked, "What is the purpose of govern ment? Is it to provide jobs? Set prices? Build homes?" The overwhelming response was, "Yes, that is govern ment's job."

The explanation that followed corrected their fallacious think ing-or so I thought. They even did well on the test, parroting back the freedom philosophy I had so ex pertly taught them. Now, as I read the bills they had proposed for their Congress, I real ized the truth-they had not really learned the philosophy of freedom. The big brother philosophy was firmly and unmistakably embedded in their young minds. Two bills proposed severe inter national trade restrictions. Two oth ers demanded longterm, low-inter est loans for farmers and students. Another mandated involuntary auto seat restraints. Still another recom mended a guaranteed annual in299 300 THE FREEMAN May come. One even suggested that the government enter the fruit-growing business. It is true that one could simply dismiss such proposals as the un thinking work of junior high school students. But it is not that simple.

From these bills I quickly realized that the students were learning well the philosophy of government so prevalent today. Their bills merely reflected proposals they hear dis cussed on television. Their bills, with a little spit and polish, refinement, and professional legal terminology, are the very issues being debated in the halls of Congress. These students knew of nothing else to propose. Throughout their lives they have been hearing adults, especially the government "ex perts," discussing the efficacy of government regulation and inter vention. Practically every proposal offers some form of government con trol. And usually such proposals are designed to benefit some unfortu nate individual or group, thus ap pealing to their desire to help others in need. Many of the students had at tended public school for several years, where they had received the govern ment's philosophy of control under the guise of preparing them for free dom. Those who had attended pri vate school had either not been ex posed to the freedom philosophy or had not truly come to accept it for themselves. None of them had read literature written by proponents of limited government.

As I sat at my desk, dejected and defeated, I thought back to my own early schooling. Even then several social studies teachers had espoused collectivist ideas. The literature was filled with them. But at home I saw in my parents hard work, rugged in dividualism, sound personal econ omy, and a fear of government in terference. It was about that time that I began receiving The Freeman and "Notes From FEE." I still recall my excitement when a book written by Leonard Read arrived in the mail and the elation I felt upon turning to the dedicatory page and reading, "To Frederic Bastiat .... " Hand penned following these printed words were, "... and Dennis L. Peterson." It was autographed by Mr. Read. At that time I knew of no greater honor. It encouraged me in learning more fully the freedom philosophy. Slowly I have realized that the freedom philosophy is not some thing that can be taught in a few class periods. It cannot become a part of one's life through a mere intro duction in school. It must be con stantly nurtured, strengthened, and sustained. It must be shown to work on a day-to-day basis. It must be re inforced in real life in the home, in the church, and in the very halls of government. In short, it is some thing that can be discouraged and 1983 FROM THE MOUTHS OF BABES 301 destroyed or encouraged and strengthened by others, but it must be learned through self-discovery.

The way of freedom must be taught, not by deriding the socialis tic fallacies, but by accentuating the righteousness of freedom. As Mr. Read so clearly stated in Accent on the Right, "When we accent what is right, we put ourselves in the realm of the positive; our message becomes attractive, for it is one of hope rather than despair. This approach also strips the wrongdoing of its plausi bilities and without any declama tion on our part-leaves it bare, na ked, and exposed." A Lifetime Challenge In reflecting on the lessons learned from my students, I nQw understand that teaching freedom to others is not the work of a'semester, but rather the work of a lifetime. It will require many lessons, not one lecture; much reinforcement, not mere regur gitation. A proponent of freedom should be a perpetual student. No one can be a teacher who is not at the same time a student himself. "Everybody is ig norant," Will Rogers said, "only on different subjects." Students will advance in their learning only to the degree their teacher is advancing in his own education. Samuel Smiles summed up this point in his book Thrift when he wrote, "Every man's first duty is to improve, to educate, and elevate himself, helping for ward his brethren at the same time by all reasonable methods."

He should live his life in such a way that others will see the desir ability of individual freedom. He should beware of developing a repu tation as a ranting fanatic who is always negative in his attitude. Rather, he should be an exemplary proponent of the positive, emphasiz ing the benefits of freedom. He should illustrate how good freedom is, not how bad collectivism is. Now I am asking myself what oth ers are seeing in me. Will my young daughters learn the freedom philos ophy from my life the way I learned it from my parents? If they do not, I have only myself to blame. , Special Issue of The Freeman on The Renewal of Freedom Reprints of historic documents and other suggested readings on Con stitutional Government in America. Copies of this July 1981 issue available in quantities of 10 or more at $.25 each. (Minimum order 10 copies.) Order from: The Foundation for Economic Education, Inc.

Irvington, New York 10533 Lawrence W. Reed Economists and the Future IN September, 1981, an economist from a major university in Michigan made known his economic forecast for 1982. His prognostications were widely publicized; perhaps some business or government decisions were based on them. According to the economist, the sluggish condi tions of 1981 would give way to re covery early in 1982. Auto sales would improve to an annual rate of 9.7 million vehicles by the second quarter. Unemployment would "sta bilize" at about the 8 per cent level. Economic expansion would spread to all major sectors, with the overall "rate of growth" doubling by the end of the year. Price rises would remain about as strong as they were in 1981. Many of his predictions were ex pressed in precise mathematical quantities. What a difference a few months can make! Anyone who was awake 302 last year knows that this particular forecaster entirely missed the mark.