The Spirit of Freedom; R. Bearce

John Adams was enthusiastic about the historic action taken by the Continental Congress on July 2. Mr. Bearce Is a freelance writer In Houston, Texas. A resolution favoring independence from Great Britain had been carried by the affirmative vote of twelve Colonies. Not until the 4th of.July, though, was the actual Declaration of Independence formally adopted. Although Adams missed foretelling the exact day of future celebrations, he accurately described the manner in which America's Independence Day would be remembered by later generations. Each Fourth of July, Americans commemorate the adoption of the Declaration of Independence. "Old Glory" comes out of the closet and appears on front porches across the nation. Bands play "The Stars and Stripes Forever." Thoughtful citi zens give thanks for the blessings of liberty. Such patriotic enthusiasm appears as a yearly ritual across the United 341 342 THE FREEMAN June States. The outward display of loy alty is there, but does this allegiance reflect an in-depth understanding of the Declaration of Independence a real commitment to personal freedom?

Although John Adams wrote triumphantly to Abigail about the vote for independence, he added a critical observation: "You will think me transported with enthusiasm, but I am not. I am well aware of the toil and blood and treasure that it will cost us to maintain this Decla ration and support and defend these states." The Critical Challenge We are now facing that same crit ical challenge. The Declaration of Independence may be extolled, but just praising it as a relevant, thoughtful document of freedom will not preserve it. Enshrining it will not strengthen freedom. Instead, we must re-examine and reassert the principles outlined in the Declara tion of Independence. Consider the second inspiring sen tence of the document: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness ..."

The colonists had enjoyed these God-given rights and others since the first settling of America. With varying degrees of freedom, they could own property, bear firearms, and worship as they pleased. They had the right of trial by jury, and they practiced representative govern ment. Most important, they had been free to live their own lives as they-not the government-best saw fit. When these freedoms were threat ened by Parliament and King George III, the colonists became indignant. Receiving no just response to their grievances, they chose to separate themselves from the mother coun try. The Declaration of Indepen dence was the formal statement of their decision to be totally indepen dent and self-governing. The real importance of the Decla ration, however, is its fundamental assertion of individual freedom. Even if the demand for political in dependence had not been made, the document would still be a profound statement in defense of human dig nity. When the Thirteen Colonies proclaimed their independence as the United States, they were reaf firming personal freedom and re jecting authoritarian rule by gov ernment over the individual.

Several years after the United States had won independence from Great Britain, a veteran of the Lex ington-Concord fight in 1775 was asked why he had fought against the British. "We had always governed ourselves," replied the rugged old 1985 THE SPIRIT OF FREEDOM 343 minuteman, "and we always meant to. They didn't mean we should." His forthright answer reveals the main issue of the American War of Independence-FREEDOM. The min uteman understood that if he was to have freedom, he would have to en joy the right of self-government. He reasoned that he could govern him self only to the extent that he exer cised personal judgment and choice over his own affairs. For almost one hundred fifty years, the colonists had done just that-accepted individual freedom, responsibility, and ac countability for their own lives. Gov ernment regulations and controls threatened that freedom. Oppressive Government The Declaration of Independence clearly states the objection to op pressive governmental authority.

The central portion of the document shows that the colonists were pro testing abuse ofpower, usurpation of their rights, obstruction of justice, and governmental interference. Speaking of the King of England, they pointed to this abuse of govern ment authority: "He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people and eat out their substance." Although he was eventually char acterized as such, King George III was not a tyrant. He and Parliament had shown a rather benevolent, paternalistic attitude toward the Thir teen Colonies-an attitude similar to the "compassion" and "concern for the disadvantaged" supposedly shown by our modern-day politi cians. Like young, immature chil dren, the Colonies were to benefit from the fatherly hand ofthe British Crown. But they were not very im pressed by this paternal hand of reg ulation, decrees, taxes, and other bu reaucratic interventions.

"Tyranny!" shouted the colonists. They saw unlimited government power for what it was-the seed of repression and subjugation. Patriots like Thomas Jefferson fought for the principles of limited government and individual freedom. They knew that the main role of government was twofold: (1) apprehending and pun ishing domestic evildoers-those people who would violate other peo pie's right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," (2) organizing the defense of law-abiding citizens against foreign aggression. Govern ment was not to be the source of a people's material welfare. The Declaration of Independence speaks eloquently of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" for the individual. These rights could be se cured only when government itself was held within strict boundaries of power and authority. The colonists realized they could improve their own personal lives if they were free of government interference. They did 344 THE FREEMAN June not want the government trying to do for them what they could and should do for themselves. They asked only for the freedom to enjoy the just fruits of their daily labors.

Even as the Crown continued to infringe upon their "unalienable rights," the colonists followed legal channels of protest, expressing loy alty to the King. There was the firm intention of retaining the tradi tional political relationship with England .. The preservation of free dom-not revolution-was on the col onists' minds. Eventually, patience ran out, prompting Patrick Henry to declare: "We have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned, we have remonstrated, we have sup plicated, we have prostrated our selves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned with contempt from the foot of the throne."

Individual Dignity The American War of Indepen dence was fought to preserve a truly "revolutionary" truth-each of us is a unique individual, able to accept self-responsibility and thus to enjoy personal dignity. For the most part, the governments, systems, revolu tions, societies, and ideologies of the world have tried to suppress that truth. People have been enslaved, tortured, and killed by those who reject man's God-given right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." The American colonists had seen the approach of slavery. In the Dec laration of Independence, they ac cused King George III of seeking the "establishment of an absolute tyr anny over these States." Similar language was used by the revolu tionary Jacobins during the French Revolution when they assailed the monarchy under Louis XVI. The French radicals shouted lofty slo gans about liberty, but their bloody revolution against the monarchy hardly parallels the spirit of the American Revolution-the true spirit of freedom.

"Liberty! Equality! Fraternity!" clamored the revolutionaries of France. Louis XVI lost his head on the guillotine. So did thousands of other Frenchmen. The leaders of the French Revo lution of 1789 had read the Decla ration of Independence. They ad mired America's document of freedom. Unfortunately, they lauded it but rejected its principles. They failed to comprehend what Jefferson and Adams meant when they said "all men are created equal." Equal1985 THE SpmIT OF FREEDOM 345 ity as it is outlined in the Declara tion says that individuals are equal in their right to be free and inde dent-to be free and independent as long as they respect the rights of oth ers to be free and independent, with .everyone respecting property and other individual rights. Each person should have the right to rise to the height of self-realiza tion consistent with that person's individual talents, ambition, and willingness to accept personal ac countability. In seeking this self-ful fillment, each person must respect the equal rights of other individuals.

When a government respects true equality-the equal right to enjoy personal freedom-the result will be that many differences will exist among the citizenry. This natural condition of inequality is consistent with freedom, justice, and human nature. Individuals are unique. Each person has varying talents, aspira tions, and weaknesses. If individuals are free to arrange their own lives, they create a diverse society where men and women attain different so cial, intellectual, and economic status. Equal Treatment Results in Many Differences Individuals are equal in their right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" -so long as they accept responsibility for their own lives and recognize their personal accountability for their failures, shortcom ings, and misdeeds. Regrettably for mankind, modern-day politicians and "social architects" like the French revolutionaries reject this truth .

Robespierre, Danton, and other leaders of the French Revolution be lieved they could bring about the re generation of humanity through the power of the State (government power and authority). Although they spoke much about freedom, they ac tually denied self-determination and the free will of the individual. They insisted that man was the product of his environment. Crime, poverty, greed-these were supposedly in flicted upon humanity by corrupt po litical, social, and economic condi tions/institutions. By the use of government authority and power, the revolutionaries believed they could erect a near-perfect if not per fect society. The visionaries of Revolutionary France had a distorted view of hu man nature-a distorted view still held by many people today in the media, in politics, in our universi ties, and even in our religious insti tutions. The theory-minded leaders of the French Revolution believed that the individual was inherently virtuous. If a person committed mur der, he should not be harshly con demned for a criminal act. Rather, he should be regarded as the victim of adverse social or economic condi346 THE FREEMAN June tions which drove him to the act of taking another individual's life.

Thus, the French revolutionaries focused their efforts to build the vir tuous society by removing what they mistakenly thought caused people to act in "antisocial" ways. By recon structing society through the power of the State, they were convinced that people would return to their basic goodness, virtue, and right eousness. The government leaders of the French Revolution said that they loved humanity. They said that they were for the "poor and homeless," "the helpless and abused," and "the needy," but in reality, they rejected the true meaning of human dignity contained in the Declaration of In dependence. They placed Society and the State above the individual and individual freedom, whereas the fifty-six signers of the Declaration of Independence in America placed the individual above the State. The patriots of the American Rev olution had faith in individual free dom. Freedom-not government power-was the foundation for true progress, self-improvement, and happiness. Absolute equality and perfection brought about by govern ment authority were illusions. Only free individuals in a truly free na tion could achieve material welfare, human dignity, and personal fulfill ment. Only when the individual has both the freedom to make choices and the corresponding obligation to abide by the just consequences of those choices, can he achieve self respect.

By adhering to the principles ofthe Declaration of Independence, Amer icans have attained material abun dance and personal dignity. The blessings of liberty have been en joyed because free individuals have been allowed in the past to labor freely in a free society. Yet, we have also been abandoning the basic truths upon which America was founded. "Omnipotent" Government From the halls of Congress to the academic forum, we hear that gov ernment has the answer to all of our society's ills. We are assured that government can and should solve every problem from hunger to faulty automobile bumpers. Commissions ... regulations ... controls ... rules ... coercion ... Congressional committees subcommittees ... regimentation and more regimentation-all should remind us of the grievances listed in the Declaration of Independence. Coercion, paternalism, restrictive legislation, and unconstitutional government intervention will gain ground to the extent that we are in different to the cause of true free dom. When we remain silent, we will be responsible for our own destruc tion-moral degeneracy, material!

1985 THE SPIRIT OF FREEDOM 347 economic stagnation, and eventual physical slavery. The principles of freedom will con tinue to be eroded as long as free in dividuals relax in their compla cency. "Is this the part of wise men," asked Patrick Henry in March, 1775, "engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation?" Freedom is threatened today just as it was threatened at the time of the Declaration of Independence. The colonists wanted less govern ment-not more of it in their daily lives. They wanted to be free to re lease their own creativity and ener gies. The "pursuit of happiness" was their own responsibility. They stated in the Declaration "that, to secure these rights, governments are insti tuted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the gov erned." The early patriots of Amer ica believed that government should protect their "unalienable rights."

It had no right to interfere with "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happi ness" other than that of prosecuting lawbreakers and maintaining self defense from foreign aggression. The colonists were free people struggling to remain free. Living in freedom had strength ened the character of the colonists. They recognized the existence of moral absolutes. Right was right. Wrong was wrong. They were indi viduals who valued honesty, hard work, thrift, and an equal respect for the rights of others. They knew what they believed and why they believed it. They said what they meant and meant what they said. Humble Before God Although the colonists were self reliant and independent, they were humble before God. True liberty was found in a genuine reverence for Al mighty God and obedience to His commandments-not worship of gov ernment authority. Their spiritual faith gave them a clear understand ing of their personal roles in life.

They accepted the rugged challenges of life, knowing that in worldly af fairs, the Lord, indeed, helped those who helped themselves. The farmers and shopkeepers who took up arms against the Redcoats heeded Ben Franklin's admonition: "They that can give up essential lib erty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." The patriots of 1776 chose both lib erty and the responsibility of de fending that freedom. The Continen tal soldier fought at Trenton and Germantown ... suffered at Valley Forge ... and finally won indepen dence. The "spirit of '76" is the faith and spirit of freedom. If Patrick 348 THE FREEMAN June Henry and other patriots were will ing to die for freedom, certainly we should live for freedom. We face the continued struggle for liberty. Bat tles lie ahead. We are in continual warfare. These are facts that we must accept honestly as we consider Patrick Henry's words back in 1775: "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is not too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery!"

A State of War Today, free people are in a state of warfare-a continued battle prompted by those who oppose free dom. We need to acknowledge our current challenge to keep alive the spirit of freedom and to strengthen freedom. First, we need an honest, sincere, and broad understanding of the basics of freedom. We cannot very well defend that which we cannot adequately explain and present to other people. We should ask our selves how well we truly understand such principles of freedom as the free-market exchange of goods and services ... personal freedom/ac countability ... no coercion against law-abiding citizens ... voluntary cooperation ... limited, strictly de fined government power. Do we understand these principIes? Are we doing what we can to understand them better? Second, in order to rejuvenate the spirit of freedom, we must practice the freedom faith continually, con sistently, and earnestly in our own personal lives. Some warriors for the cause of freedom know the ABCs on the subject, and they are on the bat tlefronts, such as actively campaign ing for pro-freedom candidates for Congress.

Such "activism" is_ to be cheered and encouraged, but woe! Some of those hard-charging freedom war riors will (1) on Monday, demand the total elimination of the federally funded Legal Services Corporation, but (2) on Tuesday lobby the federal government for an increase in fed eral subsidies and low interest loans for farmers. The wayward, backslid den freedom troopers in this case are an association of farmers who are more interested in their "special in terest" than in individual freedom and responsibility. No, we cannot have that type of in consistency if the spirit of freedom is to be enhanced and strengthened. Third, we must diligently protect freedom. Patrick Henry advised that those who would defend liberty must be strong, active, brave, and vigi lant. "Vigilance is the price of lib erty," and today we should be vigi lant-seeing where and how freedom is being undermined. For example, we ought to see that 1985 THE SPIRIT OF FREEDOM 349 many reporters, commentators, edi tors, publishers, and anchor persons are not the fair, objective, accurate, and honest news people they would like us to believe. Instead, they are prejudiced against freedom. They show a clear bias in favor of more governmenta support for more government intervention that daily translates into a corruption of the truth.

A good portion of the major news media people have a personal belief that the government should be spending more-not less-for educa tion, the arts, welfare, health, and the like. They personally believe that government regulations and programs-not free people working freely in a free society-are the best way to make sure individuals are sufficiently housed, clothed, fed, and given proper medical care. Even though we may have a very sound grasp of the basics of freedom, we must be vigilant to the distor tions, half-truths, and slanted re porting we receive from media sources around us. Fourth, we should be earnest spokesmen for freedom, actively tak ing a part in the current battles af fecting our daily lives. It isn't enough to appreciate the writings of Bastiat, Jefferson, Burke, Tocque ville, and Ludwig von Mises. Nor do we accomplish much by railing at the supper table about Congress's latest repudiation ofthe oath of officeto de fend the Constitution of the United States. Rather, we should practice what we preach by becoming intel ligently, firmly, and consistently in volved defending freedom, explain ing it, and strengthening it.

Words of Wisdom Two men who signed the Decla ration of Independence back in 1776 still speak to us as we seek to learn more about freedom. "A wise and frugal government," advises Thomas Jefferson, "which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regu late their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government ..." Dr. John Witherspoon, the only ac tive clergyman to sign the Declara tion, gives us a final insight into the spirit of freedom: "A good form of government may hold the rotten materials together for some time, but beyond a certain pitch even the best constitution will be ineffectual, and slavery will en sue. On the other hand, when the manners of a nation are pure, when true religion and internal principles maintain their vigor, the attempts of the most powerful enemies to op press them are commonly baffled and disappointed." ® Craig Russell The Moralityof Profit ONE of the banks on Main Street lends a display window to local com munity groups. Recently featured there was a food co-op. Prominent in the display was a sign that read, in large black letters, FOOD FOR PEOPLE, NOT FOR PROFIT. This implied that there was something wrong, something immoral about profit; that if something was for profit, it couldn't be for people.