The Philosophy of Freedom

by Caleb Nelson

  ARGUMENT FROM MAN’S DEPRAVITY

  “It is a system designed for sinners, in the hope of achieving . . . good.”

  [348] - Michael Novak

  This disgusting argument claims that man is too selfish and mean to live the “higher laws” required for socialism, and must therefore be allowed to wallow in capitalism until he shrugs off his corrupt ideas, or until God comes and makes everything all better. “Man should live for the sake of others,” these defenders claim, “but since man is too selfish to do so, and since we don’t agree with the Communists that we can have a utopia through force, we will have to make do with the lesser of two evils.”

  Michael Novak, who served as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, attempted to defend capitalism on these grounds, saying, “While recognizing that no system of political economy can escape the ravages of human sinfulness, [capitalism] has attempted to set in place a system which renders sinful tendencies as productive of good as possible.”

  [349]

  In other words, he says capitalism taps into the creative potential of evil souls and thus achieves moral good. This is an absurd contradiction. This argument accepts the basic ethic of collectivism—altruism—and longs for the day when man can put off caring about his self-interest. Such an argument is thus a failure in its defense of capitalism. It only strengthens the statists who claim that if the good of others is the highest ethic to achieve, then it must be moral to enforce it through government action.

  THE SOCIAL DARWINIST DEFENSE

  Popular in the 19th century, this defense claims that capitalism entails an economic application of the laws of nature, namely, the survival of the fittest. It may not be pretty or fair, these defenders say, but it’s human nature and we can’t change that. Besides, in the end it makes the human race stronger.

  This defense falsely claims that the aim (and effect) of capitalism is to make the “fittest” humans rise to the top as rulers in a grotesque “meritocracy.” This denies and distorts the true morality of capitalism which is to protect man’s freedom to act on his own judgment.

  All these defenses of the social system have failed and statism has steadily gained ground for over a century in America because capitalism’s alleged defenders have conceded the most important point to the enemy: the moral high ground.

  THE HIGH GROUND OF THE ENEMY

  “Capitalism is an evil, and you cannot regulate evil. You have to eliminate it and replace it with something that is good for all people and that something is democracy.”

  [350] - Michael Moore, Capitalism: A Love Story

  The “high ground” is a spot of elevated terrain that can be useful for military tactics. The statists have taken over this high ground in the moral battle for the soul of America. With little resistance, they proclaim their goodness and moral justification for denying individual rights.

  Capitalism is labeled as evil and the source of evils such as poverty, crime, unemployment, war, and drugs. The use of such words as “evil” is intended to instill an unearned guilt in the defenders of individual rights. This guilt, if accepted by those defenders, disarms any possible resistance. Jean-Francois Revel, socialist-turned-classical-liberal, put it clearly, saying, “A civilization that feels guilty for everything it is and does will lack the energy and conviction to defend itself.”

  [351]

  Many attacks on capitalism focus on the fact that it enables self-interest. For example, Congressman Jim Moran (D-MA) said that Americans must give up “this simplistic notion that people who have wealth are entitled to keep it.”

  [352] Capitalism’s enemies know the nature of capitalism, yet its defenders do not. Karl Marx explained, “The right of man to private property is, therefore, the right to enjoy one’s property and to dispose of it at one’s discretion, without regard to other men, independently of society, the right of self-interest.”[353] Marx, for once, hit the nail on the head. It is exactly for this reason that capitalism is vilified, and it is exactly this reason that must be unapologetically endorsed—man’s right to enjoy and dispose of his property, the right to a free exercise of conscience, the right of self-interest.

  A primary weapon of the anti-capitalists is guilt. They direct this guilt at their intended victims. But such guilt is only effective if their victims accept it and agree with it. These statists seek to have us endorse our own martyrdom, and agree to accept—in return for our achievements—curses, robbery, and enslavement.

  [354]

  The key to defeating the collectivists is for capitalists to have a certainty of their moral rectitude, to turn this contempt around, and aim it at the collectivist. We must take away their pretended holiness and expose them for what they are—parasites.

  [355] The proper defense of capitalism, and the only one that will be ultimately effective in reversing the trend of collectivism, must be done first and foremost in the arena that the collectivists have monopolized for decades nearly unchallenged—the arena of morality.

  SELLING CAPITALISM

  “The Revolution was effected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the hearts and minds of the people . . . This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments and affections of the people was the real American Revolution.”

  [356] - John Adams, 1818

  Pragmatic Progressives have been extraordinarily effective in nudging their ideas into very nearly every aspect of human life on earth. Their tactics have proven to be perfectly suited to the job of infecting and changing the culture a little at a time. Over a hundred years of baby steps have taken a once-great nation down a long journey through stagnation and decline and heading to possible destruction.

  If we are to reverse the trend and get this tidal wave to change direction, we must use some of the same tactics the enemies have freedom have used to make us enslave ourselves. We will have to change the words we use, change from a defeatist defense to an open unapologetic attack, change our aversion to propaganda (there is such a thing as true propaganda), flood our culture with true principles via various media, become better people who embrace peace and love and courage, and most of all, reverse the unprincipled collapse of our philosophy that has taken us into agreement with the incessant Progressive onslaught.

  “There is nothing so practical as a good theory.” - Kurt Lewin

  To figure out how we can “sell” capitalism back to mainstream culture, let us first look to how it was sold out. The Progressive movement has used some “playbooks” as guides to many of their strategies and attacks over the last several decades. One book is called Rules for Radicals, by Saul Alinsky. In this book, the author lays out, not a principled belief system—which he considers impossible and impractical—but several tactical strategy lessons for the “revolutionary radical” to get things done in any way necessary.

  The first important thing to note is that the Progressives, while they have no idea what they believe, clearly recognize where the battle for their non-beliefs should be fought. As Alinsky points out in his prologue, “The Revolutionary Force today has two targets, moral as well as material.”

  [357]

  They know they must get people to accept the Progressive way of things as moral, or acceptable, if it is to be put into widespread practice in the culture. “You do what you can with what you have and clothe it with moral garments,” Alinksy advises.

  [358] In the same breath as this moral justification comes the attack against the moral integrity of their enemies. Alinsky says that the Establishment must be “constantly pushed to live up to their own book of morality and regulations,” since “no organization . . . can live up to the letter of its own book.”[359] It is this line of attack that always pushes the conservatives to go along with huge entitlement and welfare programs. The Progressives merely have to ask (often with a lawsuit) why the conservatives are racist, bigoted, intolerant, selfish, or hate poor people, and the conservatives accept the premise of this attack rather than leading with
their own attack against the tyranny of the Progressives.

  Author Brad Thor offered a marketing idea to conservatives he addressed in a 2013 speech, which could be useful for defenders of freedom to implement. He said, while conservatives may not agree with the opinions and policies of the Left (when, in fact, many conservatives do), Progressives have an undeniable talent for messaging and organizing. One of Thor’s suggestions as an example was to “take out billboards in every black community across the United States reading: ‘There’s a limit to what the Democrat Party can do for you, and you’ve been seeing it for decades.’ Below would be statistics like the black unemployment rate, incarceration rate, and more. He noted that Democrats always warn Republicans about being on ‘the wrong side of history’ in various issues—Democrat stances in history could also be on the billboards, from slavery to Jim Crow laws to the Ku Klux Klan.”

  [360]

  Again, the thing we sometimes forget about propaganda is that it can also be used to spread the truth.

  TACTICAL RULES

  Alinsky also wrote about rules of Power Tactics that prove useful to both recognize when they are being used against you and to occasionally utilize:

  · “Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.”

  · “Never go outside the experience of your people.”

  · “Wherever possible go outside the experience of the enemy.”

  · “Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.”

  · “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”

  · “A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.”

  · “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”

  · “Keep the pressure on.”

  · “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”

  · “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” (This means when the other side finally gives in and says, “Fine, what do you think we should do?” that you have an answer and are prepared to lead.)

  · “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

  [361] “Freeze” means single out for blame. Don’t attack corporations or cities or government entities, but personalize it, he says. Put a face to the problem—attack the leaders. “Before men can act an issue must be polarized,” notes Alinsky. “Men will act when they are convinced that their cause is 100 per cent on the side of the angels and that the opposition are 100 per cent on the side of the devil.”

  [362] (This is from a book that literally honors Lucifer in its dedication.)

  The Progressives already fight unapologetically to vilify those they see as a threat. Television commentator Chris Matthews referred to sitting Senator Ted Cruz as a “terrorist,” saying, “I will say he’s a terrorist because what the guy has done basically says, ‘my goal is demolition—blow up health care, blow up the continuing resolution, bring the government to a standstill and then make us forfeit on the national debt.”

  [363] The same rhetoric is never tolerated by Progressives when it is used against them—which is why it must be.

  NICE GUYS AND FUNNY GUYS

  In a 2013 Town Hall Meeting for some GOP lawmakers, some voters made known their displeasure at what they called the “nice guys” routine being put on by the Republican Party leaders. These voters were recognizing that playing nice is a losing game in the battle for liberty.

  “I want Boehner up there defying this guy and saying, ‘We’re going to impeachment with you if you do not start obeying the laws!” Maryland resident Ed Hunter shouted. “Listen, we’re dying out here because you guys are being nice guys! This is not a Boy Scout meeting!”

  Another unidentified woman agreed and also spoke up, “It’s not! And you’re acting like Boy Scouts! You’ve got to fight!”

  Hunter then told lawmakers that the future of the country was at stake—so they should act like it. “Because we’re losing the country,” he said. “I want to see more defiance!”

  [364]

  Hunter is correct and this is exactly what needs to happen to reverse the Progressive momentum that is occurring in both major political parties. In 2013, a small grassroots campaign successfully recalled two Colorado State Senators in a backlash of anger over anti-gun legislation. One was recalled with only a 2% margin in the recall election.

  Another important tactic that can’t be overlooked anymore is humor. Alinsky said, “Humor is essential, for through humor much is accepted that would have been rejected if presented seriously.”

  [365] There is a huge political influence being wielded today by “comedy shows”—shows that, unfortunately for many people, are their only source of political news.

  Making fun of the enemy is the unforgivable sin. This was poignantly illustrated in the instance of a rodeo clown at the Missouri State Fair who was banned “from ever participating again” for satirizing and wearing a mask depicting President Obama. The incident also caused the state’s association to declare that future cowboys and clowns must undergo “sensitivity training.”

  [366]

  This harmless satire worked the Progressive base into an indignant lather, showing the surprising effectiveness of such activities, despite an American tradition dating back to the 1960s of dressing up in masks of both current and former Presidents and other political figures.

  [367] A Progressive writer responded to the incident, “Silence is not an appropriate response to this ‘entertainment’ on grounds owned by all Missourians. I can’t write anymore at how disgusting this is. All I want is some heads to roll.”

  [368]

  For a return to freedom we must first return freedom to the hearts and minds of the people in a widespread campaign. No political revolution can survive without the supporting foundation of a popular cultural reformation.

  EFFECTIVE DEFENSE

  In July of 2012, Viewpoint host Eliot Spitzer couldn’t figure out why liberalism seemed to him to be shrinking against the continued onslaught of the fiscally conservative Tea Party movement. “Can I tell you my theory?” Spitzer asked. “We let the Tea Party steal our thunder . . . We let the Tea Party grab the anger, the animus and the venom when it should’ve been ours, and you know why?” he asked. “We were chicken, we were afraid, we were lily-livered, had no backbone, no spine.”

  [369] This shows exactly the sort of results that can come from positioning our political battles and ideas in the most effective arena!

  Capitalism’s would-be defenders must deflate the moral superiority flaunted by those of the collectivist/altruist ethic. Nothing less will do, and indeed, anything less helps to undermine and destroy capitalism. The system of individual rights cannot be defended with guilt, by apology, or without conviction. It requires the most righteous pride of certitude. Only this way can we hope to stop, and then reverse, the steady creep of Progressive statism and change course to ascend to freedom.

  Because capitalism is moral and good, writer Craig Biddle describes what the proper grounds for its defense must be and why:

  “Capitalism enables everyone to act in a consistently self-interested manner. Rather than shying away from this unassailable fact, we must embrace and emphasize it. We must do so not on the pragmatic grounds that doing so will work to defend capitalism (which it will), but on the principled grounds that the selfishness-enabling characteristic of capitalism is, in fact, what makes it the only moral social system on earth . . .

  “Under genuine capitalism—not the mongrel system operative in America today, but pure, unregulated, laissez-faire capitalism—the government prohibits citizens from using physical force against each other, and the Constitution prohibits the government from using force against citizens except in retaliation against those who initiate its use. Thus everyone is fully free to act on his own judgment for his own sake.”

  [370]

  That is the essence of the principled, virtuous stand against the collectivist/altruist ethic. We must gain and keep a driving passion for
the good. We must love the good for being good. We must value achievement in ourselves and others and exercise a commitment to justice—refusing the unearned, in matter and in spirit.

  We may oppose our nation’s present course, Piekoff writes, but by ourselves we cannot change it. The taxes and the bureaucrats are merely consequences which cannot be erased as long as their source is untouched. “The people may ‘swing to the right,’ but it is futile, if the leaders of the right are swinging to their own . . . brand of statism . . . . To change a nation’s basic course requires more than a mood of popular discontent,” he goes on. “It requires the definition of a new direction for the country to take. Above all, it requires a theoretical justification for this direction, one which would convince people that the proposed course is practical and moral.”