Remember the Zax and the Sneetches
Recent debates about liberty, political policies, legislation, and political candidates have opened my eyes to a disturbing trend. I started to recognize it through my friends’ involvement in the Senatorial race in Utah. Most of my friends supported Mike Lee, because of his knowledge of the Constitution and desire to see government operate within its enumerated powers.
Initially I was very excited to hear of a candidate that seemed dedicated to supporting the Constitution. It brought me pleasure and hope when I heard about the content of Lee’s speeches and debates. The conversation was hopeful and bright. Well, the opposition quickly took notice of Lee and the threat he posed to the establishment. The debate surrounding the campaign transitioned toward the conventional mud-slinging and petty bickering.
This change disheartened me. My friends who started out applauding Mike for his views suddenly seemed capable only of pointing out the faults of the competition. Where did the talk of principles go? Why did the education about Constitutional government dwindle? Where was the hope? It seems that many of my friends shoved the uplifting conversations in the closet while allowing negativity to run rampant. The closet was finally unlocked for the Primary victory celebration.
I fear the repetition and escalation of this tragic inability to remain positive and focused on principles the nearer we find ourselves to the General Election.
It amazes me that we are so confrontational. Why do we demonize and vilify people who do not agree with us on all the issues? It’s not just in politics. I can think of times that I witnessed another family at the grocery store with a screaming, dirty, snot-nosed kid and jumping to conclusions about what kind of parents they were.
Conveniently, when my kid screams, it has nothing to do with my parenting. My kid probably just spent too much time with your kids and picked up some bad habits, right?
The late Gordon B. Hinckley, President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, said the following in a General Conference address in October 2005:
I wish today to speak of forgiveness. I think it may be the greatest virtue on earth, and certainly the most needed. There is so much of meanness and abuse, of intolerance and hatred. There is so great a need for repentance and forgiveness. It is the great principle emphasized in all of scripture, both ancient and modern.
Tolerance. Forgiveness. Temperance. That sound nice if someone deserves it, I guess. Right? Not quite. In the same address, Hinckley continues:
I know this is a delicate and sensitive thing of which I am speaking. There are hardened criminals who may have to be locked up. There are unspeakable crimes, such as deliberate murder and rape, that justify harsh penalties. But there are some who could be saved from long, stultifying years in prison because of an unthoughtful, foolish act. Somehow forgiveness, with love and tolerance, accomplishes miracles that can happen in no other way.
So even those who commit crimes deserve a compassionate review and possibly even moderation in their due punishment. If so, how much more deserving of respect is the person who simply disagrees with you philosophically, politically, or emotionally? Even if they are offensive in the delivery of their opinions themselves.
This brings me to another point, and this is a thought that has been eating at me for some time. Several of my libertarian friends have devoted effort of late to discredit Glenn Beck. I’m still on the fence regarding Beck. I do not watch or listen to his program with any modicum of regularity, because something about his delivery rubs me wrong from time to time. However, I cannot disregard the fact that he is opening the door for so many people to start asking for themselves the very questions that I asked and that led me to my waking to the principles of liberty.
Frequent accusations are that he has flip-flopped on issues, he cries too much, last year he supported TARP and now he doesn’t, he this, or he that. These arguments are frequently emotionally charged due to a hatred for a man who isn’t perfect. Well, none of us is perfect. One friend said he didn’t like Beck, because Beck wasn’t libertarian enough. So he still hasn’t come around on foreign policy and proper war. Boo Hoo.
If you compared my arguments of today against what I said a year ago, it would make me look like a hypocrite void of all integrity. When I am tempted to lash out at someone who is not at the same point as me, or further along in his or her understanding of liberty, I remember Christ’s rebuke of the Pharisees, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” I am compelled to drop my attacks and walk away.
I’m not here to be a Beck apologist. I do hope to point out that our time and efforts are much better spent building rather than tearing down. If at the end of the day all I did was voice my opinion against someone with whom I disagree, I have done little if anything worthwhile. If during that same day I helped a friend open their eyes to a principle of liberty, such as the importance of private property, and open the door for that friend to analyze their belief structure, and that friend realizes that he has been supportive of a political agenda that does not respect private property or individual liberty, then I have done something wonderful with my time.
I guess this is why I feel tolerant of Beck. Several months ago, I was frustrated with government. I couldn’t really articulate why. I listened to Glenn’s radio show and visited his website. I started to realize that the depth of the problems surrounding our federal government was so much more profound than I had even considered. I wanted to learn more. I realized that after listening to Beck or reading excerpts from his website, I felt anger. I didn’t know what to do about the problems I then saw. In my frustration, I turned away from Beck and found other sources of information.
I am now back in school, working on a true liberal, classical education. I am beginning to understand sound economics and the proper role of government. I am gaining a new perspective on the founding of our nation and significant events like the Civil War, the establishment of the Federal Reserve, and other events that my public education taught me were noble, righteous, and based on the common welfare of the country. I have learned the correct view of these things from philosophers, economists, novelists, and other great-minded people. I did not learn them from Beck, but he did give me the push to jump-start my transformation.
If it weren’t for Beck, I would still be mindless follower of the GOP agenda. I wouldn’t understand how much socialization has taken place even under Republican leadership. I would still support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and I would remain ignorant of the massive contribution that our foreign policy has made toward our nation’s insolvency.
I would probably still not understand Ron Paul, even though after each of the Republican presidential nominee debates I would shake my head and think that he was the only one that made a bit of sense, and too bad he was a nut job, or I’d actually be able to support the guy.
Ron Paul is now my modern political hero, and one of the reasons why is that he is willing to work with other politicians when they are supporting the principles of liberty. Rather than shout them down and attempt to discredit them for the horrid legislation they often support, Paul consistently focuses on the principles. Don’t get me wrong. I love the fact that Ron Paul speaks boldly against incorrect political action, but he does so with a focus on teaching true principles rather than ostracizing the person that holds incorrect views. He frequently voices his hope that those individuals will “come around to liberty and limited government.” He reminds me of the saying – Hate the sin, love the sinner, as well as the adage – You’ll catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.
Ron Paul, at the Campaign for Liberty’s Iowa Conference on May 14, 2010, said the following:
The other thing about the philosophy of liberty is that… it’s appealing. If we can present this in the right way, it is appealing to more than just us in this group. It appeals to people who consider themselves at one time just extreme conservatives, or even liberals believing in civil liberties. Honest liberals who believe in limited government in a personal way or share our views on foreign policy; we can bring people together. I am absolutely convinced that freedom does bring people together. …the way you bring diverse groups together – is by saying, “Yes. Your life is your own. You can do with it what you want. And the government shouldn’t be telling you what you do with it; the restrictions are that you just can’t hurt people. You should have economic liberty and personal liberty, and they should be one in the same.”
I find it ironic that the worst of the self-righteous are often my liberty-loving friends. Those who preach that the individual has the right to do what he wants – even to be racially discriminatory on his own property or to engage in hate speech, suddenly forget their principles when they face someone they don’t like.
Just like my wonderful conservative friends who supported Mike Lee allowed themselves to lose focus on the essence of what made Mike different, and move that focus to tearing down the guy who disagreed, my libertarian friends often ridicule others for not being “libertarian enough.” I am often the recipient of such misunderstanding. When debating an issue, my liberal friends often call me a “right-wing nut job.” Ironically, after giving the same argument that I gave to the liberal, my conservative friends will call me a “lefty.”
It is time to remember the counsel given by Christ in Matthew Chapter 7 verses 1 – 5:
- Judge not, that ye be not judged.
- For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
- And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
- Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
- Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.
It is much more beneficial for us to focus on our own shortcomings and faults. Let us be tolerant of others. Rather than scream at each other and bash each other with our latest favorite statistics, we should be building on common beliefs, working, and growing together. If we spent half of the energy wasted on bickering to focus on something we could do better, learn more thoroughly, etc. we would be a strong force for good.
I offer an example from the Book of Mormon. A group of missionaries left their homeland to preach the Gospel of Christ to their enemies, known as the Lamanites. One of the missionaries was named Aaron. In one of the initial cities that Aaron visits, he begins preaching to the people. His message is not well received, and Aaron spends some unpleasant time in prison.
Aaron’s brother, Ammon, took a different approach. When given an initial audience with the King, named Lamoni, Ammon did not start preaching and explaining all he knew about the Gospel. He did not criticize Lamoni’s false beliefs. Instead, he asked to serve the Lamanites. Lamoni grew to love and trust Ammon, because of their friendship Lamoni eventually came to accept the gospel.
I like my examples today, so you get to hear one more. I was recently reading an article about economics that if I’m remembering correctly was found at www.mises.org. (If you are interested in accurate economic teachings and analysis, this site is a must read.) There was a lengthy reader discussion following the article. Two well-informed enthusiasts of economics began to poke fun at another commenter who made an incorrect assumption. They teased that the other person used the wrong analytical tool or chart and referenced a more accurate tool. One of them said something like, “He probably doesn’t even know what [this tool] is, ha ha ha!” (I didn’t include the name of the tool, because I also didn’t know what it was. I looked it up at the time, but it was beyond my ability to understand without direction, and I forgot the name of it.)
How sad it was to see two intelligent individuals perched on their high horses, feeling self-important because they had an education on economics superior to another person’s. I wish they had devoted their time and energy on writing up a concise, easy to understand explanation of the economic tool they found to be accurate and helpful. They missed an opportunity to empower others to better understand sound economics.
I fear that many of us are doing essentially the same thing within our spheres of “expertise.”
It is my prayer and hope that we can stop the hateful exchanges that take place when discussing politics, philosophy, religion, or any other subject. It is not always easy. I catch myself engaging in judgmental thought and contentious debate more often that I’d like to admit, but it is my intention to work on focusing instead on common beliefs and developing friendships with those around me. I hope that I can be an instrument in other individuals’ awakening to the ongoing fight for liberty. I hope those people will join us in our efforts to restore the American Republic.
The S.T.A.R. Forum - Phoenix, AZ 