The audacity of freedom
September 10, 2008| By Senator Jim DeMint
Remarks delivered at an August 26 event sponsored by the Colorado Committee for Heritage.
Please join me in thanking John Fogarty, Matt Spalding and Mike Franc for their leadership in organizing this important event. They are part of a great team at The Heritage Foundation who keep the cause of freedom front and center on the national agenda. I especially want to thank all of you who have come today to support the Heritage Foundation and to stand with those of us in elected office who are on the front lines in the fight to save freedom in America.
Most of you are here today because America has been good to you and you want to do everything you can to leave it as good and as strong as you found it. Most of you are business and professional people who have seen how freedom works to create jobs and prosperity, and you are frustrated with politicians who don't understand the principles of freedom that are so obvious to you. As a businessman myself, I'm often asked, "What was it like to go from the business world to politics?" It's a good question because I spent my career in advertising and marketing and didn't run for any elected office until I was 47 years old. I had my own small business for about 15 years before I ran for Congress in 1998. I can confirm what you already know: politics has a different kind of logic than business.
I remember several months after becoming a Congressman; I was sitting in a Republican Caucus meeting one morning while our leadership was explaining why we should all vote for a bill that we were against so it could go to conference with the Senate where they would supposedly fix it. This wasn't the first time I'd heard this "logic," and every time we had taken this approach the bills had come back from conference with the Senate in worse shape than when they left the House. I stood up and without waiting to be recognized, blurted out, "This is completely irrational!" The room was deathly quiet for a few seconds because I was freshman who had broken protocol. Then, from somewhere in the back of the room, someone shouted, "Don't worry, you'll get used to it." I have never gotten used to it.
I came to Congress with a self-imposed term limit pledge not to serve more than six years in the House, so I never planned to wait around for seniority status. And just as an aside, I continue to believe that mandatory term limits for Congressmen and Senators would do more to refocus Congress on the good of the nation than anything else we could do. My hope was always to go back to the business world, but much of what I hoped to accomplish in Congress was killed by the Senate. For reformers in the House, the Senate was a black hole where good ideas went to die. So instead of going back to the business world after six years in the House, I ran for the U.S. Senate in 2004 and won a tough, long race.
When I arrived for the first time on the Senate side of the Capitol, I asked a veteran colleague what was involved with Senate orientation. He said that it was simple for former House members. It just required a little outpatient surgery. All that was necessary was the removal of my spine, part of my brain and a little laxative on my tongue and I'd be ready to go. I'm afraid I haven't fit in very well in the Senate either.
My campaign theme when I first ran for Congress was "Bring Freedom Home." This was a call to bring dollars and decisions back to individuals, families, businesses and communities. I believed in freedom because I had lived it and had seen it work. I grew up as one of four children of a divorced Mom who started a ballroom dancing school in our home to support our family. My brothers and sister and I were unpaid employees of DeMint Academy of Dance and Decorum. Our days started at six with a list of typed duties for every day of the week. We were not necessarily happy about it, but we learned the value of work and personal responsibility very early.
When I was twelve, I got an afternoon paper route. At sixteen, I moved up to bag boy at a supermarket, and the next year I was given an early dismissal work permit from high school that got me out of classes at 1:00 so I could go to work. I went straight from school to a job delivering and installing restaurant equipment. I earned my spending money in college, and after graduating with a major in advertising, got married and moved to Atlanta to start my MBA at Georgia State. I worked and went to school part time. Before finishing grad school I took a job in sales that sent me to North Carolina.
Two years later, I got the job in advertising I had hoped for back in South Carolina. I finally finished my MBA and my wife and I soon found ourselves with four children and a struggling new business. I had taken a big risk and started my business after our third child was born. My company did marketing and strategic planning for all kinds of businesses. I paid myself as little as I could live on and kept investing in the business. We never made a lot of money, but I supported my family and learned a lot about how free enterprise created jobs and opportunities. Developing strategic plans for clients from retailers, to manufacturing, to technology companies, to hospitals and colleges; I saw how competition and choices created the greatest country in the world.
My interest in politics came not from a desire to manage this incredibly free and dynamic system, but from a passion to keep government from messing it up. Freedom to me means millions of different people with many different interests, capabilities and values … all making their own economic, political and cultural decisions. Millions decide freely what to buy and where to buy it, while millions decide what to sell and who to sell it to. Millions decide where to work and others decide who to hire. We decide what we believe, what we value and what is right and wrong for ourselves and our families. We are all different and we want different things, but we live freely within a framework of law and order that promotes the common good and ensures that we all respect the freedom, rights and property of others.
For America, the convergence of all these free individual decisions created a nation with high standards of morality, a strong work ethic, personal responsibility and compassion for those in need. My experience working hard, sacrificing and creating a good life for me and my family is not unique. It is the American experience and everyday in America freedom is still on display for all the world to see.
The Audacity of 'Hope'
But not everyone understands how freedom works. In downtown Denver this week there is a Pied Piper who sees a very different America than you and I. His life experiences are very different from yours and mine. He has not seen freedom work, and he does not believe that freedom is fair. He sees differences and wants them eliminated. He looks at the millions who are working and struggling as I did, as many of you did, and as my married children are today, and he promises to change that great formula of freedom by creating a shortcut to prosperity without the work and sacrifice.
As Senator Obama said to the applauding socialists in Europe a few weeks ago, he wants to eliminate the distinctions between people and groups; to "tear down walls" between rich and poor, black and white, and the haves and have-nots. He forgets that most of the "haves" in America today began as "have-nots." The system he wants to change is the system that allows people to study and work their way to a better life. He invites us all to unite by "binding our grievances" against America and bringing them to him to alleviate our wants and needs.
And he is just arrogant enough to call his perspective the Audacity of Hope! Senator Obama is audacious, but not audacious in the positive sense that means "bold or daring." He is audacious when the word is defined as "not to be restrained by a sense of shame, rudely bold and brazen." Mr. Obama has the audacity to promise hope in a socialist system of government that has been a spectacle of failure throughout history. He has the audacity to ignore how freedom built the most prosperous and powerful nation on earth, and the audacity to blame government-sponsored failures and injustice on the principles of freedom.
Obama and the Democrat party have fallen for the irresistible Siren Song of Socialism. And they are singing that enchanting song this week at their convention for all Americans to hear.
In Homer's Odyssey, the hero Odysseus was warned not to sail his ship too close to an island inhabited by beautiful women who could fly and who sang a song so wonderful that sailors could not resist. Once sailors guided their ships to the Siren's island, they were killed and devoured.
Odysseus wanted to hear that song so badly that he ordered his crew to tie him tightly to the mast of his ship … after he had filled all their ears with wax. The sailors steered their ship close to the enchanted island. When Odysseus heard the Siren Song he struggled to get free and ordered his crew to steer to the island even though he knew it would mean certain death. The sailors could not hear the song and ignored their captain until they were a great distance from island.
I wish I could fill the ears of every naïve, uninformed American with wax until after November 4th. The promises of more government solutions, more government spending, and more government control have seduced nearly half of American voters. They appear ready to turn our country in a direction that history tells us will lead to destruction.
America's Choices
So what are America's choices in 2008 and beyond? Obama and the Democrats have chosen to use America's problems as an excuse to replace freedom with more government. But let's be clear: it takes no courage, no boldness, no "audacity" in any positive sense of the word to invite Americans to bring all their wants and needs to the federal government. This is cowardly political opportunism that may help politicians get elected, but it is a false promise that hurts America and imperils our future.
The choice for Americans this year and beyond is the choice between socialism and freedom. We are no longer talking about liberalism versus conservatism. The stakes are much higher because as Republicans moved to the center by using government to prove their compassion, the Democrats have moved further left, increasingly using government as an instrument of control to redistribute property and to redefine our values and our culture.
Some may think that socialism is too strong a word and that socialism could never exist in America. I disagree. Socialism is a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to control by government. Socialists are critical of capitalism, consumer choice and private property. Sound familiar? European socialism in the last century was always closely associated with labor unions, and today in America unions are the strongest allies of the Democrat Party and they continue to advocate collectivist, socialist views.
I'm afraid that America is sliding towards socialism. Government is now the nation's largest property owner (controlling nearly 1/3 of the land mass), it effectively owns more than 1/3 of the profits of all businesses and more than 1/3 of the incomes of most working Americans. Government controls the majority of education and healthcare services in America. It owns the primary retirement income plan for most Americans (Social Security). The federal government, through a burdensome regulatory system and undecipherable tax code, effectively controls a significant portion of the nation's economic development and business activity. And now the government has gotten into the mortgage business!
America's style of socialism is more subtle and, on the surface, appears more benign than early twentieth century European socialism. America's federal government has not yet taken over or nationalized any industry, but it has increasingly expanded control through regulation, increased government ownership through confiscatory taxes, and in the case of healthcare, expanded control through fixed prices and mandatory service requirements. The Democrats are now openly talking about socializing all of healthcare and nationalizing the energy industry.
The Siren Song of socialism already has many Americans under its control, and unless we change our course, it will devour our prosperity and our hope for a better future. All we have to do is look at the slow economic growth and high unemployment in the more socialized European nations to see the negative impact of socialism. Freedom and socialism cannot exist together; they are incompatible. The fight to save freedom must begin today!
Socialism Destroys Freedom
We are often reminded that those who don't know history are destined to repeat it. Unfortunately, Americans have little knowledge of the history of socialism and the resulting government dependency that robs people and nations of freedom. About the time the United States was adopting its new Constitution in 1787, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, Alexander Tyler, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:
A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government … A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury … From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by dictatorship … The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years.
During those 200 years, those nations always progress through the following sequence: 1. from bondage to spiritual faith; 2. from spiritual faith to great courage; 3. from courage to liberty; 4. from liberty to abundance; 5. from abundance to complacency; 6. from complacency to apathy;7. from apathy to dependence; 8. from dependence back to bondage.
I refuse to accept this as America's fate! But Tyler's commentary tracks with my own experience in politics: the more dependent people are on government, the more likely they are to vote for candidates who promise more from government. There's no better example of this than the current frenzy to elect Barack Obama president. As Americans have become more dependent on government for their income (welfare, Social Security), healthcare (Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans hospitals, children's health programs), education (government run public schools and government subsidized universities and scholarships), housing (government housing and government sponsored affordable housing), food (food stamps and school lunches), and other government handouts such as farm subsidies and mortgage bailouts, voters have become increasingly addicted to big government. This has not been good for Republicans whose platform, at least in theory, is built on limited government and more individual freedom.
Freedom's Promise
Over 700 years ago, on September 11, 1297, King Edward I of England sent 7,000 troops to squash a rebellion by the Scots. Sir William Wallace, who was called the Guardian of Scotland by his fellow countrymen, had convinced the Scots that they should be independent from England. The King had no patience with these Scottish peasants and sent his best fighting men to reassert his control.
When the King's troops arrived at the Scottish border, their commander sent a message to Wallace offering him the opportunity to surrender and live. His response: "take back this reply, that we are not here to make peace but to do battle, to defend ourselves, and liberate our kingdom. Let them come on and we shall prove this in their very beards!" So the English planned their attack.
But there was one small obstacle. The troops had to cross the River Forth to get to Sir William Wallace. The only passage across the river was Stirling Bridge, a bridge so narrow that only two horsemen could walk abreast as they crossed. Moving troops into position was a long and tedious process. The English commander was so confident, however, that he only sent 2,000 troops across to quell the Scottish rebels.
The King's 2,000 troops quickly found themselves trapped on the wrong side of the bridge. They were ambushed by 6,000 angry Scotsmen. The narrow bridge made retreat impossible and restricted the passage of reinforcements. The English troops were massacred, and the Scottish fight for freedom became legend.
The legendary story of Sir William Wallace and the Scottish fight for independence became the inspiration for the movie Braveheart. This story is a metaphor for the major conflict of all human civilization: the constant battle between those who wish to control others and those who resist being controlled.
The pursuit of physical, emotional and spiritual freedom is arguably the highest purpose of mankind. The pursuit of freedom is, in many ways, a moral cause which attempts to elevate individuals to a place where they can make their own decisions based on their personal value system. Yet despite endless calls for liberty, the conflict of the ages continues to wage between those who would use the force of government to control others and those who are willing to fight for the freedom to control their own lives. That is the cause that brings us here today.
The American founders attempted to deal with the conflict between government control and individual freedom through a system of representative democracy and a separation of powers. The federal government would be given limited authority over the people and the states, but the people would be given the power to choose their government and their representatives. The states would maintain considerable control and independence, while power at the federal level would be divided between three branches of government.
The plan devised by our founders and ensconced in the Constitution worked! The United States became the greatest nation in the history of the world and its people became the freest. The American success demonstrated the indivisible nature of prosperity, freedom and security. But something has changed in America. Voting trends over the past decades indicate that Americans increasingly prefer candidates who promise an expansion of the role and scope of the federal government. This trend suggests that Americans have forgotten the value of freedom and may no longer understand that it was freedom, not government, that created the greatest nation in history.
Liberty, Freedom and Independence
I'm afraid Americans have not been taught much about freedom and its companions; independence and liberty. We tend to use these three words synonymously, but I have found it helpful to consider the distinctions between liberty, freedom and independence. If liberty was a coin, one side would be freedom and the other independence. Freedom is what you're allowed to do. Independence is what you're capable of doing. There can be no liberty without both.
Driving a car provides a simple analogy. If you have a car, along with the means to pay the expenses of owning a car and the skills to drive it, you are not dependent on anyone to drive. You are independent. But if there are no roads, bridges and other infrastructure, you are not really free to go where you want. There must be many choices of roads, as well as traffic laws and good enforcement of laws before you are truly free. Without the infrastructure of freedom, your ability to travel freely is severely restricted. You and your car are limited to where you can travel and you are at considerable risk every time you leave your driveway.
Individuals and families are generally responsible for developing the skills to drive and for buying their own cars. Developing skills, creating the wealth to buy a car and instilling the personal responsibility required to drive safely – all the capabilities required to be independent – have traditionally been a private sector responsibility. Schools may assist with drivers' education, but learning to drive and buying a car is an individual and family responsibility.
Building roads and bridges, making laws and enforcing them – creating the infrastructure of freedom – are a collaborative effort between government and the private sector. Government may provide the funding (which comes directly from taxpayers), but businesses, developers, and citizen groups heavily influence where and when roads are built. My point is this: if individuals have the capabilities required to drive and society provides the roads, infrastructure, laws and enforcement to provide travel choices and safety, there is liberty when it comes to driving. A free society requires much the same on a larger scale.
Freedom refers to the external factors in the environment (like roads) that allow people to act with autonomy, make choices in all areas of their lives, and to be protected from those who would threaten their lives and property. Examples of freedom's external factors should include the right of parents to choose among many schools, the right to keep what you earn, the right to own and keep an individual health insurance policy, the right to own your Social Security plan, the right to buy products and services from every state and from all over the world without restrictive regulations and taxes, the right to operate a business in a globally competitive environment, and the right to access the abundant resources available to America such as energy to improve the quality of life for everyone.
Free institutions that include strong families, volunteer organizations and our free enterprise system, along with a government that operates according to a predictable framework of law, will work together to create the choices and protections that are necessary for independent people to thrive. A state of liberty exists in a country where capable, independent citizens live in a free environment supported by strong institutions.
Independence refers to a characteristic or capability of the person. Independence suggests an ability to live with a degree of autonomy and self sufficiency. Independence is the ability of a person to succeed in a free society. Liberty relies on an independent citizenry that has the character and capabilities to seize the opportunities that freedom provides. We often refer to this as human capital, and it is increasingly obvious that this capital is on the decline in America.
In America, the individual characteristics or capabilities that make freedom work include a love of liberty, an allegiance to God and country, personal responsibility and self reliance, a strong work ethic and marketable skills, a belief in family and service to community, the importance of character and integrity, and an adherence to moral principles based on religious conviction. These capabilities cannot be decreed by government or given to people. They must be developed by strong families and free institutions. Government cannot give people character, a strong work ethic, and the skills to succeed. And government run, politically managed schools cannot do it either!
Regardless of which word we use to describe it, Americans love the idea of freedom. But too often we mistake the blessings of freedom with the substance of freedom itself. Self government is a blessing of freedom. Self control is a requirement for this blessing to exist. The pursuit of happiness is a blessing of freedom. Taking responsibility for yourself and sharing in the responsibilities of being a part of a community are prerequisites for the pursuit of happiness. Security, opportunity and prosperity are all blessings of a free America like flowers in a beautiful garden. Tilling the soil, fertilizing, weeding and watering are the hard work required to make the flowers grow. Working the "soil" of liberty by continuously developing individual capabilities and freedom-enhancing institutions is the hard work required to produce the blessings of freedom.
If asked, few Americans would support socialism, but many have been misled into supporting public policies that will ultimately result in a more socialistic nation. When voters don't recognize the threats of socialistic policies, politicians will continue to win elections with the "Siren Song" of more government. The solution to this problem is a deeper understanding of freedom and how it works.
The essence of freedom is much broader, more complex, multi-dimensional and dynamic than is commonly understood in the world today. Freedom's meaning has been cheapened by political rhetoric which suggests moral license, entitlement, equality of outcomes, and a lack of responsibility and discipline. Freedom so defined is not worthy of the high cost in blood and sacrifice which has always been required to win it.
Freedom is in fact a "discipline" which must be continuously pursued to be achieved and preserved. Freedom requires constant development directed towards the skills, values and overall capabilities of the individual, and the freedom-enhancing institutions in society that provide the opportunities, choices and accountability for freedom's expression. All of this must be developed on foundational principles of freedom.
In America today, few politicians have the audacity to stand and fight for freedom. Few Congressmen have the audacity to believe that people should and can be responsible for themselves and their families. Few Senators have the audacity to believe that the proper role of government is to guarantee that freedom has the opportunity to work for everyone. Few judges have the audacity to say that every human being should be granted the dignity of making their own decisions and the responsibility to live with the consequences. Few Presidents have had the audacity to say that the freedom to succeed must include the freedom to fail, and that government cannot be used as a guarantor of success.
My friends and fellow Americans, I find it incredible and audacious that a major political party in America would build its platform on the tenets of socialism while attempting to discredit the principles of freedom. The question is: will the other political party have the audacity to build its platform on the principles of freedom?
The Principles of Freedom
The Heritage Foundation, which I consider one of freedom's best friends and one of the nation's most important organizations, is embarking on a multi-year project to re-establish the principles of freedom in America. Heritage understands that political policies cannot define freedom because they are constantly changed and compromised. Freedom is not defined by tax cuts or a strong defense, though these are important policies in a free society. Freedom must be established on a foundation of unchanging principles on which good policies are based.
So far, Matt Spalding, the leader of the project, has identified nine principles that are essential to the preservation of freedom. These are:
- Liberty
- Equal Rights
- Consent of the Governed
- Religious Liberty
- Economic Opportunity
- National Independence
- The Rule of Law
- Constitutionalism
- Self Government
We don't have time to discuss them all tonight, but I'd like to make a few comments about two. Liberty is rightfully the first principle listed and one I've already discussed. Americans must be reminded that the uniqueness and the success of our nation is the result a heartfelt belief in liberty. As government grows, liberty recedes. The more we ask of government, the less we have of liberty. Liberty depends on individuals who have the character and skills to succeed in a free society. If we believe and understand this principle we will not support policies that create dependency on government. And we will not allow secular government to purge character-building, religious-based values from our culture or run our schools.
Liberty also depends on effective institutions such as families, volunteer organizations, free enterprise and limited representative government to provide the infrastructure of freedom throughout our society. Our goal must be to make freedom work for everyone.
The other principle I'd like to discuss briefly is Constitutionalism. Constitutional government is synonymous with limited government. All Congressmen, Senators, Presidents, Cabinet officers, and members of the military swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. It is that important! The problem is, the only time I hear much about the Constitution is when we take the oath of office. After that, it is pretty much ignored.
If you wonder why people are spending billions on this year's election, it is because government has exploded well beyond its constitutional bounds and now reaches into all areas of our lives. George Soros is willing to spend billions because he knows if he can get control of government, he can control every aspect of American life … and most of the world with it. If the federal government was limited to its original constitutional role, we might still have to beg people to run for Congress.
Ignoring Constitutional boundaries, Congressmen are now philanthropic legislators. There is no cause that does not stir them to show their compassion with other people's money. And that's why our federal government is seriously in debt and continuing blindly on an unsustainable financial course. If you listen to Congressmen and Senators, there is no industry that can run without their help. They believe they must protect all Americans from the greed and dishonesty of doctors and businessmen. Every problem is an excuse for government intervention. They refuse to let freedom work. The Constitution is almost universally ignored by Congress. Unless this is changed, Congress will soon bankrupt our nation and destroy our future.
The Heritage project on the Principles of Freedom comes at a critical time for America. Hopefully, Americans will resist the Siren Song of socialism this November, but we have a long way to go to re-establish the principles of freedom across America, to cultivate a true love for liberty, and a new respect for our Constitution. I know The Heritage Foundation and all of you will be leading the way. Thank you.
