Steve Trinward Steve Trinward is "Soul Proprietor" of Trinwords.Com (wordsmithing and editing services) and a contributing editor for Rational Review.
|
Spiritual
Positivism & Politics “An idea isn’t responsible for the people who believe in it.” – Don Marquis [ Note: If this seems even more disjointed than usual, please blame the pharmacy’s worth of painkillers, the back pain which seeps around the edges anyway, and the relatively unformed nature of the thesis. If I really knew what I was talking about, this would be the conclusion chapter of the book I keep threatening to write … ] So here we are, with the enigma wrapped in a paradox: How do we change the world toward Liberty, if it doesn’t want to be changed? Answer: we don’t. Nathaniel Branden perhaps said it best when he declared that until the Libertarian movement becomes about spirituality instead of just politics it will never amount to much (or words to that effect). Richard “Senator Chocolate” Boddie has also chimed in with his “Libertarians are deceived en masse, and converted one at a time.” Neither of these pronouncements stems from a deep-seated faith in sudden shifts in the political strata. But what does this all mean for the would-be libertarian activist? Must we simply shake our heads and sigh, and hope that something DOES happen that turns the tide in the direction of greater Liberty, smaller and less powerful government, Bill of Rights Enforcement, etc.? I don’t think so. However, the answer does not seem to lie with more vociferous confrontation against the state, but with more effective alternative solutions being presented. My Tennessee colleague Joey King calls it “showing the benefits”; other spiritual teachers tell us that “what we resist, sticks to us”; I’d sum it up with, “If you can’t say something good …” There may very well be some things worth fighting against out there: war, confiscatory taxation, social injustice, corruption, bureaucratic government … the list can be made up by almost anyone among us. But how about the things worth working for? Turn the cards upside down and what do you see? Peace, justice, voluntarism, honor, community activism … and the overriding factor, choice! The three-pronged slogan that so beautifully informed the last national LP convention: liberty, responsibility, community – to which I am always quick to add the modifiers: individual liberty, personal responsibility, voluntary community – there is where the heart of the matter lies in the struggle to restore (or create for the first time?) a true appreciation of what it is to be a free individual in a free society. Given this approach, the question becomes one of how best to accomplish this, with the least amount of stress and strain along the way. Steamrollering a plan over an unwitting (and thus at heart unwilling) electorate only means short-term success, and long-term disaster. You might slip something through for a little while, but once the voters who either missed the issue and stayed home, or misread the issue and thought it was harmless, figure out what they have done, you are dogmeat the next time out. Similarly, an attempt to soft-pedal the campaign, and pretend that you only want THIS rollback, or that program abolished, when you seek a much bigger target, might give you the one issue, briefly, before a steel door slams down in your face, when you seek your true ends later on. Better to be upfront about your overall strategy, while showing the benefits which might accrue from your short-term plans. Obviously, building coalitions of like-minded others is a big part of it. Here in Tennessee, the Libertarian Party has joined with a broad variety of groups and individuals (some of whom are even, GASP! Elected politicians!!), focused solely on keeping a state income tax off the boards. We clearly disagree on some issues (though fewer than one might suspect?), and we do not endorse each other beyond the individual levels. But on this issue we are indeed all for One, etc. My car has (or it, did until I totaled it?) a variety of bumperstickers across its backside; until recently there had never been a political candidate shown who was not running as a Libertarian. There are now TWO: Marsha Blackburn (current GOP state senator, running for Congress) and Mae Beavers (state rep running for state senate to oust one of the worst tax lizards on the hill). Those two Republicans flank the usual array of “no income tax” … “keep and bear arms” … and “end the war on drugs” stickers which grace the middle of the bumper and rear panel (along with my spiritual stickers: “GOOD Happens” and “I’m Am Not Lost: I Am Exploring”). At the risk of kicking a dead horse (at least in this column) I have to contrast this with the folks up in Massachusetts, and their own attempt at state income tax REPEAL. (I hesitate to use this same example, since it will undercut my point for those who still think, um, their s*it don’t stink …) However, not only have Carla Howell, Michael Cloud and Co. refused to even consider that there might have been at least a kernel of truth in some of the criticism they have received over the last few months (and from more than just my tapping fingers), their recent actions indicate they have even LESS interest in a successful outcome in November than had previously been presumed. When the largest anti-tax coalition in the state, Citizens for Limited Taxation, offers to bring as much of its membership as possible to help get out the vote for such a tax repeal, in aid of an issue which has been allegedly “blacked out” by local press and media … One would think the welcome wagon and the red carpet would be immediately evident. Seemingly, the Howell/Cloud effort has just been waiting for such an offer from its erstwhile colleagues. But no! What we get instead is a grilling worthy of Torquemada, seeking “purity of intent” and all that stuff. Apparently, unless CLT is willing to come forth with its full support of the purest idea of NO STATE INCOME TAX, for all the right reasons … Carla and Michael don’t WANT their help! One has to ask, if this is the extent of outreach being done in this campaign, how serious is it? Suppose that somehow with the absolutist approach they were able to actually PASS this referendum; how long would it take the legislature, knowing how slender a margin they were up against, to overturn it (and maybe tack back on an extra ½% as punishment)? Meanwhile consider the likelihood that when this referendum fails miserably in November (as it must, if its proponents are so determined that nothing but the unconditional surrender of the state is an acceptable goal here, and nothing but a Randroidlike obeisance to every punctuation mark and phrase is good enough to be considered support?), there will be ANY pieces to pick up for the next attempt? Another road to travel? I contrast this with attempts I am currently seeing from OUTSIDE the orthodox liberty movement, to build bridges among individualist-based spiritual schools around the ideas if liberty. The upcoming (July 2002) issue of “Science of Mind” magazine is entitled, “Probing the American Soul” Do We Know What We Have Here?” It contains a number of worthwhile articles, as well as an interview with Jacob Needleman -- who uses Jefferson, Franklin, Washington, Paine, Frederick Douglass, Lincoln (in his pre-war years?), Whitman, Thoreau and Emerson to illustrate the concept of what America really does mean in the overall scope of societies and liberty. From a purely libertarian perspective, there are some problems with Needleman’s thesis. He seems to hold a certain validity for a governmental role in social action, and in fact some of his thoughts about war and defense sound almost neo-conservative. The way he gets around this, however, is both ingenious and a possible avenue for the rest of us: he separates matters into “nation” and “society.” In this way, he is able to speak of the goals of freedom, self determination and individual liberty in terms of the internal policies and politics, while granting an external role for the representative powers which exist mainly (at least legitimately?) to protect that society from outside invaders. In doing so, he sounds as much like some libertarians have, at least since 09/11; he is in pretty good company there, notwithstanding the views of others (including your obt. sert.) who hold that without the perspective of open borders, a truly free society is at best a sham,. At any rate, I recommend the article and interview, as yet another example of how self-declared libertarians.are very much not ALONE in this battle. [ Inasmuch as I warned that this might be a bit disjunctive from the gitgo, I’ll let this stand as it is. Those wishing to read Needleman’s actual words, please go to www.scienceofmind.com and see for yourselves. Next month I hope to be both more coherent and chock full of post-LP convention musings…] |
