- The Washington Times - Monday, May 26, 2003

Lots of ink has been spilled trying to explain a hatred of the United States that can cause the terrorism of September 11, regimes devoted to our destruction, and even actions of “allies” to embarrass and undermine America. The problem is that much of the America-hating, incited by governments distracting citizens from their own abysmal records seems completely unreasoning. For this, the best insight may be in the 1927 book “Liberalism,” by Ludwig von Mises, which seems particularly relevant today:

“The root of the opposition… cannot be reached by resort to the method of reason. This opposition does not stem from the reason, but from a pathological mental attitude. …

“Resentment is at work when one so hates somebody for his more favorable circumstances that one is prepared to bear heavy losses if only the hated one might come to harm. … They hope that the rich, whom they envy, will also suffer under it.

“The Fourier complex is much harder to combat.

“Scarcely one person in a million succeeds in fulfilling his life’s ambition…. Plans and desires are shattered on a thousand obstacles, and one’s powers prove too weak to achieve the goals on which one has set one’s heart. The failure of his hopes, the frustration of his schemes, his own inadequacies… constitute every man’s most deeply painful experience.

“To render it bearable… [the neurotic] takes refuge in delusion. … The ‘saving lie’… not only consoles him for past failure, but holds out the prospect for future success … . The consolation consists in the belief that one’s inability to attain the lofty goals to which one has aspired is not to be ascribed to one’s own inadequacy, but to the defectiveness of the social order. The malcontent expects from the overthrow of the latter the success that the existing system has withheld from him. Consequently, it is entirely futile to try to make clear to him that the utopia he dreams of is not feasible… . The neurotic clings to his ‘saving lie.’… For life would be unbearable to him without the consolation that he finds in the idea…. It tells him that not he himself, but the world, is at fault for having caused his failure….

“[They] consider any means as permissible if it seems to give promise of helping them in their struggle to achieve their ends. Whoever does not unconditionally acknowledge all their teachings as the only correct ones and stand by them through thick and thin has, in their opinion, incurred the penalty of death… and it deems any crime, any lie, and any calumny permissible in carrying out its struggle.

“Now it cannot be denied that the only way one can offer effective resistance to violent assaults is by violence. Against the weapons… weapons must be used in reprisal, and it would be a mistake to display weakness before murderers. One must be in a position to compel the person who will not respect the lives, health, personal freedoms, or private property of others to acquiesce in the rules of life in society. This is the function of the state; the protection of property, liberty and peace.

“[However] a victory… can be won only with the weapons of the intellect, never by force. The suppression of opposition by sheer violence is a most unsuitable way to win adherents to one’s cause. Resort to naked force — that is, without justification in terms of intellectual arguments accepted by public opinion — merely gains new friends for those whom one is thereby trying to combat. In a battle between force and an idea, the latter always prevails…. It is ideas that group men into fighting factions, that press the weapons into their hands, and that determine against whom and for whom the weapons shall be used. It is they alone, and not arms, that, in the last analysis, turn the scales.

“[Unfortunately] no other remedy is possible in this case than the treatment of the illness by the patient himself. Through self-knowledge, he must learn to endure his lot in life without looking for a scapegoat on which he can lay all the blame.

“Most Americans cannot understand how envy and a need to blame others for their difficulties leads some to hate us. But it has. So we must deter and disable their ability to assault us. However, we must also win the war of ideas that nothing can justify the carnage of terrorism. And that more difficult battle for lasting peace will require more than just military weapons.”

Gary M. Galles is professor of economics Pepperdine University in Malibu, Calif.

Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times is switching its third-party commenting system from Disqus to Spot.IM. You will need to either create an account with Spot.im or if you wish to use your Disqus account look under the Conversation for the link "Have a Disqus Account?". Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide