OPINION:
Freedom should not be taken for granted.
America fought for freedom, and it has been central to America since the Revolution. The Declaration of Independence notes that certain “unalienable Rights” include “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Patrick Henry famously said, “Give me liberty or give me death.” The First Amendment says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
Freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of assembly are all guaranteed. These freedoms are still upheld, but without vigilance, there is always the prospect that these freedoms will be eroded and eventually lost.
There are dark clouds of socialism and communism on the horizon. We are at a “civilizational moment” where we will see what the future of America holds. This 250th anniversary of our independence begs the question of whether the faith-based values of the founders will be maintained.
A nation will not flourish without political, economic and religious freedom.
Michael Novak’s classic book, “The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism” often called the book that changed the world used the illustration of a three-legged stool where each leg must be strong or else the stool becomes unstable or falls apart. The three legs are political, economic and religious/moral-cultural freedom.
Taken too far, political freedom can become anarchy or totalitarianism. Likewise, economic freedom can become harmful if not checked by the rule of law and the consciences of those who do business. However, without economic freedom, a society will not flourish. Without political freedom, economic freedom is precarious. It may be maintained for a while, but it is always in danger of being controlled at the whim of the ruling elite. Above all, without religiously based moral values, a society will eventually crumble.
Michael Novak was a “radical leftist” early in his career as a professor at Stanford University. He published a book, “A Theology for Radical Politics,” arguing for his leftist, socialist views.
I had a number of personal conversations with him in the later years of his life. He said that what convinced him that socialism was harmful was the numbers. He said that he discovered that socialism always hurt the poor, whereas economic freedom always helped the poor.
The “numbers” still show the same thing. For 30 years, the Fraser Institute in Canada has published the “Economic Freedom of the World” annual report. The Heritage Foundation has also published a similar but independent “Index of Economic Freedom” for the last 32 years. The bottom line is that the more economically free a country is, the more we see better life expectancy, less infant mortality, better quality of healthcare, less poverty, less corruption, better income levels, more income for the poor, more happiness, less child labor and less unemployment.
Socialism and Marxism restrict economic freedom and provide big government solutions. In these lists, you can see that countries that are Marxist and socialist are always harmful to the poor. This conclusion seems counterintuitive, but the numbers have shown the same results for many years. These numbers stick in the craw, bother or grate on the socialists’ advocacy. If they are going to face the facts, they have to try to get around these numbers.
In addressing poverty, there is a role for government, non-profits and markets. But the main driving forces towards eliminating poverty has been the free market.
In 1800, 85% of people were in extreme poverty. In 1950, it dropped to 50%; in 1992, it was 25%; in 2007, 15%; and in 2015, 9.6%. At one point, the former head of the World Bank, Jim Kim, maintained that extreme poverty could be virtually eliminated by 2030.
That may be overly optimistic post-COVID-19, but that is the direction things are headed. Twenty-five countries in 25 years have eliminated extreme poverty within their borders.
I once had a conversation with Ron Sider, left-leaning evangelical and author of “Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger.” I noted that in the introduction to the fifth edition of his book, he admitted that in previous editions, he had not given as much place to markets as he ought to have done. He responded, “Churchill said that if you are under 30 and are not a socialist, you don’t have a heart, and if you are over 30 and you are not a capitalist, you don’t have a mind with some qualifications.”
When you look carefully at the track record of socialism versus free markets, the evidence points towards democratic capitalism.
We need to maintain a strong view of political and economic freedom undergirded and reinforced by faith-based morality if we are going to flourish as a nation.
• Rev. Dr. Art Lindsley is chairman of the board of Transform World, senior fellow at the C.S. Lewis Institute and a senior fellow at the Geneva Institute for Leadership and Public Policy. He was formerly vice president at the Institute for Faith Work and Economics. He is author of many books, including “True Truth: Defending Absolute Truth in a Relativistic World,” “C.S. Lewis’s Case for Christ: Insights from Reason, Imagination, and Faith,” and “Be Transformed: Essential Principles for Personal and Public Life.” He is co-editor with Anne Bradley of “For the Least of These: A Biblical Answer to Poverty” and “Set Free: Restoring Religious Freedom for All.” Art has an M.Div. from Pittsburgh Theological Seminary and a Ph.D. from the University of Pittsburgh in Religious Studies.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.