The Hardin tribune-herald. [volume] (Hardin, Mont.) 1925-1973, 1951-05-03
Fdcts dnd Fdncies
BY-Hdzel PeGse
m SEARCH OF PEACE
(Continued)

(Continued) 49,. .
This makes it stronger be-
cause it embodies justice and
those incentives which bring
out the best in man. If, on the
| other hand, he believes liberty
to be less Just, less strong and
less productive than slavery, he
is on the ether side of this
great issue even though he
salutes the same flag and is
ones friendly neighbor.
Relinquish liberty for pur-
poses of defense in an emer-
gency? Why? It would seem
that in an emergency, Of all
times, one needs his greatest
| strength. SO. if liberty is
strength and slavery is weak
ness, liberty is a necessity
rather than a luxury, we can't
| afford to be without it-least
lof all in an emergency.
Suppose that a clergyman
were to admonish his. congre-
/ CATION to abandon the practice
Of Christianity during every
emergency; that it is a luxury,
good only for normal times. If
he were to say that, we would
certainly believe him to he a
religious quack and of negative
worth. We would conclude that
he did not really believe justice,
goodness and strength to be
embodied in religious faith. 1t
is the same with all self-styled
lovers of liberty who call for
its abandonment during every
emergency. They m st be
counted out of the forces for
liberty. Indeed, should they not
be counted among the enemies
of liberty.
The only person who can
effectively defend liberty is one
! who believes in it and who con-
siders it to be the embodiment
of strength rather than weak
ness. All others will do the
wrong thing and support the
wrong cause when the chips are
down. If by this test, the de-
tenders of liberty turn out to
be few, then the cause of liberty
is that much more desperate
than we had assumed.
The first necessity in any de-
Tense is to identify the enemy,
with precision and accuracy.
Lacking that, defense measures
make no sense. It is like shoot
ing at an unknown target.
Could it be that our past efforts
for the defense of liberty have
failed for the reason that we
have failed to identify the real
enemy?
What is the basic issue in
this conflict? What de we wish
to fight against? It is slavery,
the enemy of liberty. It is that
and nothing more.
Slavery takes on many forms
and goes by many names. But
no matter what its name or
form, the enemy is anything
that prevents man from being
free.
T. The enemy of liberty is, at
its base, an idea-the idea that
the enslavement of man is a
{ superior and stronger form of
social arrangement than is an
arrangement of free men work
ing togather voluntarily. 1t is
the idea that men of a COM
munity or nation can better
themselves and grow stronger
if some of them will enslave
others. That idea is the real
enemy. In attacking the enemy
of liberty by force as is COM
monty assumed to be necessary,
how might one proceed? The
enemy is basically an idea,
which is an abstraction. It has
no nose to be punched and no
heart to-be pierced. The nearest
you can get to an idea by the
use of force is to attack it's
hoSt-the person who believes
it. This explains the great temp
tation to personify the enemy
of liberty, to recast it in the
form of certain persons who
can be attacked by the use of
force.
Which persons shall be at
tackled? Every person violates at
! least some of the tenets of lib
erty, and to that degree is an
enemy of liberty in practice.
Every person is, then, partly
the friend and partly the enc
my of liberty. Realizing this,
one should abandon the attempt
to personify the enemy of lib
erty and to attack it by force.
|. If he persists in the attempt,
he will at his point have al
ready gone astray in it's defense.
The project will have become
doomed to failure, no matter
what words are emblazoned on
the banners Of the marchig
columns, in the enactments of
necessary war time controls"
and in the bond drives to fl
nance it.
(To he continued