Our Threatened Freedom

Is Freedom Dangerous

Professor: Dr. R.J. Rushdoony

Subject: Political Studies

Lesson: 112-169

Genre: Conversation

Track: 112

Dictation Name: Vol. I - Part 08 - Is Freedom Dangerous

Location/Venue: Unknown

Year: 1980’s – 1990’s

[Dr. Rushdoony] Is freedom dangerous? This is R.J. Rushdoony with a report on our threatened freedom.

In this century we have seen a dramatic change in American life. From a strong affirmation of freedom as a necessary and moral fact, we have turned rather steadily to a distrust of freedom and a belief in regulations.

Is this faith in the health and virtue of regulations and controls justified? In certain areas of life we all tend to believe in regulations, we do not believe that a man should have the freedom to shout “fire” in a crowded theater, we do not believe that an 8 year old child should have the freedom to drive a car, we do not believe that a murderer should be turned loose and have his freedom at will. Very obviously we place some very serious restrictions on freedom, even to the point of imprisonment and or execution in some cases.

However, our restrictions on freedom have historically had a common factor. We have held to the premise that an irresponsible person should not have freedom, particularly if his activities can or have endangered or destroyed the lives of others. As a result, none of us have the right to shout “fire” in a crowded theater, to do so is dangerous irresponsible. The common fact in the limitation of freedom is this factor, irresponsibility which can be a menace to the lives and persons of others. We therefore control minors and limit their freedom, we also limit the freedom of convicted criminals because they have used their freedom to the injury of others.

Increasingly however, our federal policy of regulations has another premise. Namely, that none of us can be trusted with freedom and therefore none of us are entitled to the freedoms which were once commonplace. In other words, we are all treated, at the very least, like children.

Is this morally sound? It might be possible sometime in the near future to achieve such radical controls over all of us, some very radical controls. Cars may be made so that we can never exceed the speed limit, cigarettes and liquor can be totally abolished, a serious tax and or heavy penalty can scare us out of being overweight, we may all be required to do conservation work, pick up street trash, made too afraid by radical penalties to risk sexual and other sins, and so on and on. Will we be morally stronger, or morally weaker?

The fact is that as state regulations increase, we become morally weaker. It is basic to biblical faith that moral strength comes from inner regulations, not outer ones. And our inner regulations are governed by our faith and character, by our religious convictions. The more we rely on outer controls and regulations, the less we depend on inner regulations, and the faith which makes them possible, and the freedom which gives them growth.

To distrust freedom is to distrust growth. To distrust freedom is to trust in statist controls rather than in God as the source of morality. When we try to make people good by statist regulations, we are declaring that they must remain permanently as children, that the state can produce a better moral life than freedom under God, and that the state knows best. This I submit is a very dangerous belief.

This has been R.J. Rushdoony with a report on our threatened freedom.