It has occurred more than once that one or another of our Free Liberal editors has disagreed with the words of another editor. The complaint usually takes the form, “I don’t know if that is the kind of thing we ought to be saying.”
In the April print edition of the Free Liberal, I wrote about the problem of “teamism” --where people overly identify with a group, taking the group’s positions to be their own, regardless of the absurdity or contradiction contained in such positions. The result is foot-stamping, flag-waving, and “my way or the highway” mindless stubbornness. Go Team!
On the alternate side, in response to the power of the team, another type of stubbornness manifests itself. This is probably more common to organizations of strong-willed individuals (like this one). The individual members of the team desire to control the group position so that those positions do not conflict with their own personal values.
Many organizations adopt a communications policy that dictates that a “party-line” must be followed. Everyone in the organization is aware of this and only pre-approved statements are issued from the designated spokesperson.
By its nature, the Free Liberal must be different. We are a magazine of opinions and ideas. Debate is part and parcel to our mission. We don’t agree on everything. Thankfully! That would be very boring. Our job is to challenge existing frameworks of belief and offer a better way. We must do so amongst ourselves, just as we do in the surrounding society. Anything less undermines the effort. What kind of hypocrites would we be if we insisted on a party-line?
I believe that the key to finding peace in our disagreements is to first recognize them. I am happy to state for all who are reading this, that if you read this publication any given day, you should not assume that everyone involved with it agrees with everything everyone else is saying. If you are offended by an argument or an idea, or even a method of argumentation, the proper course is to provide a rational argument in opposition. TFL does not stifle criticism. We get stronger through debate.
However, we aren’t at odds on every issue. The Free Liberal is almost completely a volunteer organization. People work on the project because they enjoy doing so. We have some really great social hours, where we discuss both ridiculous and serious subjects. Our common ground is greater than our differences. We do share a general belief in liberty as a political system and community as social system. It is unlikely that you will find any writing at the Free Liberal in favor of the police state or socialism. Also out are racism, warmongering, hatefulness, and unwarranted adulation of those who hold political or corporate power. Peace, respect, and understanding have a stronger currency here.
Free Liberalism is at the nexus of classical liberalism and modern liberalism. We are all about synergizing dichotomies and bridging supposed chasms of philosophy. The Free Liberal team generally understands this, even if it doesn’t always apply it. We ourselves fall victim to the desire to control one another and to stamp out disagreement.
Let’s undo “teamism” and stand for free speech and open debate. Even this article is subject to criticism. Bring it on. Maybe I’m wrong. Nasty letters can be sent to editor@freeliberal.com.
-- Kevin D. Rollins
.