A course in political miracles can contain all the lessons in the world for developing oneself into a successful guardian of political liberty, yet will still be an incomplete course if it doesn't mention ways one can sabotage the achievement of one's political ideals, wouldn't you say?
We all understand a flawed philosophy automatically contains the seeds of its own sabotage, which is why liberal-progressives with all their abstract intellectual contrivances cannot prevail in the long run. Yet for so many years liberal-progressives have ruled. Why? Because they have pursued their goals with laser-like aim devoid of self-damaging strategies, tactics, and attitudes.
The opposite is true of most would-be liberty guardians.
Liberty political philosophy is free of man-made intellectual contraptions. "In a moral, just, and reasonable society, men and women are governed by natural laws which must be honored if the society is to serve human life in its full promise. Natural laws do not violate one person's rights (wronging one person) for the good of many. In nature, what is right for any one individual is right for a society of individuals, and what is wrong for any one individual is wrong for a society of individuals. With natural law governance no one is sacrificed. Natural law treats every one equally."
Therefore, completely unlike liberal-progressives, those who love liberty renounce forced solutions. "A guardian of liberty is one who understands that forcing solutions on people by legislation, judicial fiat or majority rule is injustice ... degrading and unfair; but allowing people free choice among solutions which encroach on no one allows the learning of responsibility and the development of self-esteem."
With such a non-harmful life-serving political philosophy, liberty proponents should have celebrated huge success many, many years ago. Why has their progress been so pitiful? Could it be that the strategies, tactics, and attitudes of would-be liberty guardians have been like arrows flying off and falling everywhere but on target, perhaps even damaging themselves and their cause?
The Greek word hamartia (ἁμαρτία) is usually translated as "sin" in the New Testament. In Classical Greek, it is an archery term meaning "to miss the mark" or "to miss the target." If liberty guardians have for years been missing the mark politically, what are their deadliest sins in this context?
The farthest off-target aim which is made by those who hope to produce liberty is believing they need to make converts. Deep down inside, every human being feels the natural rightness of liberty, and that includes liberal-progressives who are only temporarily trapped in their addiction to dictatorship, living in denial like alcoholics but not totally beyond healing. Liberty guardians do not need converts. They need only help people get in touch with their innermost natural feelings. How is such a true aim accomplished? Not by creating a sense of alienation, but by fostering a sense of rapport; not by thinking "you are against us," but by holding in mind the truth "we are all in this together."
If you are feeling the true inner joy of liberty and you would like another person to feel what you are feeling, you do not try to prove to the other person that you are different (trying to prove to yourself that you are "not like them"). You do not say to another: "I'm this, but you are that." Rather, you think in your mind, "Here, join me in feeling this joy," and you happily let that person join in what you are feeling.
If you are deeply certain of the natural rightness of liberty and you want another person to also know that same deep certainty, you do not say in your thoughts: "I'm right! And you are wrong!" Instead, you let that person feel you. You let down your barriers and wordlessly convey: "Here, feel my certainty and the peace it engenders."
If you are experiencing the exquisite love of life which liberty allows one to experience and you wish another person could feel such sweet natural love, you do not attack that person. You extend the love and let that person feel your love, so they will crave joining with you in spirit.
In order for people to be on the same page with you, you first have to allow them to be "with you." Separating yourself, flaunting arrogance, attacking ... all are arrows which do damage to your own purpose.
What about constantly allowing discussions to degenerate into possible details of pie-in-the-sky Utopian futures? Does such a tactic alienate people or aid them in joining with you in a feeling of rapport? Isn't the here and now where others are likely to be focused? And doesn't their joining with you and feeling what you are feeling occur only here and now?
Another widely off-target arrow is the strategy of voicing seemingly head-in-the-sand foreign policy announcements, allowing others to form the impression that you could care less about the suffering of people elsewhere in the world because your sacred principle of avoiding foreign entanglements trumps any sympathy for people living in terror and horror. Could it be that first expressing sincere and deep compassion for the sufferers in other countries will help people join with you on a feeling level, and therefore be receptive to any liberty-promoting alternative solutions which you may then voice?
Then there is the insufferable arrogance of "I will never support the lesser of two evils," totally avoiding two glaring facts of existence. (Fact 1) Nobody is perfect. (Oh, but you and your guys are perfect enough to deserve support. Yet God forbid anyone else ever deserving support.) (Fact 2) The lesser of two evils is logically the greater good of the two possible alternatives being compared. Now there's a policy ... choosing to see evil while blinding oneself to seeing good! Such a strategy keeps your ego very satisfied. And of course your ego doesn't want you noticing that it is out to destroy you ... and that supporting your ego is supporting the greatest evil of all.
In all these respects, to see clearly, or to blind oneself: that is the question. Will would-be guardians of liberty be like Hamlet, lamenting the slings and arrows of "outrageous fortune" which are actually the misdirected arrows of their own egos? Or will they take control of their own destiny, quit looking through the ego's eyes ... and make their mark?
The device which even more deeply prepares freedom lovers for success, A Course in Miracles , talks about our ultimate need to free ourselves from every kind of slavery:
You have been told to bring the darkness to the light, and guilt to holiness. And you have also been told that error must be corrected at its source. Therefore, it is the tiny part of your self, the little thought that seems split off and separate, that the Holy Spirit needs. The rest is fully in God's keeping, and needs no guide. But this wild and delusional thought needs help, because, in its delusions, it thinks it is the Son of God, whole and omnipotent, sole ruler of the kingdom it set apart to tyrannize by madness into obedience and slavery.
Also available free of charge online:
Course in Relationship Miracles