I posted this in the libertarian thread but though it was appropriate to general right-wing politics with many on seeming to say that they prefer the disaster of climate change to the supposed loss of freedoms that tackling it might entail (remember the hysteria around the green new deal going to outlaw hamburgers) * Freedom and liberty are emotive subjects and trigger words and dishonest people who know this can use those emotions and triggers to manipulate people. People want freedom and liberty I mean the alternative is suppression, harassment, lack of choice, an inability to do as you wish, slavery. Many in the US believe that it is the natural right of American to have freedom that the very nation was born out of a desire for liberty. The great rallying call of the war of independence was ‘Give me liberty or give me death’ and the Declaration of Independence emphatically declares that it is the unalienable right of all people to have liberty. But Patrick Henry who said ‘Give me liberty or give me death’ was a slave owner and although ‘liberty’ was declared the new nation baked slavery in and kept in place so many restrictions that only about 10% of the old colonies population actually got the vote. The US was set up in the main to serve the interests of the squire class basically the interests of the more wealthy in that society with checks and balances that were more stacked against what they saw are the mob (the electoral college, senate and supreme court been amongst them), and in general that has remained the case up to today. And the wealthy have become proficient in using the concept of ‘freedom’ to manipulate the American people as the franchise grew. * Wealth has taught many Americans to see some things as been associated with freedom and others to be the enemies of freedom. Tax cuts are about freedom Deregulation is about freedom. Limited government is about freedom And the enemies of freedom are left wing ideas (that ALWAYS leads to hard-line totalitarian communism) Taxation used to help the more disadvantaged in society Regulations that limit exploitation and improve the environment. Government as a check on the power of the wealthy and a mechanism for the greater good
Freedom from health care. Freedom from retirement. Freedom from a living wage. Freedom from housing. Freedom from eating. Freedom from vacations. Freedom from peace. Freedom from a stable climate. Freedom from clean air & water. Freedom from education. Freedom from science. Freedom from critical thinking and rational thought. Freedom from reality.
Freedom comes with responsibilities ........... not the least of which is to educate oneself to be able to discern truth from lies. Today, "truth" is a fluid thing, it appears - since T**** entered the political scene and suckered some VERY undereducated people into believing his claims of "fake news." These are the very same "mainstream media" that informed us from the early 1900's through 2 World Wars, the Korean War, the Viet Nam war, and the Iraq & Afghanistan wars. They served us well all that time, but T**** slimes up out of the ooze and proclaims to the world that they are all "fake news." Why??? Because they pointed out his HUGE FLAWS and his penchant for telling monster lies. He slobbered all over Fox news(??) because they became a mouthpiece for hardline conservativism and Fox gushed over him - so they became T****'s darling .................. until Fox started to point out the obvious about the 2020 election results. Then Fox was on T****'s shit-list. Truth isn't a fluid thing. It's not the pea in a shell game. There are NO ALTERNATIVE FACTS!!!! The sky cannot be blue and red at the same time. Pictures, video, and audio tape don't lie. TRUTH and FACTS stand alone .................. with no verifiable challenges. Freedom also entails freedom for individuals to expect clean air, water, soil in order to live healthy, safe, happy lives. To have the Constitutional right to freely VOTE (since we ARE a democratic republic). But the political system has ignored those basic freedoms in order to appease the heavily-monied few, who shower H-U-G-E sums of money into mostly REPUBLICAN POLITICIANS' pockets to have laws "custom-tailored" for their interests. (Recently very large sums of money have been funneled into Democrat Joe Manchin's campaign - as he staunchly defends the filibuster, which is the key tool for THE REPUBLICAN PARTY to block any real progress in this country). If we, as a country, restrict the ability for some citizens to vote - or shorten the time allowed to even count those votes that occur - or "delay" the applications of citizens to be registered to vote until it's too late - gerrymander voting districts by re-drawing boundaries so election outcomes are assured ................. we're well on the road to autocratic, dictatorial rule. Most left-wing ideas DO NOT lead to Communism as some flapping lips suggest. But they certainly DO lead to much more fairness in our society - for many more of it's people. The REPUBLICAN-LED voter restrictions absolutely DO lead toward one thing ........... one-party, one head-of-state, dictatorial F-A-S-C-I-S-M. Fascism - "a form of restrictive, nationalistic government where political opposition is suppressed, weakened or eliminated. Control by one political party and/or one person. Typically established by military takeover & violence, or lies & propaganda. It is maintained by threats of career loss, violence toward the individual or their family, imprisonment, or execution." How can a county's people be "free" when they are restricted, impeded, or forbidden from certain "rights" ?????????????? Is the U.S.A becoming "free" only for the certain FEW??? The answer is YES.
Can freedom and liberty be expressly defined for the purpose of discussion? How much has mankind evolved since the caveman for whom it was acceptable to hit someone over the head with a club to get what the other had? now instead of clubs its guns, knives or bombs.
Wrat Can you please explain your argument? Well one of my points in the post was to point out the vagueness of the terms and that they are often expressed as what they are not People want freedom and liberty I mean the alternative is suppression, harassment, lack of choice, an inability to do as you wish, slavery. And even given that some people have felt that it is still ok to claim to be in favour of freedom while actually been slaver owners and how other manipulate the terms to push an agenda Wealth has taught many Americans to see some things as been associated with freedom and others to be the enemies of freedom. Tax cuts are about freedom Deregulation is about freedom. Limited government is about freedom And the enemies of freedom are left wing ideas (that ALWAYS leads to hard-line totalitarian communism) Taxation used to help the more disadvantaged in society Regulations that limit exploitation and improve the environment. Government as a check on the power of the wealthy and a mechanism for the greater good
I've said it before, but I'll try one more time. "Freedom" is a meaningless concept unless we specify freedom from what and for what purpose. What's the difference between "freedom' and "liberty? Freedom comes from Old English, meaning “self-determination". The Nation: Freedom vs. Liberty; More Than Just Another Word for Nothing Left to Lose (Published 2003) .Freedom vs. Liberty: Understanding the Difference & What it Means to Be Truly Free. Some say freedom is internal,a matter of state of mind or will; liberty is external, a matter of politics. The Stoic philosopher and slave Epictetus argued that with the right attitude we're always free, regardless of our circumstances. "Freedom is not procured by a full enjoyment of what is desired, but by controlling the desire." Or as Holocaust survivor, Viktor Frankl put it:"“Everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms – to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way (in how he approaches his circumstances).”Man's Search For Meaning When asked, ‘What is the major jihad?’ the Prophet replied: ‘The jihad of the self (struggle against self)’”. [Al-Majlisi, Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 19, p. 182, hadith no. 31 "Liberty" comes from the Latin “libertatem”, meaning “civil, political, or social freedom. Hanna Fenichel Pitkin has observed, liberty implies a system of rules, a ''network of restraint and order,'' and is associated with political life. It was liberty that Patrick Henry said he'd die for, and that Lincoln told us,in the Gettysburg adress, we were"conceived in." Liberty recognizes he need to balance freedom with the rights of other individuals. Freedom includes the right to swing your fist, but as J.B Finch said: "your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins". The Libertarians are mainly concerned with the liberty that involves freedom from external constraint by government, and for the purpose of pursuing whatever one wants to pursue: lawn darts, helmetless motorcycle riding, etc. Modern liberals or progressives, on the other hand, came to recognize that a few powerful private individuals could be an even greater threat to liberty than the government--whether it be " the caveman for whom it was acceptable to hit someone over the head with a club to get what the other had" or the corporation for whom it was acceptable to pay workers starvation wages and dump toxic waste on the neighbor's property. The only way to rein them in effectively is through government regulation. And the purpose is utlilitarian: the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people in the long run.
Unfortunately the NYT article was behind a paywall .. "In short, freedom is inherent to humans. It exists within them by virtue of their humanity. Liberty is a political construct that allows people to enjoy freedoms such as property rights, free speech, freedom of association, etc." any politician who promises freedom is full of crap.
TRUE. All regulation IS NOT BAD!! How many U.S. citizens have bitched over the decades when their water supplies have been polluted?? It wasn't caused by Tommy tossing his McDonald's cup on the ground ........... it was caused by Industries who took the cheap way out and just dumped chemicals into the ground to avoid paying for proper disposal means. Contaminated water knows NO POLITICS. People driving drunk or high or speeding causing accidents / killing / paralyzing someone else might be freedom or "liberty" for the plastered driver ............ but what about the freedom and liberty of the victims to expect safe travel and other drivers to operate their vehicles in a sensible, safe manner???? Regulations are NECESSARY because humans will always look for ways to do whatever the hell they want, regardless of the consequences for others that they don't give a sh*t about. It boils down to selfishness ............ "I'll do what I want, when I want, how I want. I don't care how it affects anyone else." So government regulations are necessary - by local, state, or federal governments.
Not evolved at all. The beauty of the Fred Flintstone Cartoon is to show that despite the technology and other advancements, we are handicappped by vanity and self-delusion.
I don't think it can be defined without a context: freedom from what, and for what purpose? And are we talking strictly political , or a broader context in which spiritual and ethical considerations shape the political milieu? We often think of freedom as freedom from external constraint and from government interference. In the nineteenth century, the Progressive Movement came to realize that large private business corporations could pose an even greater threat to freedom, and sought the aid of the federal government to control them. The Progressive Era (Progressive movement) (article) | Khan Academy Reformers Take on Industry: The Progressive Era | Encyclopedia.com And during the Great Depression, Franklin D. Roosevelt's Four Freedoms speech identified a couple of non-human threats to our freedom: freedom from want and freedom from fear. In the real world of political life, freedom, as the power to do what we want, has to be balanced against our protection from our neighbor's freedom to do the same. "My right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins". And for this, we invented government. Political Context. In a political context, ‘Freedom’ Means Something Different to Liberals and Conservatives. Here’s How the Definition Split—And Why That Still Matters https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrFauv3Vklk2gckAUmjzbkF;_ylu=c2VjA2ZwLWF0dHJpYgRzbGsDcnVybA--/RV=2/RE=1682556791/RO=11/RU=https://courses.lumenlearning.com/sanjacinto-usgovernment-1/chapter/the-nature-of-public-opinion//RK=2/RS=a_Eb5pvI7_zRZYkGy9shKA0KJrs- Basically, liberals/progressives want government regulation to promote equality and welfare, and to remove restrictions on social behavior. Conservatives want to reduce government involvement in the economy and equality promotion, but want to restrict social behavior, in the name of order and morality Libertarians want neither Populists want all. More simply put, conservatives want to get government out of the economy and into the bedroom. Liberal/progressive want government out of the bedroom and into the economy. Libertarians want government mostly out of both. Populists want government into both. freedom requires balance and compromise. The Balance of Freedom https://www.************/2509944117...-freedom-and-constraintthere/286809731463392/ It means something radically different for liberals and conservatives. I lean toward the liberal/progressive understanding, but I think these differences are best worked out in a constitutional framework of representative democracy within the institutional constraints of the Bill of Rights. ************************ Spiritual/ Ethical Context. In an ethical/spiritual context, which ideally should be influence with the political one, freedom means freedom from domination by id and ego in the interest of the general good. Religious prophets and clerics have preached freedom from selfish impulses and character flaws. Saint Thomas Aquinas taught that freedom is not simply the ability to choose between two courses of action, but rather the capacity to choose what is good and act accordingly. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) told us that Jihad-al-Jihad-al-Nafs or Jihad-al-Akbar is (struggle against self) is the greatest of all jihads. Merits of the Soul: Struggle against the Self (Jihad al-Nafs) Jihad al-Akbar, The Greatest Jihad: Combat with the Self May God grant me the power to conquer myself. Some go farther and call for freedom from self. (Nicholas Blewett, Freedom from the Self; Sam Woolfe, The Illusion of Self The Illusion of the Self | Issue 97 | Philosophy Now which will free us from delusion, fear, hurt and suffering. The Buddha told us the self is an illusion.What Buddhism Teaches About Self and No-Self But The Self is Not an Illusion "You could say that awakening doesn’t mean no-self so much as new self. Awakening means the emergence of a new self-system. It’s as if an old self has dissolved away and a new one has emerged. They don’t feel that they have no identity but as if they have a new identity. Christian have the concept of being "Born again" ( which sadly is sometimes only a concept.) They don’t feel that they have become nobody but that they have become somebody else. (In this sense, when traditions such as Buddhism speak of “no-self,” it may be that they strictly mean “no separate self.”) Wong and Reilly bulid on Frankl's two-factor model of self-trancednence model to develop a concept of self mastery which is similar to that of Aquinas. Living a virtuous life depends on a combination of acquired virtues and infused virtues: (1) on cultivating the habit of doing good deeds until it leads to the development of a character of virtue; and on on being awakened to our spiritual motivation to self-transcedence in all situations. That may help with the spiritual/ moral aspects, but the broader political context requires balancing the judgments of diverse groups of individuals and groups--which hopefully have some relation to the greater good, but tend to be powerfully driven by the lust for power, wealth, status, and sensual indulgence. Unless these differences are duked out peacefully in an institutional framework of commonly accepted "rules of the game", we have a Hobbesian "war of all againt all". Fortunately, our Founding Fathers were guided by the realization that men are not angels. Madison, Federalsit Papers #10 & #51.
Sniped a bunch so as to make response clearer ... revival of zombie thread awesome! Since it was posted in a political forum I was looking for clarity in context so as to be able to focus on discussion without going off on an unrelated tangent, while on a broader scope of course EVERYTHING is related to everything . The title of the thread the "use of freedom in US politics", so defining freedom in order to discuss was the question NOT as was suggested an argument. In order to debate/discuss effectively/intelligently one must know the parameters of said discussion, another case where rules/regulations come in to play as was already said rules/regulations are not inherently bad OR good but in almost all cases very necessary
Freedom and liberty are really marketing terms to prop up the false narrative of the American Dream. Remembers it’s a honor for poor kids to fight and die for their country but it’s a burden for the rich to pay taxes to support those kids
The West isn't falling, The MAGA GOP Fascist attempt to derail Democracy, the Constitution, the Rule of Law has failed . This thread isn't going to go well for you .
Freedom is relative, look 90 miles away at Cuba. Yet, according to some they would trade freedom for the Iron Rice Bowl. Iron rice bowl - Wikipedia
