Thoughts on freedom

[ZhaoYun]

Now that all of the habitable world is controlled by nationalist entities, there is no true freedom, since true or absolute freedom presupposes the freedom to elect out of that which one desires to be free of.
Now that freedom is restricted everywhere, in varying degrees, it must be qualified with terms like political freedom and personal freedom, sexual freedom, religious freedom, etc.
I believe that this circumstance constitutes a kind of imprisonment that damages the human spirit and retards our individual development and social progress.
An aside: I have lived in many places and as an American, the thing I found the most surprising was that many of the places I've been to, particularly in Asia, had much higher degrees of personal freedom, though their political freedoms were often severely curtailed.
Is this inevitable? Is there another way. Mind you, I'm not an anarchist, but I am reminded every day that at any time in human history before say, 150 years ago, I would have walked away from all of this and tried to build something new, without interference. Perhaps I would have failed, having been eaten by a bear or something, but historically it's been those who made this very choice, absolute freedom at any cost, that as an American I have been raised to idolize, and do.

 

[Big Black Dog]

Sorry. I'm not bright enough to have a clue as to what you're talking about.

 

[RodISHI]

Now that all of the habitable world is controlled by nationalist entities, there is no true freedom, since true or absolute freedom presupposes the freedom to elect out of that which one desires to be free of.
Now that freedom is restricted everywhere, in varying degrees, it must be qualified with terms like political freedom and personal freedom, sexual freedom, religious freedom, etc.
I believe that this circumstance constitutes a kind of imprisonment that damages the human spirit and retards our individual development and social progress.
An aside: I have lived in many places and as an American, the thing I found the most surprising was that many of the places I've been to, particularly in Asia, had much higher degrees of personal freedom, though their political freedoms were often severely curtailed.
Is this inevitable? Is there another way. Mind you, I'm not an anarchist, but I am reminded every day that at any time in human history before say, 150 years ago, I would have walked away from all of this and tried to build something new, without interference. Perhaps I would have failed, having been eaten by a bear or something, but historically it's been those who made this very choice, absolute freedom at any cost, that as an American I have been raised to idolize, and do.

Freedom does not actually exist for certain things when you consider we do live in a nation of laws. We have no freedom of personal property rights when elitist are allowed to rule unfettered.

The open prairie no longer exist. When I was a child we camped along the river banks and beaches in both Arizona, California and Oregon unhindered. There were no fees to simply pull over and put up camp for a night or two even. Mom and Dad were young and just starting out so we often lived in a tent for the first week until they got settled in a place near his newest job.

I've considered for years that I'd like to make our place here on the south end an actual free camp spot where anyone who came in peace could take a rest for a bit of time. Then I consider the ramifications of letting someone else invade my private space. Next thing ya know they'd be telling me how I should live by their standards.

Now we are not even allowed to have a cigarette in our own home here if we use it for workshops or use the shop for anything that could be considered public traffic. That gets me to wondering if I have a garage sale would I be in fear of being fined or arrested because it would be unlawful for me to smoke in our own place. Next we won't be able to buy sugar without an extra cost but Monsanto and those type companies will still be able to pollute us with their chemicals and ruin the basic seed that has sustained mankind throughout history.

The United States of America has been taken over by corporate & political bullies that will do whatever they wish to the people until the people say enough. By then there will be few to stand up because they have fear of losing what little bit they may have. To many people seem to think that forcing the small family enterprises out has no affect on their own lives. It may be years before they understand they sold themselves for nothing into a system that enslaves them.

Freedom is an old cliche that we only grew up believing in as naive children. We only thought we would be free and we only thought that the law applied to all, it does not. Even the rich who have abused others or used abusive measures to gain wealth and power are not free as they worry each day how to keep all their ill gotten booty and who may be on the ladder right behind them or who may catch them in their misdeeds.

The only place you still have free is your own mind. Your free to make decisions but beware of how you make those. One wrong step on the wrong person's toes and it could land you in jail or threatened with jail if you refuse the program of the giants that rule over the land. Then again just think of all the free time you could have in jail, warm bed, time to read, time to reflect, running water and no rain pouring through a leaky roof. Personally I'd miss Rod and the dog so I try to avoid confrontations as much as possible.

 

[Citizen]

The best description of freedom I can think of was given by Thomas Jefferson, when he said:

"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual."

 

[American Horse]

What does freedom mean to you; what is your definition of freedom?

If you have marketable skills, particularly the skills of a craftsman, I don't think there is much keeping a person (like you) from opting out of the system, operating financially under the table, avoiding the Social Security and Medicare systems - their encumberments but also later benifits - if that is what you want to do.

I would assume such an individual (or couple) would want to remove themselves physically and geographically from a lot of interference by civil institutions. But they would need to realize their freedom would be somewhat compromised by the need to maintain a low profile, and not attract too much attention to oneself.
.

 

[Avatar4321]

Im not sure I agree that all the habitable land is occupied and controlled. I think there are alot of resources we are unaware of or simply dont use.

This thread is interesting. Im going to have to think about what freedom means for me.

 

[manifold]

Freedom isn't free.



























It costs a buck-o-five.

 

[JBeukema]

Now that all of the habitable world is controlled by nationalist entities, there is no true freedom, since true or absolute freedom presupposes the freedom to elect out of that which one desires to be free of.

Freedom is restricted in all societies, for the mutual benefit of all.

Now that freedom is restricted everywhere, in varying degrees, it must be qualified with terms like political freedom and personal freedom, sexual freedom, religious freedom, etc.
I believe that this circumstance constitutes a kind of imprisonment that damages the human spirit and retards our individual development and social progress.

Are you arguing for anarchy and a return to the natural state?

Is this inevitable? Is there another way. Mind you, I'm not an anarchist, but I am reminded every day that at any time in human history before say, 150 years ago, I would have walked away from all of this and tried to build something new, without interference

Only until more people showed up, and social order was needed.

 

[Xenophon]

Romance of the three kingdoms fan, eh?

 

[JBeukema]

Romance of the three kingdoms fan, eh?

 

[Xenophon]

ZhaoYun is famous in Chinese history as 'one of the five tigers that would slay the dragon' during the later Han period of China.

The story of this time period is in the book 'Romance of the three kingdoms' (China was devided into three parts, Wei, Wu and Shu at this time), it is a story of great battles and heroes that was brought to life in the computer era with a game series of the same name.

 

[ZhaoYun]

Wow. What great responses. Thanks. I'm new here, so I don't know how things usually roll here, but I'd like to respond. Let me know if my formatting is clumsy.

Big Black Dog, don't feel bad. Most of the time I'm not bright enough to have a clue as to what I'm talking about, but judging by your tag lines, I think you might sympathize.

RodISHI, exactly! My problem is, by the time I figured out that it might be a cliche it was too late. So I've decided to be the kind of man that many consider a naive, idealistic, dreamer. Which brings me to

American Horse. You nailed it. I am a carpenter, and have been working overseas contracts for many years. Soon I'm planning to settle down somewhere in the world that's, shall we say, under the RADAR. For me, one of the most important aspects of freedom is independence. I believe the less I take, the less I should be expected to give. (yeah I know, naive naive), but more importantly I know that as an American and a man of the West, that working toward that independence is traditionally the most important factor in making us men.

BTW Citizen, thank you. I believe that Thomas Jefferson was one of the greatest men in history.

Avatar, I hope to hear your thoughts.

Manifold, It costs folks like you and me.

Which brings me to Mr. Beukema, who I believe may carry a bit of troll blood in his veins:

Freedom is restricted in all societies, for the mutual benefit of all.

Ideally, and ostensibly.

Are you arguing for anarchy and a return to the natural state?

as I stated in the following passage you quoted, I'm not an anarchist. For now, these are just thoughts on freedom.

Only until more people showed up, and social order was needed.

Well, sort of. I believe that nascent free societies do not need to establish or maintain social order. They are held together by the need to survive, and the noble goals that its founders share.

Xenophon. Nice. I wasn't a fan until after I was given that name by the folks I lived with in China for two years.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

I'm happy with the freedom I enjoy, thank you very much. What more freedom could I need? I can do whatever I want. I even have the liberty to do nothing thanks to the financial resources of my parents. All the boundaries I have are the freedom to take freedoms away from others. And I do not want to do that because it ultimately diminshes my own freedom. Freedom to do WHAT is what I ask? I have the freedom to pursue my creative pursuits if I had the willpower, I have freedom to pursue my intellectual pursuits, and I do. I have all the freedoms in the world short of curtailing others' freedoms; and what more could I ask for? The same freedom for others who are less fortunate.

 

[Agnapostate]

"A bit of troll blood"? Nah. That boy's been skinny dipping in the reservoir under the bridge.

 

[editec]

Pure freedom is called anarchy.

 

[Agnapostate]

As insightful as you generally are, ed, "anarchy" as you conceptualize it is merely a continuation of the hierarchical constrictions that humans current place on each other sans the pretensions of formal authority. A condition of chaotic and disorderly lack of organization will breed the rise of scattered power hungry warlords through a manifestation of social Darwinism that will quickly proceed to contradict the premise that "anarchy" is "without rulers" through establishments of authoritarianism.

Legitimate anarchy is achieved through establishment of the political theory of anarchism, which holds at its core horizontal and decentralized organization that is decidedly non-hierarchical. The force that is exerted through such organization is specifically intended to counter greater and more authoritarian impositions of force, similar to the arrest of the violent criminal by the police being a necessary forcible means of preventing forcible acts of greater severity. So whatever "rule" or "authority" exists is intended to prevent an establishment of a more imposing form, and a society that could maximize such organizational structure would be closest to the proviso of being "without rulers."

 

[American Horse]

<SNIP>.....I am a carpenter, and have been working overseas contracts for many years. Soon I'm planning to settle down somewhere in the world that's, shall we say, under the RADAR. For me, one of the most important aspects of freedom is independence. I believe the less I take, the less I should be expected to give. (yeah I know, naive naive), but more importantly I know that as an American and a man of the West, that working toward that independence is traditionally the most important factor in making us men.

Locating in a place of low population does not necessarily create privacy. Here in South central Indiana, Monroe County (pop 121,000/129 family units per square mile/5 population centers), the home of Indiana University we have a varied and cosmopolitan population with every type of entertainment available.

Thirty miles to the East in Brown County (pop 15,000/23 family units per square mile with 22 population centers), we have inter-dependent "artist" and "salesmen" types, very gregarious, hoping for tourists, even with a summer theater play-house.

Thirty miles to the West, the largest county in the state, Greene (pop 33,000/28 family units per square mile with 7 population centers), people are more likely to carry a shotgun rack in their back truck window and not smile much when a stranger drops in unexpectedly, expecting privacy to be respected - but if a stranger needed help out on the country road they wouldn't hesitate to help out; very independent and austere.

The trouble with a village type population centers as opposed to a city, everyone makes it a point to know everyone else’s secrets. (Hey, JOE got a letter from the IRS….get a P.O. Box?)
In cities there's much more privacy and anonymity.

 

[Al Gunn]

America is free is a myth, you can vote for one of two identical parties, you get equal rights voted away (prop 8), a lot of you want to take freedom of choice away (trying to overturn roe vs wade), 50 million people have no health care (no freedom of health and liberty), you wage war all over world to enslave others to your ways...
And most of all, nothing is free in the US, everything has a price.

 

[American Horse]

America is free is a myth, you can vote for one of two identical parties, you get equal rights voted away (prop 8), a lot of you want to take freedom of choice away (trying to overturn roe vs wade), 50 million people have no health care (no freedom of health and liberty), you wage war all over world to enslave others to your ways...
And most of all, nothing is free in the US, everything has a price.

Yada yada yada....

 

[manifold]

As insightful as you generally are, ed, "anarchy" as you conceptualize it is merely a continuation of the hierarchical constrictions that humans current place on each other sans the pretensions of formal authority. A condition of chaotic and disorderly lack of organization will breed the rise of scattered power hungry warlords through a manifestation of social Darwinism that will quickly proceed to contradict the premise that "anarchy" is "without rulers" through establishments of authoritarianism.

Legitimate anarchy is achieved through establishment of the political theory of anarchism, which holds at its core horizontal and decentralized organization that is decidedly non-hierarchical. The force that is exerted through such organization is specifically intended to counter greater and more authoritarian impositions of force, similar to the arrest of the violent criminal by the police being a necessary forcible means of preventing forcible acts of greater severity. So whatever "rule" or "authority" exists is intended to prevent an establishment of a more imposing form, and a society that could maximize such organizational structure would be closest to the proviso of being "without rulers."

Agna is trying to say in more than 150 words what can be said with about 17: Theoretically, pure freedom equals anarchy, but it's not a stable state of reality. Authority will always emerge.