It is clear that since the election of the new President, that lines have been drawn in the sand, both politically and culturally....maybe even spiritually. Of course however, as history demonstrates, wars are never black and white, good guys vs. bad guys....there is always a third factor.
It seems to me that both sides of the political spectrum seem to revolve around one question:
Equality or Freedom?
The current health care debate is a good example of this ideological dichotomy. The "liberals", who happen to be in power at the moment, are (were) pushing for social equality in this health care debate by trying to get all Americans covered by some form of medical insurance, while "conservatives" oppose these ideas apparently out of a fear of a "government takeover of medicine". They are worried that they will lose their freedom to choose their medical coverage and that the quality of health care will decrease (for them as well as others). (I realize that a health care reform bill has been passed recently, but I will not comment on that here.)
Now, I do understand that this issue is very complicated in nature, with all the financial and business considerations, but I am a citizen who is willing to pay extra taxes in order to help improve the social welfare of others, because I believe that will pay dividends which would benefit many people, including myself in the long run and on many levels. Personally, I don't see how improving social welfare will impinge on Freedom as the conservatives claim, but perhaps I am ignorant or naive. It is my understanding that the role of government IS to improve and protect the social welfare of its people. Maybe I'm wrong....?
Having said that, I think that the independent spirt inherent in conservatism is certainly good. We should all strive to be independent people as this is healthy. However, for a political group whose ideologies are often rooted in a religion that espouses love for your fellow man, it seems very odd to me that they would not want social equality. (Of course, this changes when it comes to the issue of the application of Justice, that is when they seem to be okay with her being blind.)
So, what is the answer to this complex question of Equality vs. Freedom?
It's quite clear to me when I read the words of our founding fathers what the answer is.
From the Declaration of Independence written by Thomas Jefferson:
(Note: Independence is another word for Freedom)
"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator, with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness."
What does this tell us?
Simple: Man cannot be Free without Equality.....it is not a choice between one or the other.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
what is freedom?
ReplyDeleteSome say it is the ability to do anything you want. 'Anything' in this occasion makes 'freedom' undefined and therefore unlimited and identifies 'freedom' with 'will'. Will, by itself, can be unlimited. But the two notions, freedom and will, cannot be identical because there would be no need for two separate words to identify them. Also, at the practical level, we find freedom is limited to the point it cancels itself (it is what we say freedom of one stops at the point it violates the freedom of another).
So freedom is limited, therefore defined, so that brings us back to question no.1: What is freedom? Who is free? Is there a definition?
Lets see what Aristotle has to say
- Pol.4.1291b
"The first kind of democracy therefore is the one which receives the name chiefly in respect of equality. For the law of this sort of democracy ascribes equality to the state of things in which the poor have no more prominence than the rich, and neither class is sovereign, but both are alike; for assuming that freedom is chiefly found in a democracy, as some persons suppose, and also equality, this would be so most fully when to the fullest extent all alike share equally in the government."
- Pol.6.1317a, 1317b
"Now a fundamental principle of the democratic form of constitution is freedom - that is what is usually asserted, implying that only under this constitution do men participate in freedom, for they assert this as the aim of every democracy. But one factor of freedom is to govern and be governed in turn; (...) And one is for a man to live as he likes; for they say that this is the function of freedom, inasmuch as to live not as one likes is the life of a man that is a slave. This is the second principle of democracy, and from it has come the claim not to be governed, preferably not by anybody, or failing that, to govern and be governed in turns; and this is the way in which the second principle contributes to equalitarian freedom."
Aristotle suggests that freedom is a political term, directly connected with an essential mechanism of Democracy: the ability "to govern and be governed in turn".
The same with equality. Equality is not natural, because living beings are not born equal. Equality can be achieved only in a political environment such as Democracy, based on institutions such as Anadasmos (redistribution of land on equal terms), Eleftheria (participation in authority on equal terms, through a 'govern and be governed in turn' procedure) and Kleroton (election by lots)....
Evrite greetings from Giorgos
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteGreetings Giorgos,
ReplyDeleteThank you for providing Aristotle's opinion on Freedom. I personally subscribe to the idea that Freedom and Equality are part of nature....and that society, government, and social law must reflect natural Law as close as possible.
Evritos