Can We Do Anything About Our Eroding Freedoms?

Freedom has been won and lost a million times over thousands of years. Small groups and large groups have attempted to define and implement freedom. Everyone you ask will assure you they can tell you what freedom is. Unfortunately, as with all things, every person has a different opinion, making a "one size fits all" definition of freedom nearly impossible. There is a plethora of components that people agree on, but no two people will ever agree on every aspect.

What is more important than defining it may be finding a consensus as to what level of freedom is actually appropriate. Liberal types want very much to allow unrestrained freedom for the most part. They believe in the freedom to dress as you please, love who you please, worship who you please, and so on. But if pressed, even the most liberal will waver when confronted with freedoms that may be harmful to others. Even the most liberal would be against allowing a pedophile to live as he pleases, for example. Or they would largely agree that the support of white supremacists should not be allowed.

Liberals are not the only ones who would choose to oppress freedom. Conservative types highly favor freedom, wearing red white and blue and waving flags to prove it. However, despite vocally supporting freedom, they also feel as though some freedoms should not be allowed. Non-traditional marriage, unchecked entrance to the country by non-citizens, dissent directed at traditional values, the promotion of ideals that destabilize pride and loyalty to the country, and so on.

Both groups love and appreciate freedom, and both groups believe limits to freedom should exist for the benefit of self or society. Any limits a group sets are backed by a moral claim that allowing some particular freedom would damage individuals and/or society as a whole. We are miles apart, while being in complete agreement. Without being hypocritical, it is impossible to demand freedom for yourself when it denies freedom to another. None of us disagree on how important freedom is, that isn't the issue at all.

The part we can't agree on is what causes harm to individuals and society and when the needs of society supersede the needs of the individuals or small groups. We can't agree on who gets freedom and who doesn't. We can't agree on what harms others and what doesn't. We can't agree on who's freedom is most important. We can't agree on which freedoms should be limited.

So how do we pick who gets to decide what is harmful and what is not? Also, who gets to decide when an individual's freedom is more important than society's freedom? I think the best place to start is to stop arguing about freedom. We all agree it is a great thing. Let's start from the top and work down.

Who should get to decide? In a democracy, ideally the majority rules. Whatever the majority wants is what we should get. It allows satisfaction to the greatest number of people and that seems like the best possible outcome. You can't please everyone, so it seems the most accommodating thing we can hope to do is please the majority.

The one big flaw in that plan is that democracy has absolutely nothing to do with morality. We like to think it does, but it does not. People feel that way because they believe the majority of people are guided by universal principles like don't kill, mean is bad, nice is good, do unto others, etc. It may be debated whether morals are set by a god or by an inner instinct, but the substance of the issue is the same either way. It is here that all the trouble starts.

In order to satisfy one person's desire many times, another has to suffer. What makes one person more important than another? Who picks the criteria? How can everyone be free, if some are oppressed? Again, the only way to settle the issue even remotely fairly is to allow the majority to make those decisions. The sad truth is, that the ability to provide freedom for all does not exist within our current culture. It may not be possible within our human limitations at all. No time in recorded history suggests otherwise.

The people of the United States have become so divided that we not only can't move forward, but we are slipping backward. There seems to be no compromise and the wedge is driven deeper every single day. We hear rumors of civil war and the civil unrest is already blatantly obvious. Not only are these divides stressful and unpleasant but they put us at risk. United we stand, divided we fall.

In my observation, conservative types believe that individual rights should be greater than the rights of society as a whole and liberal types believe the rights of society should be the priority. Both have valid arguments.

If an individual is limited in access to his heart's desire and is being forced to always be in service to others, they will be cheated out of having a life of freedom. If it is not their nature to be self-sacrificing and altruistic then having to submit to that type of life would be unfair and less enjoyable. They are not wrong about that.

Some people believe that having a fair, equitable, inclusive society allows more individuals to achieve higher levels of happiness and believe that to be the end goal. They believe that when society is happier, individuals are also happier, making it the most efficient way for the majority to gain happiness. They are not wrong about that.

Humans are social creatures and are herd animals. We almost always join small groups and just as often we, in addition, form larger groups. At this point, living in seclusion isn't possible for most people, even if it were preferred. In my opinion, that lends credibility to the notion that the needs of society should be served before those of the individual.

Working our way down, next is who gets to pick. Unless someone can give me a good reason otherwise, I have to stick with the majority being the fairest option we have available, and if it was as simple as that we'd have a lot fewer problems. But sadly the voice of the majority seems to be lost in our current system. We have allowed too many things to skew the results of the true majority desires.

A complex issue to be argued, but the electoral college does indeed skew true majority voting. We won't argue the merits of it here but I stand my ground that it allows for a manipulation that disfranchises some votes of the majority. I find it appalling that a POTUS candidate can get the votes of the majority of the people, clearly indicating they want that person, and yet lose the election. This has happened way too often in my lifetime. How is that not a slap in the face to the majority of the people?

I could live with that if it were the only thing ripping decisions from the true majority, but it is only one of many. Gerrymandering, redistricting, Citizens United (legal bribery), dark money, corruption, manipulative media, disinformation, voter suppression, and Dem super delegates, to list only some of the things depriving the majority. Depriving them of the freedoms they want.

The abortion issue is a good example, along with the marijuana issue. In both cases, more than 70% of the people want them legal but that isn't what the clear majority gets. Does that make you feel free? I reckon 70% of us would say no. To me, issues like these and the electoral college are clear indicators that our country does not concede to the majority despite our claims to the contrary.

I remind you again that majority has nothing to do with perceived moralities. We made booze illegal and then made it legal again. Abortion was illegal, we made it legal, and it went back to being illegal. Pot was unregulated, went to illegal, went to part illegal, part legal. I use these examples to emphasize the point. Regardless of your moral stance, when the majority really does win, sometimes it may seem immoral to the minority. That shouldn't stop the majority from gaining their freedom in whatever area though.

What is the solution? I honestly don't know. We are so fixated on our differences we can't see that the majority is getting the shaft and the minority is getting the gold mine. If we ever understand this one thing we will have a chance, but I am not going to be holding my breath waiting for people to get it. It isn't right against left, it's top against bottom, and almost all of us are on the bottom. Break those chains of partisanship and start demanding the majority actually get what they want. We all want to be free, so let's help each other get that.