The Swamp logo

Why We Should Aspire for Equal Dependency Rather Than Independence

by David Graham about a year ago in opinion
Report Story

Unlike popular belief independence is not the path to freedom, quite the opposite, equal dependency is what gives freedom

It is impossible to talk about independence without also talking about the notion of freedom, whether it be an independent nation or an independent person, independence is supposed to equal freedom.

But does independence equal freedom, is an independent person free, is an "independent" person even an independent person? To answer that we need to look at some independent people.

Arguably the most independent person in this world is a man nicknamed, Man of the Hole, this man is the last surviving member of a tribe in the Amazon rainforest, and he lives completely and entirely on his own.

Everything he needs to live he gets from the forest, that means he fends for himself, gathers his own food, his own resources, literally he does everything himself, and he is so independent that if every person on Earth died but him, he would continue living exactly as he is right now. Nothing would change for him. Considering this, it would be fair to say that he is dependent on no one but himself.

But all is not as it seems, as independent as he may at first seem to be he is actually not independent, he is dependent completely and entirely upon the Brazilian authorities for protection, if the Brazilian authorities had not set up a protection zone spanning forty square miles around his home, it is likely he would have been killed a long time ago by illegal loggers who want access to his land.

So despite being the most independent man on Earth, he is not independent, but is he free? He is free to live his life exactly as he is now, but what if he wanted to leave, where would he go, would he be accepted? And would he even be allowed to leave? These are all questions that should he wish to leave would have to be debated by Brazilian government officials. That means he is free to live his life as he does now but he is not actually free, and in fact has less actual freedoms than the average Brazilian.

The latter point may seem questionable, but the average Brazilian can move freely throughout the country but Man in the Hole cannot; therefore, the most independent man on Earth has less freedoms than the average Brazilian.

But what about Brazil itself, it is an independent nation so does that translate to its people being free, or rather does a nation being independent equate to its people being free? To answer that you need only look at North Korea, North Korea is an independent nation but you would be hard pushed to find a single person who would say its people have a great many freedoms. So being an independent nation does not imply freedom.

Therefore if North Korea is independent, but its people do not have a great deal of freedoms, and this man is independent but has less freedoms than the average Brazilian, this begs the question does independence truly equal freedom?

The simple answer is, no, independence has nothing to do with freedom. In fact, freedom is derived from the opposite of independence, it is derived from dependency namely equal dependency.

Equal dependency is where a large number of people are equally dependent upon each other, for example if a person is heavily reliant upon one person, they will not have a great deal of freedom, but if a person is equally reliant upon millions of people and those people are equally reliant in return then all those people will have a great deal of freedom.

That means, the more people we are dependent upon and the more people dependent upon us the greater our freedoms. That means dependency is a good thing when a large number of people are equally dependent upon each other, but a bad thing when one person or even worse many people are heavily reliant upon one person.

For example, take a dictator, a person becomes a dictator by making large numbers of people heavily reliant upon him, while in turn giving himself access to large numbers of people meaning people need him, but to him because he has many options everyone is expendable. So he needs no one individual, but every individual needs him. And in that is his power.

For example, imagine there are ten farms and this dictator controls all of them, that means he controls the nation's food supply, that means an entire nation is completely and entirely reliant upon him for food, but he is not reliant upon the nation for control of the food, all he needs is to control the ten farms.

To control the farms all he needs to do is control the markets into which the farms sell, that means the farms can't sell their produce without him, which gives him control of the farms, and the people cannot buy food without him, which gives him control of the people.

The only way to break this monopoly would be an uprising which saw the people and the farmers bypass the dictator and interact directly with each other, which is why dictators always go out of their way to control a nation's lines of communication.

If the people cannot communicate with each other, for example in this case, the farmers cannot interact with the consumers, and the people can't interact with the farmers, then the farmers will always need the dictator and the people will always need the dictator.

That means a dictator keeps his power by keeping people as independent from each other as possible. That means equal dependency is the absolute enemy of a dictator. If people are equally dependent upon each other, then a dictator has no power.

This begs the question why we all aspire for independence, the answer of which lies in the fact that independence in the way we aspire for it does not actually mean independence.

Whenever a person says I want to be independent, what they are saying is that they want freedom. But independence is not freedom, unity is freedom.

It may seem nitpicky to highlight this fact, however, I would argue that teaching people to aspire for independence implying that independence equals freedom is not wise, because it leads to people believing that they do not need others. When they do. We all need each other.

The more people that unite, the more freedoms that those people will have. That makes unity the ultimate empowerment tool, not independence, and that makes equal dependency the path to freedom, not independence.

So what we should all be aspiring for is not independence, but equal dependency. That is the true path to freedom, and the more of us that fights for it, the more freedoms we will all have.

That’s all from me for today, stay safe!

If you found this post interesting I would love it if you gave it a like and a share, and if you would like to help support me in making more posts like this feel free to drop me a tip! :-)

Also to see more posts from me make sure to follow my social media:




About the author

David Graham

Due to injury I write using voice dictation software! Lover of psychology, science'y things, movies, fiction and self-improvement. From the north-east of England!


Reader insights

Be the first to share your insights about this piece.

How does it work?

Add your insights


There are no comments for this story

Be the first to respond and start the conversation.

Sign in to comment

    Find us on social media

    Miscellaneous links

    • Explore
    • Contact
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use
    • Support

    © 2022 Creatd, Inc. All Rights Reserved.