Liberty: Theory vs. Reality

One of the guiding principles of my philosophy is that, as a society, we should pursue the path that results in the greatest amount of liberties for everyone. First, we have to define liberty, and I can think of no better way than this: the absence of coercion. I use coercion because, when you get down to it, liberty isn't some intangible concept that philosophers debate – it's really the ability to do the things that you want to – to “pursue happiness” as the Founding Fathers put it.

I think it's interesting how we regard liberty and freedom as synonymous, however they are actually two sides of the same coin. Freedom refers to being free of coercive powers, however this doesn't include additive liberties such as various technologies and social contracts. Liberty, on the other hand, refers not only to this freedom from coercion, but also liberties that are afforded to us by engineering and social contract.

There are several constraints on liberty in our world. One of which is physics. Even though flying cars are legal – there's none in the marketplace. The way to overcome this is through technology. I would argue that technology increases liberty because it increases your ability to fulfill your dreams.

Another constraint is coercion of which there are multiple forms. The most fundamental is the type which your mind imposes on you – such as self-confidence, etc. Another form is societal – such as the various norms and mores that all peoples are subject to. The heaviest form is governmental – which can actually give you real punishments that often involve minimizing your liberty. The last form is the hardest to overcome & most powerful form of coercion - hence its the major constraint on liberty.

There are two ways to measure liberty: one way is to look at what the laws say and the other has to do with what most people are able to get away with. For instance, in Pennsylvania the speed limit on the interstate is 65mph, however the actual speed is probably closer to 75mph. This difference between the law and daily reality is exactly what I'm driving at.

In the United States, we like to think we have a lot of liberty, and in many ways we do, but let's not let our preconceptions cloud reality. We have relatively open laws, and they're quite well enforced. I think the standard for speed limited is probably pretty correlative with the sum of American daily reality.

By contrast, in Africa there are many regimes that wield totalitarian power that highly restrains liberty, however their power might only extend 50 miles from the capital. If you're out in the countryside, you really aren't subject to their coercion at all, and you might live completely as you would under no laws at all. If freedom was measured in speed limits, I'd bet their laws are closer to 10mph and reality is closer to 100mph – disregarding technology and liberties which only a government can give – such as property rights, roads, etc.

If I have liberty seeking behavior, it would seem like I'd try to live in a land that has the highest amount of real freedom – adjusted for every constraint. I'm not sure anyone keeps tabs on this, but I'd really like to see the numbers.

I'd welcome some comments on this!

Comments

[Derek]

I have heard rumors that Sweden is the freest nation on Earth, but then again they just allowed the Pirate Bay to be taken to court... so who knows. I think regardless of what outside factors are pressing down on individuals and preventing their desired freedom is completely subjective. You are free to do whatever you want, you just have to suffer the concequences of doing something others (i.e. government, society, etc) find offensive or impeding on their personal freedoms. Peter Sutcliffe felt he was free to go about killing women, and nothing stopped him for a while. So thats a roundabout way of saying coercion from your mind if stronger than government, or maybe governments create that... this topic could go on all day.

[Nick Pinkston]

Yea, Sweden is probably high in some areas like social freedom, but I bet in economics and property rights they're not as good. I know Hong Kong and Singapore are always on top of the economic freedom indexes - not sure about human rights. New Zealand and Ireland are up there for both I believe. I really need to travel more.

I don't think it's useful to say "you're free to do what you want, but face the consequences" this isn't "free". No one can stop our free will for any instant, but in the long term they definitely can. I can kill someone, but soon they'll find me and put me in prison where I'm not free to do much of anything.

I don't see how this is relating to mind-based freedom > than gov't-based. In both cases your mind is used, yes, but in the later the consequences aren't self-imposed.

[Derek]

No I agree, my comment was a little off your topic. I agree with your post. It just made me think about people who, despite the consequences, do whatever they want. As apposed to people who know and fear the consequences, and so would never go beyond the laws even if they are imposing on free-will.

[Roscoe Jenkins]

It seems that we're just working towards getting the most done. Humanity must submit to some order in order to grow itself as a species. Liberty restrictions aren't so much governmental force as self imposed limits to keep things under control.
Metaphysically, we're "free" to do whatever we wish, we've all just decided that there are certain things we should keep ourselves from doing, like indulging in bestiality. We place social restrictions on individual actions. And since some cow-fuckers can't control themselves, the royal We felt the need to set up agencies that could punish (or isolate) unwanted behavior.
One would hope that we're shooting for the maximum potential in both individual and social liberties, but getting to stasis will take trial and error and time and a lack of corruption on either side.