We use the word "freedom" very much in politics. It is a central theme of most political programs. It is ironic because the word's meaning is context dependent yet too often no context is specified. One of the people who addressed this was George Lakoff in his book: Whose freedom? Lakoff recognizes two meanings in the context of American politics. There is the progressive meaning:
The central thesis of this book is simple. There are two very different views of freedom in America today, arising from two very different moral and political worldviews dividing the country.
The traditional idea of freedom is progressive. One can see traditional values most clearly in the direction of change that has been demanded and applauded over two centuries. America has been a nation of activists, consistently expanding its most treasured freedoms:
The expansion of citizen participation and voting rights from white male property owners to non-property owners, to former slaves, to women, to those excluded by prejudice, to younger voters
The expansion of opportunity, good jobs, better working conditions, and benefits to more and more Americans, from men to women, from white to nonwhite, from native born to foreign born, from English speaking to non-English speaking
The expansion of worker rights-freedom from inhumane working conditions-through unionization: from slave labor to the eight-hour day, the five-day week, worker compensation, sick leave, overtime pay, paid vacations, pregnancy leave, and so on
The expansion of public education from grade school to high school to college to postgraduate education
The expansion of knowledge through science from isolated figures like Benjamin Franklin to scientific institutions in the great universities and governmental institutions like the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health
The expansion of public health and life expectancy
The expansion of consumer protection through more effective government regulation of immoral or irresponsible corporations and class action suits within the civil justice system
The expansion of diverse media and free speech from small newspapers to the vast media/Internet possibilities of today
The expansion of access to capital from wealthy land-holders and bankers to all the ways ordinary people-more and more of them-can borrow money today
The expansion, throughout the world, of freedom from colonial rule-for the most part with the backing of American foreign policy
These are among the progressive trends in American history.
There is also the meaning used by radical conservatives:
The rise of radical conservatism in America threatens to stop and reverse these and other progressive trends together with the progressive ideal of freedom that has propelled them all.
Lakoff follows his own teaching here by giving little chance for the reader to respond to the frames the conservatives use. I have always liked Lakoff's approach but it is limited to a specific context and there is far more to the idea of freedom. Read on below and I'll explain.
This country has been changing since its founding but that change seems to be accelerating in recent years. I am going to be 79 in March and I can bear witness to these changes. I also have read lots of history so the context of American politics is known to me.
My approach to politics has also been changing. More and more I use relational systems theory to view our world as a complex system. I find that this approach is very enlightening for it places us in a context that is not restricted to either progressive or conservative world views but sees them as part of a larger system. This is important because of the fast pace of recent human social evolution and also the lack of the same.
There is an interesting circularity in all this because as we change the system changes and as the system changes it changes us. This makes it impossible to formulate a program without being ready to adapt and correct it rapidly.
Yesterday I wrote a diary about freedom but used different frames. I relied on Paulo Freire's frames involving the system of oppression that has within it oppressors and oppressed. Here it is if you are interested: Will the poor always be with us? The thing that motivated this diary was my poll. There was significant response to two of the questions:
the poor
will always be with us
32% 9 votes
are less "human" than the rest of us
10% 3 votes
. I know we are not all "progressives" here, but this strikes me as problematic. If the responders read the diary they saw reasons why such responses are really off the mark. Furthermore, in the context of our coutry's politics these responders would consider the poor to be "free" or to have "freedom" like all Americans. Their poverty would be a result of their not using their freedom as well as those who are not poor.
This is very close to the radical conservative way of explaining the situation and I wonder why folks here think that way. Clearly, if they read the diary, they disagree with it. The thesis there is that neither the poor or the people who are not are free in a very real sense. This is an important point in Freire's book and it is worth rephrasing his ideas in the context of this discussion about freedom.
Lakoff asserts that progressives want to do something about the ability of people to enjoy a middle class existence, to put it too simply. Thus we struggle to make it possible to achieve the freedoms on his list above and more. This is a trap and it frames the discussion in a very unsatisfactory way.
We are at a crucial point in our history for the system of politics we practice is failing us more than it ever has before. Rather than it giving the poor the freedom to become middle class it is making more and more of the middle class join the poor.
Does this mean that those being forced to make this downward economic shift are losing freedom? If so, then the poor clearly are not as free as the middle class.
Furthermore, the middle class do not seem to have the power to prevent their demise so they lack some important freedom.
It is even worse because the oligarchy that rules us clearly believes that this is what should be happening. Are they more free than the huge majority of the people they exercise power over? If your goal is to behave in a way that treats other people this way they seem to have that freedom. But there is a catch here and it begins to show up right now. If the wealth they possess is the source of their freedom, then that freedom is also system dependent and becoming more fragile as they achieve more and more of what they seem to want to do.
System stability is a very tricky thing. It is based on the idea that anything that is a potential source of change in the basic system's nature must either be absorbed and turned into a stabilizing force or it must be destroyed. But if it is already a part of the system, then it must be destroyed or the system will necessarily change.
This is where we seem to be. Our freedom depends on their willingness to let us have it. The consequences of depriving us of that freedom can be catastrophic for them. Yet they seem to lack a fundamental freedom, namely to see this.
Recent events show the destructive potential of their freedom. Global Warming, war, poisoning the air, oil and water that sustains life. Freedom to rape the land with fracking and pipelines and offshore drilling and agribusiness, etc. Freedom to eliminate consumers who buy the goods they produce. Where will it end?
Now we can speak of a different freedom. It is not the progressive program as Lakoff asserts but it is the ability to stop behaving like we can only see our freedom in terms of becoming more like them. It is the freedom to reorganize how we use our labor and our minds to provide what we need to survive and to leave a legacy for future generations that will allow them to survive. This is not the system we have. It can only come to be if we learn to be truly free. True freedom is coupled very tightly to understanding the consequences of action and then acting responsibly. True freedom comes from realizing that it is not a zero sum game but one where the growth of one is the growth of all.
We need to learn about freedom. We need to teach about freedom. Then we can become free together. There is no other way. The only thing we have to lose at this point is precious time. If we do not act soon it may be come to late. That is a horrible thing to wish on future generations. That is a horrible thing to accept responsibility for. It won't be politicians who make this happen It will be you and I or it will be no one.