Freedom… a sweet concept. We all want to be free. But what is freedom?
An official definition says that freedom is “the state of being free, of not being imprisoned or enslaved”. My definition is a bit different.

Truly free people should be allowed to rape, loot, pillage, slaughter each other in the streets, shoot bears in national parks, take hostages, or do anything else they may want to do, without restrictions. Even with one restriction, my definition of freedom is destroyed.

Laws are maps that define the boundaries of freedom. Now if we think that America, between the federal and state levels, has enough laws so that one will need a few good years to read them all, I think it’s safe to say that the freedom is so restricted that it just ain’t freedom anymore.

The United States of America – Land of the free and home of the brave. Yeah right.

If you’re being told all your life that you’re free, it’s natural to start believing so. It’s a brainwashing process, and if in this moment you believe that you’re free, I suggest you take a second thought.

The governments were initially created to protect certain fundamental rights (freedom of speech, press, and privacy), but these days they are breaking each and every one of those rights.

sponsored links

The freedom of speech is one of the most cherished rights we have. The most powerful weapon a politician has is propaganda, and they hate the freedom of speech because they cannot influence the people who speak out (people who speak out actually think).
If someone tries to speak out, they’ll hit a wall of ignorance and abandon. Most people don’t even bother anymore because of this, and the system is getting stronger. And as the system grows stronger, the freedom of press is disappearing.

Several acts passed by former presidents allow corporations to merge and buy off smaller companies. For example: one of the largest missile makers for the U.S. (General Electric) currently owns News channel NBC. If a war would break out, the news will only show how great it is.

And the third fundamental right that’s vanishing, is the right to privacy. NSA systems are able to capture phone calls, faxes, e-mails, file transfers, telegraphs, every mean of communication.
In London, surveillance cameras capture every move in the city… I wouldn’t want to live there.

Nowadays freedom exists only at national levels. The individual notion of freedom is starting to become just a dream. Only the very poor people can enjoy it (no cellphones, no cars, no credit cards, no e-mail, etc).

We limit our freedom even more by ourselves, by becoming more and more dependent on modern technologies. They are good, but we need to find a balance and don’t allow them to control the way we live our lives. Ask yourself “will I survive two months without a cellphone?”.

Freedom has become a myth. The good thing is that we are still free enough to make things right. Find a fight and stay in it while you’re still free to do so. Make yourself heard, make yourself known.

And remember what Mahatma Gandhi said: “Be the change you want to see in the world.” Start being a better person, and the world will follow.



Liked this post? Subscribe for updates via RSS or email:
  • David

    “Truly free people should be allowed to rape, loot, pillage, slaughter each other in the streets, shoot bears in national parks, take hostages, or do anything else they may want to do, without restrictions. Even with one restriction, my definition of freedom is destroyed.” Perhaps, but with that definition, only one person can be “truly” free at any time, rendering your definition essentially useless. Truly free people should be allowed to do anything that does not limit the ability of everyone else to be the same way. Hence the power physical coercion is not a right that truly free people should or do have.

  • David

    “Truly free people should be allowed to rape, loot, pillage, slaughter each other in the streets, shoot bears in national parks, take hostages, or do anything else they may want to do, without restrictions. Even with one restriction, my definition of freedom is destroyed.” Perhaps, but with that definition, only one person can be “truly” free at any time, rendering your definition essentially useless. Truly free people should be allowed to do anything that does not limit the ability of everyone else to be the same way. Hence the power physical coercion is not a right that truly free people should or do have.

  • http://armannd.com/ Titus-Armand

    You are right. My definition truly is somehow useless… but yours is essentially wrong – and I believe you have mistaken “freedom” for “rights”.

    Other than another example of the imprecision of the English language (“freedom” has plenty of connotations), we can’t really imagine freedom because we don’t have too much to compare it to.

    Being truly free is a purely individual pursuit requiring moment-by-moment, conscious decision-making against the natural order of hierarchical organization. And since most people would rather follow than lead, these self-determining individuals will form a necessary but only occasionally effective minority. So the fact that my definition applies only to a minority of people doesn’t render it useless.

    True freedom – inside of a system – is an unimaginably horrible thing. The freedom to write and think about it is enough…

    The only true freedom available to us is one of a spiritual nature. Regardless of whether you are religious or not, if your mind is free from hate and you can slow down and smell the roses, you can consider yourself to be truly free.

    In the physical world, only a state of anarchy could offer total freedom. And we wouldn’t want to live in a system like that.

    Anyhow, the problem with the current democratic freedom is that it means less and less with every passing day…

  • http://armannd.com/ Titus-Armand

    You are right. My definition truly is somehow useless… but yours is essentially wrong – and I believe you have mistaken “freedom” for “rights”.

    Other than another example of the imprecision of the English language (“freedom” has plenty of connotations), we can’t really imagine freedom because we don’t have too much to compare it to.

    Being truly free is a purely individual pursuit requiring moment-by-moment, conscious decision-making against the natural order of hierarchical organization. And since most people would rather follow than lead, these self-determining individuals will form a necessary but only occasionally effective minority. So the fact that my definition applies only to a minority of people doesn’t render it useless.

    True freedom – inside of a system – is an unimaginably horrible thing. The freedom to write and think about it is enough…

    The only true freedom available to us is one of a spiritual nature. Regardless of whether you are religious or not, if your mind is free from hate and you can slow down and smell the roses, you can consider yourself to be truly free.

    In the physical world, only a state of anarchy could offer total freedom. And we wouldn’t want to live in a system like that.

    Anyhow, the problem with the current democratic freedom is that it means less and less with every passing day…