4 ms·

Historically, freedom did indeed have different meanings. For example, in the German Democratic Republic, you were shot when you wanted to leave. But it is jus

Historically, freedom did indeed have different meanings. For example, in the German Democratic Republic, you were shot when you wanted to leave. But it is just insufficiently sophisticated people that would conclude from that that they were lacking freedom. They did have freedom, but just had a different definition for it. Their definition of freedom was "understanding of the necessity" / "Einsicht in die Notwendigkeit". The definition comes from the famous German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, so surely it is more valid that the thought of some stupid redneck that thinks freedom means not being shot when you want to leave the country. Being shot when leaving is consistent with this definition of freedom. It is not a shallow western individualist definition, with negative freedoms (freedom from...), but a collectivist definition. If you leave, you deprive the collective of your work, thereby reducing their positive freedoms. Surely it is just to shoot somebody for such an egregious violation of other people's freedom. Rant over. I am really sick of people trying to twist the meaning of terms to suit their own political agenda. If you want to argue that other things are more important than freedom, fine. But at least make up your own terms.

yossarian1408 6y ago
The confusion comes from the conflation of 'liberty' and 'freedom' as meaning the same thing. Your "stupid redneck" is right if by 'freedom' he really means 'liberty', and to most people these two terms are completely interchangeable. Far from being the same thing, these two ideals are actually contradictory. As you touch on, negative rights must be violated in order to secure positive rights. Now, If you want to claim one is more legitimate than the other, I have a John Locke to match your Friedrich Hegels.
- mustafa_pasi 6y ago
  I think the point of the OP is that both definitions of freedom and liberty are going to be understood to mean different things depending on what people you are addressing. You go ask the Kashmir people what they think liberty and freedom are, and I bet they will define it in terms of Islam and Hinduism. Those particular definitions that you take for granted are a product of America being an immigrant nation populated by people who had at the time, little shared identity. Now to your credit I will say, the Americans are probably the most far ahead in this domain. Most of the rest of the world are still stuck with a freedom-with-exceptions mentality.
  - yossarian1408 6y ago
    That is a very interesting idea. I never considered that freedom can either contain or exclude liberty, depending on who you are talking to. But i'm still pretty sure that you can't confuse the term 'liberty', as it has a more defined meaning, regardless of cultural contexts. What changes is the value associated with the ideal. Every people on Earth strives for freedom, but the form of this freedom may be different in every cultural context. In the Western tradition, as developed by John Stuart Mill, Frederick Bastiat, Thomas Paine and John Locke, etc., this means liberty which is characterised by an emphasis on negative rights, freedom from government, and individualism. I do not think that the people of Kashmir consider liberty when they ask for freedom, but rather mean freedom in the way that the OP defines it, as only being democratic self-governance.
- rklaehn 6y ago
  Interesting. In German there is no such strong distinction, so I was not aware of this distinction in English. E.g. the word "Vogelfrei" refers to somebody who is free but excluded from society, an outcast. So definitely not a tiny bit of positive freedom there.
teterphiel 6y ago
> But it is just insufficiently sophisticated people that would conclude from that [getting shot for the crime of border crossing] they were lacking freedom. Translation: East germans getting shot at the border were just too dumb to realise that they were free... > Surely it is just to shoot somebody for such an egregious violation of other people's freedom Translation: Refusing to have their labor wasted on a defunct system, thereby depriving others of its non-existent fruits, soundly earned one's capital punishment, to be carried out on the spot. It was "Notwendig". > They did have freedom, but just had a different definition for it. And surly they did have less radiation poisoning due to a different definition of what it means to be "poisoned". EDIT: How could I miss this misanthropic gem: > some stupid redneck Translation: I know only cliches about the discarded working class trapped in the American rust belt, but treating them with contempt seems fun and acceptable, so I'll join.
- rklaehn 6y ago
  Sorry that this was not clear, but my comment was deeply sarcastic. I thought the "Rant over" was sufficient as a sarcasm marker. I think the "stupid redneck" definition of freedom, which I share, is way better than the "sophisticated philosopher" definition I mentioned. I see a very worrying tendency, in the context of Covid, to re-establish the absurd GDR/Hegel definition of freedom in German state tv and other media. People seem unaware what a fundamental change that is. E.g. https://www.zdf.de/nachrichten/panorama/hegel-geburtstag-freiheit-100.html https://www.zdf.de/nachrichten/panorama/hegel-geburtstag-fre... https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/mit-hegel-durch-die-coronakrise-freiheit-heisst-nicht-dass.1008.de.html?dram:article_id=474037 https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/mit-hegel-durch-die-cor... Regarding Hegel's definition of freedom: https://www.britannica.com/topic/state-sovereign-political-entity/Hegel https://www.britannica.com/topic/state-sovereign-political-e... "To Hegel, the state was the culmination of moral action, where freedom of choice had led to the unity of the rational will, and all parts of society were nourished within the health of the whole." To me, this is hell...
  - _0ffh 6y ago
    Totally with you! If we want to talk in German philosophers I suggest Nietzsche, like this: >>A state, is called the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly lieth it also; and this lie creepeth from its mouth: "I, the state, am the people."<< Or like this: >>Everything the State says is a lie, and everything it has it has stolen.<<
Proven 6y ago
> They did have freedom, but just had a different definition for it. Who’s they? The communist rulers had own definition of freedom that applied to caprice others? That freedom reminds me of the freedom concentration camp prisoners had in WW II. You’re free, but don’t try to escape.

yossarian1408 6y ago

The confusion comes from the conflation of 'liberty' and 'freedom' as meaning the same thing. Your "stupid redneck" is right if by 'freedom' he really means 'liberty', and to most people these two terms are completely interchangeable. Far from being the same thing, these two ideals are actually contradictory. As you touch on, negative rights must be violated in order to secure positive rights. Now, If you want to claim one is more legitimate than the other, I have a John Locke to match your Friedrich Hegels.

mustafa_pasi 6y ago
I think the point of the OP is that both definitions of freedom and liberty are going to be understood to mean different things depending on what people you are addressing. You go ask the Kashmir people what they think liberty and freedom are, and I bet they will define it in terms of Islam and Hinduism. Those particular definitions that you take for granted are a product of America being an immigrant nation populated by people who had at the time, little shared identity. Now to your credit I will say, the Americans are probably the most far ahead in this domain. Most of the rest of the world are still stuck with a freedom-with-exceptions mentality.
- yossarian1408 6y ago
  That is a very interesting idea. I never considered that freedom can either contain or exclude liberty, depending on who you are talking to. But i'm still pretty sure that you can't confuse the term 'liberty', as it has a more defined meaning, regardless of cultural contexts. What changes is the value associated with the ideal. Every people on Earth strives for freedom, but the form of this freedom may be different in every cultural context. In the Western tradition, as developed by John Stuart Mill, Frederick Bastiat, Thomas Paine and John Locke, etc., this means liberty which is characterised by an emphasis on negative rights, freedom from government, and individualism. I do not think that the people of Kashmir consider liberty when they ask for freedom, but rather mean freedom in the way that the OP defines it, as only being democratic self-governance.
rklaehn 6y ago
Interesting. In German there is no such strong distinction, so I was not aware of this distinction in English. E.g. the word "Vogelfrei" refers to somebody who is free but excluded from society, an outcast. So definitely not a tiny bit of positive freedom there.

teterphiel 6y ago

> But it is just insufficiently sophisticated people that would conclude from that [getting shot for the crime of border crossing] they were lacking freedom. Translation: East germans getting shot at the border were just too dumb to realise that they were free... > Surely it is just to shoot somebody for such an egregious violation of other people's freedom Translation: Refusing to have their labor wasted on a defunct system, thereby depriving others of its non-existent fruits, soundly earned one's capital punishment, to be carried out on the spot. It was "Notwendig". > They did have freedom, but just had a different definition for it. And surly they did have less radiation poisoning due to a different definition of what it means to be "poisoned". EDIT: How could I miss this misanthropic gem: > some stupid redneck Translation: I know only cliches about the discarded working class trapped in the American rust belt, but treating them with contempt seems fun and acceptable, so I'll join.

rklaehn 6y ago
Sorry that this was not clear, but my comment was deeply sarcastic. I thought the "Rant over" was sufficient as a sarcasm marker. I think the "stupid redneck" definition of freedom, which I share, is way better than the "sophisticated philosopher" definition I mentioned. I see a very worrying tendency, in the context of Covid, to re-establish the absurd GDR/Hegel definition of freedom in German state tv and other media. People seem unaware what a fundamental change that is. E.g. https://www.zdf.de/nachrichten/panorama/hegel-geburtstag-freiheit-100.html https://www.zdf.de/nachrichten/panorama/hegel-geburtstag-fre... https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/mit-hegel-durch-die-coronakrise-freiheit-heisst-nicht-dass.1008.de.html?dram:article_id=474037 https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/mit-hegel-durch-die-cor... Regarding Hegel's definition of freedom: https://www.britannica.com/topic/state-sovereign-political-entity/Hegel https://www.britannica.com/topic/state-sovereign-political-e... "To Hegel, the state was the culmination of moral action, where freedom of choice had led to the unity of the rational will, and all parts of society were nourished within the health of the whole." To me, this is hell...
- _0ffh 6y ago
  Totally with you! If we want to talk in German philosophers I suggest Nietzsche, like this: >>A state, is called the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly lieth it also; and this lie creepeth from its mouth: "I, the state, am the people."<< Or like this: >>Everything the State says is a lie, and everything it has it has stolen.<<

Proven 6y ago

> They did have freedom, but just had a different definition for it. Who’s they? The communist rulers had own definition of freedom that applied to caprice others? That freedom reminds me of the freedom concentration camp prisoners had in WW II. You’re free, but don’t try to escape.