Thursday, May 21st
6:00 - 7:30pm Eastern
Cedar Bluff Library Meeting Room
9045 Cross Park Drive, Knoxville, TN 37923
https://zoom.braverangels.org/4923
Many of our members have quit social media, but if you haven't, please share this page to increase visibility!
All Americans say they love freedom. So why does so much rhetoric on both sides say that their party promotes freedom while the other is authoritarian?
Most freedoms represent trade-offs between competing freedoms. Many of our political debates come down to which of these we place a higher priority on.
Free speech vs. protection from harm — Allowing people to say anything protects dissent and open debate, but can enable harassment, incitement to violence, or dangerous misinformation.
Individual privacy vs. public safety — Surveillance and data collection can help prevent crime and terrorism, but erode personal privacy and enable government overreach.
Economic freedom vs. equality — Letting markets operate freely tends to generate wealth but also concentrates it, while redistribution reduces inequality but limits what individuals can do with what they earn.
Religious freedom vs. anti-discrimination — People and institutions should generally be free to practice their faith, but that can conflict with the rights of others not to be denied services or opportunities on that basis.
Freedom of movement vs. community control — Open borders or zoning freedom maximizes individual mobility, but communities may want to control who moves in or what gets built nearby.
Press freedom vs. fair trials — Reporting on criminal cases serves the public interest, but can prejudice juries and make it harder for defendants to get a fair hearing.
Bodily autonomy vs. public health — People generally have the right to make their own medical decisions, but vaccine mandates or quarantine rules can override that for the benefit of others.
This essay by Robert George and the accompanying video below offer a constitutional scholar's perspective on what our founding fathers meant by freedom and liberty when they were drafting the constitution, particularly the meaning of "the pursuit of happiness" and what it implies about the role of government.
Many freedom trade-offs represent the difference between the "freedom to" and "freedom from" or Positive and Negative Liberty.
Negative Liberty tends to be emphasized by Libertarians and refers to having the "freedom from" external constraints, such as taxes, regulations, and onerous laws.
Positive Liberty is favored by Progressives and places a priority on having the "freedom to" do the things that lead to a fulfilling life despite one's economic or social circumstances. Examples of positive liberty include universal healthcare, public education, social safety net, and affirmative action programs that try to ensure all citizens are able to obtain the necessities of a successful life.
Each positive liberty necessitates a tradeoff in negative liberty, usually through increased taxes. Negative liberties can usually be granted without sacrificing positive liberty, other than the freedom to not pay taxes. Freedom of speech, protection against unreasonable searches, and the second amendment don't cost anything, but many see these as being a tradeoff between personal freedom and law-and-order.
Human rights are those negative liberties that cannot be encroached upon under any circumstances. People differ on which rights should be included among these, but everyone sees some rights as sacred.
Positive and Negative Rights are another way to think about these things. Most of the bill of rights addresses negative rights, or things that your right to do cannot be infringed upon. The right to receive a jury trial with competent representation in the 6th and 7th amendments are positive rights.
Any discussion of freedom should be informed by our concept of what it means to make a decision freely. We are all constrained by our environment and the habits we have learned, so how do we distinguish acts that are "freely chosen" versus those that are done out of coercion, incentives, or habit?
This video offers a short summary on the philosophy of freedom and its relationship to free will.
This article talks about the different aspects of freedom, such as political, religious, freedom of movement, and educational freedom.
Which freedoms are you most worried about losing? Who is threatening to take away those freedoms, and why?
Is the government the only institution that can take away freedoms? How is our freedom limited by non-governmental forces?
Where should the line be drawn between free speech and preventing harm?
When, if ever, is it justified for a government to restrict individual freedom for the collective good? Does your answer change depending on the severity of the threat — a pandemic versus a crime wave, for example?
Are all freedoms equally important, or is there a hierarchy? If you had to rank free speech, economic freedom, bodily autonomy, and privacy, how would you order them and why?
Who gets to decide when one freedom outweighs another? Courts, elected majorities, experts, or individuals themselves — and what are the risks of each?
Do trade-offs between freedoms fall differently on different groups in society? For example, does a policy that restricts economic freedom hit the poor harder, or does one that prioritizes public safety over privacy affect minorities more — and does that change how we should evaluate it?