Freedom an Illusion

Freedom an illusion

They say freedom is the key to reach the world, full of bounties and comfort. That is why freedom should be achieved at any cost, to make this planet a heavenly place. The modern globe, we see today, emerged with slogans of freedom, which according to some schools, lead to prosperity and equality. But what this freedom is? In this piece, I will try to answer this question and after a bit of freedom’s philosophy, I will share with readers, some living examples, showing how this freedom is just an illusion, giving an artificial meaning to a dieing life.

There are two main ways; freedom can be characterized, through its nature of existence and its use as a tool to measure everything. Each way directs us to a new understanding of freedom. Moreover freedom can also be understood as positive/negative and formal and substantive freedom, but for the sack of simplicity, I will focus on main categorization.

Let’s start with first category, the nature of its existence where we further classify freedom as Relative and Absolute. Relative freedom is something which allows individuals to select among given choices. For example, one can marry a girl from any clan, given that; this new relationship does not break any established social good, like laws of religion, society or state. Or one can exercise his relative freedom at market place where he keeps on baying, as long as his pocket permits him, or one may choose his subjects at university according to given criteria, examples goes on and on. Since the beginning of life man practiced relative freedom in one way or another, it is the only form of freedom which exists.

On the other hand, the absolute freedom, which can only imagine, in a domain of no limits, is simply not possible. One is free to do every thing he wants, yes everything, because nothing stops him. Taking history and logic as tools (since I cannot test it empirically) to understand it and to verify its existence’s possibility, leads us to the conclusion of Heidegger, who says “we are thrown to this world”. Creator did not ask us at the beginning of our life that whether we agree or disagree to come and spend sixty years of our life on this strange planet. So one cannot say that we are born free, indeed we are born slave. In our social circles we find many limits for our wishes, our means always fall short of our wants. Global requirement of economic growth, for example, is constrained by recourses or questioning holocaust in Germany is banned by their law. You will always find some natural or manmade boundaries to this kind of freedom. So, without any doubt, freedom in its absolute form can not exist.

The second way of categorization examines the freedom’s role as a yardstick or a scrutinizer for everything. Here we come across with some serious trouble, where people accept or reject acts and concepts using freedom as a yardstick. This differs from school to school. It can further be characterized as, taking freedom as value and ability.

Freedom as an ability can not be taken-away, its there and can not be controlled. For example your freethinking ability can be influenced but can’t be stopped by any authority. Many other activities of your conscious, subconscious and super-subconscious come in this paradigm. Taking freedom as ability is largely accepted and there isn’t any intellectual fight for this, between left and right blocks. Everything I discussed, in the relative freedom above, is the ability of human being to practice freedom and that is naturally understandable.

Taking freedom as a value means accepting it principally to measure the legitimacy of almost everything, regardless of any social religious or cultural aspects. When we say principally it means value is bigger than ability, for the sack of understanding, one may say, ability is the subset of value and of every value. Freedom as ability, which is accepted by all societies, having different values, is scrutinized by all values, accordingly. Value describes the limits of ability and if this value is freedom itself, then freedom will tell you to continue any ability, so freedom could be flourished further.

This indeed was the very unfortunate and dangerous tern in the human history when metaphysical questions were abandoned, and Kantanian approach was taken. Freedom from, a vertical conception of good (accepting almighty God, as a supreme authority) and freedom for, oneself (replacing God with man) ended up with a society of many gods. Well! The idea of a society, full of gods, was not workable, and could not fulfill the wishes of each god. It was in that moment, when they turn towards another god, the god features required, one and only “The Capital”. Since it fulfils all the wishes, they had, society, first time in history became slave “of the capital, for the capital and by the capital”. There should be no doubt about market position, and It is market where one practice freedom, depending upon how hard he tried, to make his lord happy, and got his bounties in pocket. This was the first time in history of civilizations that economics became the centre of life and an end, which once was, a mean to an end.

Did you get it now, why Hijab was banned in some countries of Europe, although it was a private affair? Since that ability was limiting freedom, as a value, or could create danger for this value in future, that is why it was banned despite individual’s ability. So it should be obvious now, that every time any clergy and especially Islamic society criticize freedom, they attack its position as a yardstick or as a value to measure other abilities and values. Discouragingly, it seems that all, Immanuel Kant’s free man expected did not materialize thus far and he is still struggling under his lord, Capital, this school is continuously pushing people towards these falls and vague hopes, but then, for how long? So the answer is, as long as you and I agree to fuel their factories with our blood and bones.

Those who still have doubts, that all of us work for, lord Capital, can see straggling society, by reading this, the word of freedom fathers but remember this all happened after metaphysical questions were abandoned.

Thomas Jefferson, the 3rd president of US (1743 - 1826) “I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs”.

Sir Josiah Stamp 1880-1941, said “If you want to remain slaves of the bankers and pay for the costs of your own slavery, let them continue to create money and control the nations credit.”

Mr. Woodrow Wilson 1919 said “I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is now controlled by its system of credit. We are no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.”

Not just banking but indeed the fundamental thought, this institution is standing on, is dangerous. Then why these gurus, big guns, address side issues, tertiary issues and not talking about freedom itself? In my opinion they purposely engage people, so these gurus can have more time for their fruitless social experiments. Therefore, the kind of society we live in will create new questions and answers, like water flows in artificial fountain and we will keep on doing this. Sub prime mortgage crisis, financial crisis, confidence deficit, trade deficit, so on and so forth, the story of problems and solution will never end. We will keep on striving for freedom and it will never come in our hands, because it is nothing but a deliberately created illusion.