Give the events of the 20th Century and the way of the world so far in the 21st, freedom has never been a more important concept than it is today; as the 'free world' seems to have lost its way, and the notion of freedom has been misunderstood. As Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President of Ukraine, recently wrote: "Freedom, once explored and understood, is the way forward to good government."
Berlin's work seeks to combine the two broad notions of freedom into a more pervasive, powerful and practical philosophical idea. It's too easy to take freedom simply to be the absence of state power: we can think that we're free if we can do and say as we please, and protect ourselves from government interference. But true freedom isn't so much freedom from, as freedom to: the freedom to thrive, to take risks, for futures we choose together by working together. So that freedom is the value that makes all other values possible. For a better, less risky, future for all humanity.
That's the prize. In reading Berlin's essays let's try to focus on how he explains the nature and value of freedom and its relevance to today's world, which in so many different ways can be seen to be on the brink…
We can start our meeting on Tuesday 15th by pooling our perceptions of what freedom/liberty actually is…so it would be helpful if everyone came armed with their own mind map of all the different manifestations of freedom. Then we can discuss its value in different forms and finally its application to today's world.
In preparation for tomorrow's meeting it mighty be worth referring again to FDR's 1941 address to Congress featuring 'the four freedoms' … of speech, of worship, from want and from fear. Obviously in 1941, democracy was under threat, and maybe similar forces are at work today, putting freedoms under threat. Here's an extract:
Franklin D. Roosevelt: The Four Freedoms (1941)
By early 1941 President Roosevelt was openly committed to helping the Allies win the war against Hitler's Germany. In his annual message to the Congress in 1941 he suggested why it was so important that the United States ensure an allied victory, and he outlined a creative way to enable cash-poor England to buy American supplies. Two months later Congress passed the Lend-Lease Act which authorized the 'lease or loan' of military supplies to 'any country whose defence the President deems vital to the defence of the United States'.
'I suppose that every realist knows that the democratic way of life is at this moment being directly assailed in every part of the world-assailed either by arms or by secret spreading of poisonous propaganda by those who seek to destroy unity and promote discord in nations that are still at peace … There is much loose talk of our immunity from immediate and direct invasion from across the seas. Obviously, as long as the British Navy retains its power, no such danger exists. Even if there were no British Navy, it is not probable that any enemy would be stupid enough to attack us by landing troops in the United States from across thousands of miles of ocean, until it acquired strategic bases from which to operate.
'But ... as long as the aggressor nations maintain the offensive, they, not we, will choose the time and place and the method of their attack. That is why the future of all American Republics is today in serious danger … Just as our national policy in internal affairs has been based upon a decent respect for the rights and dignity of all our fellow-men within our gates, so our national policy in foreign affairs has been based on a decent respect for the rights and dignity of all nations, large and small. And the justice of morality must and will win in the end. Our national policy is this:
'First, by an impressive expression of the public will and without regard to partisanship, we are committed to all-inclusive national defence.
'Second, by an impressive expression of the public will and without regard to partisanship, we are committed to full support of all those resolute people everywhere who are resisting aggression and are thereby keeping war away from our hemisphere. By this support we express our determination that the democratic cause shall prevail, and we strengthen the defence and the security of our own nation.
'Third, by an impressive expression of the public will and without regard to partisanship, we are committed to the proposition that principles of morality and considerations for our own security will never permit us to acquiesce in a peace dictated by aggressors and sponsored by appeasers.
'We know that enduring peace cannot be bought at the cost of other people's freedom .... Our most immediate and useful role is to act as an arsenal for them as well as for ourselves. They do not need man-power. They do need billions of dollars worth of the weapons of defence.
'As men do not live by bread alone, they do not fight by armaments alone. Those who man our defences and those behind them who build our defences must have the stamina and the courage which come from an unshakable belief in the manner of life which they are defending. The mighty action that we are calling for cannot be based on a disregard of all the things worth fighting for. The nation takes great satisfaction and much strength from the things which have been done to make its people conscious of their individual stake in the preservation of democratic life in America. Those things have toughened the fibre of our people, have renewed their faith and strengthened their devotion to the institutions we make ready to protect. … In the future days which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.
'The first is freedom of speech and expression everywhere in the world. The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way—everywhere in the world. The third is freedom from want—which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants—everywhere in the world. The fourth is freedom from fear, which, translated into world terms means a worldwide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough manner that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbour—anywhere in the world. That is no vision of a distant millennium.
'It is a definite basis for a kind of world attainable in our own time and generation. That kind of world is the very antithesis of the so-called "new order" of tyranny which the dictators seek to create with the crash of a bomb. To that new order we oppose the greater conception—the moral order. A good society is able to face schemes of world domination and foreign revolutions alike without fear. Since the beginning of our American history we have been engaged in change, in a perpetual, peaceful revolution, a revolution which goes on steadily, quietly, adjusting itself to changing conditions without the concentration camp or the quick-lime in the ditch.
'The world order which we seek is the cooperation of free countries, working together in a friendly, civilized society. This nation has placed its destiny in the hands, heads, and hearts of its millions of free men and women, and its faith in freedom under the guidance of God. Freedom means the supremacy of human rights everywhere. Our support goes to those who struggle to gain those rights and keep them. Our strength is in our unity of purpose. To the high concept there can be no end save victory.'
The notion of freedom has been under-examined by philosophers over the last century as they investigated more abstract matters.
“Peace is not an absence of war, it is a virtue, a state of mind, a disposition for benevolence, confidence, justice.” – Spinoza (1670)
Although Berlin uses the terms freedom and liberty interchangeably, there is a distinction. Liberty emphasizes the importance of individual rights and the limitations of government power, while freedom is more focused on the ability of individuals to pursue their own interests.(D)
The Greek philosophers used the terms mind and soul interchangeably.(S)
Liberty is linked to one's health and wealth. It's much harder to be free if lacking these.(V)
But on the other hand, there is freedom in having nothing left to lose.
But the poor lack the ability to make the choice not to have possessions.
Research suggests one needs £53,000 a year to be happy.(H)
Berlin believed the worst form of slavery occurs when people don’t know they are being controlled.
Being Interdependent
Working together is progressive and is for the better of the community. Total freedom entails being interdependent.(S)
Everything we do has an impact on others.
Being a good parent means constraining the freedom of one's children.(V)
We are free to hold opinions, but it is the expression of them that can cause problems.(V)
Some freedoms come and go, for example the NCCL's defence of PIE's promotion of paedophilia, (involving Harriet Harman and Patricia Hewett).(L)
John Lewis is frequently described as 'paternalistic'.(V)
Self-determination leads to a healthier society.
One has to accept some degree of central authority.(M)
One needs to respect the needs of others in order to fulfil one's own desires.(R)
