Skip to main content

To Freedom or Not to Freedom

Image
By
A good portion of this week's readings dealt with the idea of freedom.

What did Lenin say about freedom? What did others say to that? What is their own definition and all. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel's (August 27, 1770 – November 14, 1831) core concept in life was the notion of freedom. Understanding humanity, its history, political life, and self-consciousness all revolved around this, in Hegel's work and philosophy (source). Eighteenth century philosophy of freedom dealt with the individual citizen, a strand of belief that Hegel did not subscribe to. Hegel believed that such individualistic freedom is tyrannical, and is abstract and purely formal. He said that true freedom is only possible in a political state where millions of differences in wills can be reconciled through reason.

However, as Lenin famously retorted, “Freedom yes, but for whom? To do what?” Does the ability to express one's own opinions and choices constitute freedom? One very small example can look at the scenario where parents encourage children to express their wants and listen to them (a very Western concept for me). But is that freedom? Does that child know what it entails? From here, it can be a logical deduction that freedom requires a certain degree of consciousness.

Consciousness for whom? Another example may include a group of people who are born and raised in the bourgeois class. Do they even know the plights of the proletariat? In such cases, does freedom not become a mere word to play with linguistically?

Finally, freedom that truly does not bring peace to a nation or group, cannot be a freedom to look for and crave. Freedom to not know, and fall into the hands of the cunning capitalistic and hegemonic propaganda cannot be freedom. Inability to question the status quo because of any fear of consequences cannot be freedom, even though the setting is in a free world.

So what is freedom? Do we actually have a choice?
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Purdue's Professional Revolutionary

By RK
In light of the discussion we had during our advisee meeting on Friday about being strategic in our means as critical scholars I was struck by the words of Lenin who emphasizes the role of the intellectual. He says, "The history of all countries shows that the working class, exclusively by its own effort, is able to develop only trade-union consciousness, i.e., it may itself realize the necessity for combining in unions, for fighting against the employers and for striving to compel the government to pass necessary labor legislation, etc. The theory of socialism, however, grew out of the philosophic, historical representatives of the propertied classes, the intellectuals." (pg. 74) This idea of the bourgeois socialist intelligentsia as an instrument of raising consciousness and fomenting dissent is an ideal one I am sure but in contemporary times we, the academics, forming a substantial part of the "intellectual elite", occupy a unique position which forces us into &
6 comments
Read more

Echoing Malcom

By Saqib
Reading Malcolm X's speeches, it is clear that he points to a historical trend in the process of obtaining independence from tyranny. In other words, history shows that people must be committed to overhauling the system and prepared to sacrifice for a great cause. The trouble comes in overcoming the anesthetization of the natural impulse that people have to change their surroundings. I feel that this is incredibly difficult in the modern world when entire industries have been created for the sole purpose of distraction and self-indulgence. Has that impulse changed? Is it still there? Sometimes I think that when people become so self-absorbed and ignorant of rampant injustice, they will only react when its too late. For instance, there have always been economic disparities but public anger only sets in when their houses are foreclosed and savings wiped out. Revolution then becomes the last refuge of the hopeless. Is there any point to calling for revolution when the only precursor t
2 comments
Read more