Liberty

Our definition of American Liberty is a bit weird. We seem to define it as a total freedom to do as we wish – anyone or anything that stands between me and total autonomy is violating my liberty. I won’t argue against liberty being a virtue. It is indeed something that we should hold in high esteem and collectively strive for, but America’s current concept of liberty is outdated.

It seems the word ‘Liberty’ can be a succinct retort to any condemnation of behavior, ideology, or action. Questioning the current state of culture along with the standards and norms it embodies isn’t a direct attack on your liberty. So the present use of the term to defend oneself against perceived persecution deserves some fresh scrutiny.

The way we define this American Liberty seems rooted in 18th century, colonial America. The concept of liberty at that time relied heavily on the abundance of property and resources. The new America had both. An expanding west with rich soil and minerals meant that generations of sons and daughters could expand west.

With the acceptance of the Manifest Destiny ideology one could follow their ambition as far as their abilities were able to take them. According to the landowning population of America there should be no impedance to one’s goals. No impedance so long as those goals didn’t infringe on the liberty of another landowning American.

There are quite a few flaws in that concept of liberty. For one that definition relies on unlimited resources, which we now understand are not unlimited. Most of our modern industry relies quite heavily on materials and fuels that are not plentiful or renewable. The unlimited supply of land is no longer available either. Those that can afford it, and are so inclined, buy a slice, and those that can’t afford it are left to serve those that can.

This lends to the next point, liberty of one person has always come with the total subjugation of another. Those that preached American Liberty during the colonial days also relied on people with no civil or human rights to provide free labor. The same that said, ‘taxation without representation is tyranny,’ also held human beings as slaves, which seems pretty tyrannous.

Our modern era also relies on the subjugation of the lower classes to keep our current conception of American Liberty running. We participate in a global economy that relies on very suspect labor practices when it comes to extracting minerals, processing raw materials, producing goods, and distributing those goods. Our ability to order whatever we want from our pocket is likely on the back of exploitative practices and violations of human rights along the way.

We are a connected planet now in almost every aspect. We share an economic system, an ecosystem, and an information network. Our connectedness comes with a lot of convenience, but it also comes with undesirable externalities. As those externalities become apparent we have a responsibility to attempt to address them.

The climate crisis isn’t a domestic crisis. It is a zero-sum global crisis. It is zero-sum because we either all come together as a species to fix it or we continue to fight one another and overuse the commons until we destroy our home. This means that we need to have a reckoning with what we consume and how we consume.

To this point affordability was the key factor when it came to our American consumption habits. One could, and in a capitalist/consumer society is expected to, buy and consume whatever they can afford. Consideration for where, how, or why it was produced probably weren’t much considered in the past – and likely neither was where the waste would go once consumed.

So the idea of being able to consume in whatever way and at whatever volume one wishes is part of this current concept of liberty. Exponential growth and consumption on a finite planet is impossible. We are operating in a manner that is not sustainable. The way we redefine liberty will pave the road to either a future of prosperity or ultimate destruction. We cannot continue to define liberty according to the same 18th century principles when our global circumstances have changed so much.

The old idea of liberty cannot coincide with this interconnected, global society. Total freedom cannot coexist within a system that is reliant on exploitative labor. Complete freedom cannot be a part of a system that stresses the ecosystem to the point of collapse.

The pandemic alone has forced us to come face to face with issues long ignored. Long ignored because they weren’t pressing enough to affect the masses on a personal level. We have now been forced to answer tough questions. The polarization caused by this reckoning is a step toward re-envisioning our future. It is a painful but necessary step, and also a step in the right direction.

Our global circumstances have changed and along with that comes that necessity to realign our values. We must be able to continue to pursue our version of happiness, but we must do so with the understanding that our pursuit of total freedom will likely run afoul of another person’s pursuit.

Time is not on our side. Allowing those old ideas of liberty to dictate policy and business for another 20-30 years will only result in more work for future generations. I do not have an answer on how we accomplish this feat. Acknowledging that there is a problem and trying to convey my perspective is all I can do.

Restrictions on total freedom are not the annihilation of liberty. It is the birth of a modern liberty where one sect of society doesn’t rob the rest of society of their freedom. Liberty redefined is being a good steward of the planet and acknowledging that each of our actions reverberates across our society. Modern liberty is pursuing our happiness within the natural limits of our planet and without violating a human being’s natural rights.

I appreciate your attention and hope you’ve found some value in this.
Thanks for reading.