Growing up in a western society, you can't help but notice that freedom is kind of our thing. In fact, you often hear the term "liberal society", where "liberal" comes from "liberty" and is often used synonymously with freedom, although there is a subtle difference. While freedom is the ability to do as one pleases, only limited by one's own ability, liberty means the responsible use of freedom, additionally limited by a rule of law that protects the rights of everyone in the society. However, looking at the trajectory of our society, the business practices of corporations and the demands of so-called "neo-liberals", it seems that this distinction has been lost to time. Anyways, that's not really what I want this blog post to be about.
The point I want to discuss is whether freedom really deserves its standing near the top of our hierarchy of moral values. I know, bringing this into question is dangerous and if you're not careful can lead to the justification of totalitarianism, fascism or slavery. But if you've read this blog before, you know I like to dwell in grey areas and am not scared of a little controversy. I don't like dictatorships just as much as the next person and think enslaving people is really a dick move. How's that for a disclaimer? Alright, let's go.
First of all, in a green field, freedom is a great thing. Nobody in their right mind would question that. Having more options is better than having less options, as any game theorist would agree. There are some results from psychology, that people are less content with their selection when choosing from a larger set of options, people sometimes get decision paralysis and many people are just overwhelmed if left too many choices, but in general, people value freedom. That's not just a cultural phenomenon, it's a natural part of the human condition.
The aforementioned grey areas arise when you look at what other values you frequently have to weigh against freedom. The one that's most commonly discussed is safety. I'll spare you the use of a dumb quote here, because there's too many variants and most of them are falsely attributed. The freedom/safety trade-off makes a lot of intuitive sense. If you don't perform any "dangerous" actions, you're less likely to suffer unintended outcomes but less free to perform said actions. On a societal level, this gets elevated to restricting actions that can be dangerous to others. If nobody is allowed to run around with a flame-thrower, nobody gets set on fire by a flame-thrower by accident. It's a philosophical question with no right or wrong answers where you draw the line. Carrying guns? Knives? Jaywalking? Passing under a ladder? This is really the bread and butter of politicians, so I'll not go further into it.
The value that I find more interesting to weigh freedom against is unity. And before you angrily scream: "I knew this was a promotion of fascism!", please stop with these false dichotomies already, will you? When I tell you that there are tangible benefits to unity, I don't say we should all go out wearing uniforms and beat up everyone who's not wearing one. But if you ever collaborated with someone on a non-creative task, you'll know how pleasant it can be if they're similar to you. It starts with speaking the same language and ends with agreeing on the choice of tools and how to use them. People find it easier to form bonds with other people if they find similarities to themselves. And if you are a technically minded person, I don't need to convince you of the benefits of standardization.
But, you may ask, isn't diversity also valuable? To which I say: yes, but this isn't about the unity/diversity trade-off, this is about the freedom/unity trade-off. It's about those situations where people have the choice to do things the way that everyone else does them and doing them differently. This is where I feel like my cultural background and our emphasis on freedom often encourages me to do things differently, just for the sake of being different. I don't think it's just me. All around me I see people who are desperately trying to be special, just so they are noticed. Human attention is the most fought over resource of the 21st century, while at the same time, medical professionals are talking about a loneliness epidemic.
So should we forfeit some of our freedom, just to fit in? I think we should at least consider it a bit more often. I often dream of a single piece of culture that all people on earth share. Just imagine this for a second! Just a minor thing, a symbol, a ritual, a song, a piece of clothing, anything that represents nothing more than humanity. One universal thing that every person on earth voluntarily identifies with for cultural reasons in the same way that Christians identify with Christmas. Just sit on this thought experiment for a second and marvel at how beautiful it could be while being completely unrealistic at the same time, despite it really not feeling like it's a lot to ask.
Anyways, why don't you think about this blog post the next time you encounter an option that feels "boring" because it's "what everyone else does". You may find it surprisingly beneficial to be boring for once.
