Thoughts on freedom

This will be one of several posts I hope to make on the subject of freedom. Given its importance in our political world today, it is certainly worth serious consideration. And I will note that my viewpoints may be contradictory at times or somewhat disjointed. These posts are meant to serve as a method for fleshing out the ideas on the subject. Perhaps, once I have done that, I will write up the more fully fleshed out idea in its entirety.

Freedom from responsibility for the actions taken by the individual leads to the further abdication of freedom for the individual in all other respects.

Or, put another way, responsibility for one's actions are an important freedom. When abdicating that responsibility, one abdicates their own freedom. The freedom to do what you want when you want comes with ability to enjoy, or suffer, the results of those actions. If you are only willing to enjoy the good results and slough off those that are unfavorable, then you are not free. It means that you will choose not to do certain things for fear of suffering negative consequences. Or worse, you will choose to assign the blame for those actions undertaken by you to others and, in the end, those others will then soon make the choices for you.

At the risk of offering a political example, I submit that the housing and foreclosure crisis is but a step in this direction. Many people who could not otherwise afford the homes they bought subsequently found themselves in default and foreclosure when the economy turned sour. However, instead of taking responsibility for making the poor choice to purchase homes they knew they could not realistically afford under the premise that they could simply borrow forever on equity (that somehow was not vulnerable to the normal ups and downs of economic principles), they blamed the mortgage lenders or the government for "encouraging" them to make such poor choices. Clearly it was not their fault and therefore they were entitled to government assistance to absolve them of the morass they later found themselves in.

This is not to argue that the government and mortgage may not share some blame, but this does not absolve the individuals of the choices they made. But the tendency to deflect blame for their actions is the next step in reducing the freedoms that they/we all once enjoyed.

Decisions

Some people have a very difficult time making decisions. Others like to delay them - sometimes indefinitely, it seems. And others simply hold their noses (figuratively) and plunge in and hope that their decisions work out for the best. But therein lies a key issue with decisions. It is not the decisions themselves that are the issue but the consequences (and the related fear of) that cause the problems for people trying to make decisions. A cascading series of "what ifs" leads to a paralytic state whereby it becomes impossible to make an otherwise simple decision. Frankly, the concern is not so much for the decision itself as it is that the decision-maker is the one ultimately held accountable for the decision.

Taken at a political level in view of the recent passage of the health care "reform" legislation by the US Congress, the decision about what to do by various representatives was shaped by the potential consequences of this single vote. Democrats were particularly vexed at having to make a decision that could potentially make or break their legislative careers. For those on the far left, they were unhappy with voting for something they felt did not go far enough and feared that their supporters would drop them for not following through on their convictions. For those more toward the middle, there was concern that independents would drop them due to a concern among a majority of voters about the bill itself and its corollary costs and enlarged government implications. While the end result - with the assistance of a great deal of executive encouragement (or strong-arming, depending upon one's point of view) - speaks for itself, the final results of their respective decisions will be known further down the line. But the hesitancy of many of the final supporters to commit to a decision earlier was because they worried about the consequences of such a decision. Their subsequent rationalizations aside, many of those who voted in favor (and even against) this legislation would have preferred not to have been forced into making this decision at all. The fact that the possibility of "deeming" the bill to have been passed without an up and down vote was even pondered by the Democratic Congressional leadership (though it was finally submitted to a formal vote) speaks to the fear that many had of being held accountable for their decisions.

But this goes far beyond the realm of politics. Some people hesitate to get married, fearing what may happen if it turns out they are their intended ultimately are not compatible and having to deal with those consequences. Conversely, married people may push off a decision on getting a divorce for similar reasons - namely, that making the decision to get married in the first place was a bad decision. Even more simply, why purchase the car now when you can put the decision off and perhaps get a better deal later? Or suffer if you fail to take advantage of a deal now and a better one fails to materialize later? Or, perhaps at its most simple level - should I eat that ice cream now? Because if I do, I need to know who I can blame later because it's not my fault that I was tempted... The people who sold me the ice cream should have known better and they're responsible for my poor decision.