Freedom: An Individual Choice?

During the late seventeenth century, the concept of freedom began an evolutionary change with political theorists Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, which has continued into the present. Abandoning the strict patriarchal views of James I, these two theorists redefined freedom as the state of nature for the entire human race.

In the simplest terms, freedom offers people the opportunity to make choices and act on them. Freedom allows individuals to be self-directed-people are free to make independent decisions on how to behave at any given moment. The words freedom and liberty are often used interchangeably to represent this conception of personal choice and self-determination.

Furthermore, absolute freedom places no restrictions on what people can and cannot do; human beings have the ability to think, speak and act in which ever way they choose. In order for this to be possible, one must understand what the choices are and be able to decide individually.

Hence, freedom is an individual's right to choose how to live without the constraints of a higher authority. Specifically, this concept of freedom runs through the social, economic, and political spheres of modern-day society in western civilization.

Centuries ago, individual rights and freedoms were in their infancy. The seventeenth-century English writer and philosopher Thomas Hobbes offered a secular conception of freedom that presents human beings as free and equal by nature.

During this period in time, the English Civil Wars from 1640 to 1660 created political tension within the state of England. As King Charles I fought to hold absolute power over Parliament, England sought to establish a permanent and stable government.

Under these circumstances, Western Europe gradually moved away from the traditional norms of absolute monarchy and began focusing its sights on representational government. Reacting against the divided ideology of the Reformation, Hobbes justifies his political philosophy through a state of nature that breeds anarchy.

He illustrates in his 1651 novel Leviathan that men are naturally selfish, predatory, and individualistic animals constantly at war with each other. Because citizens of a state are equal and free by the laws of nature, men are subject to a life that is "solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short."

Hobbes demonstrates this idea further in describing his law of nature: "And because the condition of Man (as hath been declared in the precedent Chapter) is a condition of Warre of every one against every one; in which case every one is governed by his own Reason; and there is nothing he can make use of, that may not be a help unto him, in preserving his life against his enemyes; It followeth, that in such a condition, every man has a Right to every thing; even to one anothers body."

This quotation indicates that people are individually free, governed by their own reason and desires.

However, this absolute freedom creates a society fearful of violence and death. Hobbes conveys that this fear causes people to surrender their natural rights and adopt a monarchy in order to quell this war of all against all. This sovereign known as the Leviathan is given absolute authority to enforce laws and ensure the wellbeing of mankind.

Hobbes creates this society called the Commonwealth through his vision: "The only to erect such a Common Power...is, to conferre all their power and strength upon one Man, or upon one Assembly of men, that may reduce all their Wills, by plurality of voices, unto one Will...it is a reall Unitie of them all, in one and the same Person...This done, Multitude so united in one Person, is called a COMMON-WEALTH."

Hobbes reveals that by conferring all power to the sovereign, man cannot question his authority to rule. This form of government allows citizens to freely choose a ruler but also places necessary restrictions on their actions in avoiding anarchy.

Although citizens become subject to the law of the land, the sovereign equally protects these individuals from mistreatment and aggression. These groundbreaking political philosophies inspired other political theorists to later formulate their own theories on social contract.

In contrast to Hobbes, English philosopher John Locke proposes the idea of conditional freedom in his 1690 novel Second Treatise of Government. While he agrees that all men are naturally free and equal, Locke also believes that sovereignty belongs to the people rather than to the state.

With the state of nature characterized by reason and peace, Locke explains that all people have equal opportunity to make their own decisions on how to live.

This reason teaches man to act in accordance with the law and help preserve mankind by punishing criminals: "That being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions...Every one, as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his station willfully, so by the like reason, when his own preservation comes not in competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of mankind and may unless it be to do justice on an offender."

This quotation indicates that individuals are free to govern their own actions as well as others for the good of mankind. In a civil society, individuals represent impartial third-party judges-anyone can punish another for taking away a person's life, health, liberty, or possessions.

These punishments deter men from committing such acts of injustice and protect society from violence and crime. While not all men choose to be good and lawful, Locke advocates civil government as an appropriate political system to rectify the flaws and misconducts that exist within the state of nature.

Unlike Hobbes, Locke states that absolute monarchy is not a justifiable system of government, for it provides one man with the liberty to judge and make legislative decisions. In his state of nature, man is not subject to the unjust will of another man but free to govern his own self.

Later in the text, he demonstrates his understanding of democratic freedom that allows for personal choice and limited government restrictions: "THE natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but have only the law of nature for his rule...This freedom from absolute, arbitrary power, is so necessary to, and closely joined with a man's preservation that he cannot part with it, but by what forfeits his preservation and life together."

Locke believes that man is free when no higher authority holds the power to manipulate his actions and thoughts. With his original philosophies on freedom and the state of nature, Locke became an important influence in creating a political system that upholds the natural rights of the individual.

Though both Hobbes and Locke believed in the basic individual right to freedom, their premises are very different, leading to contrasting conclusions.

Hobbes, on the one hand, believes that man is naturally greedy and self-centered, causing him to commit violent acts against others in an attempt to achieve his desires. His solution to this problem is an absolute monarchy that, though chosen by the people, is bestowed the responsibility and power to control the masses. It seems that Hobbes' theory is contradictory-believing that man has natural rights but not believing man deserves to exercise those rights because of an innate inability to do the right thing.

Locke, on the other hand, believes in the general goodness of man and that man will work for the common good of all people; this, he believes, is the natural law of humanity. Therefore, he contends that men should be free to make choices and not be restricted by government. Governments' purpose then, would be to protect society from aberrant minority behaviors and more importantly, to preserve the rights of the individual.

Locke's philosophy is the basis of our present concept of freedom and the role of government. We can trace its evolution through political philosophers.

Following the work of Hobbes and Locke in the eighteenth century, several other political theorists influenced the way we understand freedom today.

French writer and philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau expanded his view on freedom, arguing that monarchy does not yield freedom to its citizens. Like Locke, Rousseau grounds his work in the belief that humans are all naturally good and ultimately people work for the common good. In his 1762 novel The Social Contract, he defines freedom as a person's obedience to the natural laws of humanity.

He explains further that each man cannot control the actions of another: "Since no individual has natural authority over his fellow man, and since force creates no rights, agreements remain the basis of all legitimate authority among man...To renounce one's liberty is to renounce one's humanity, the rights of humanity and even its duties."

Rousseau indicates that each individual is free from all of humanity and thus, is not subject to any authority but his or her own will. For Rousseau, the purpose of civil law and government was to combine the individual wishes of the people with what was best for society. While human beings relinquish their power for government to assure liberty and peace, this sovereignty still resides with the people.

Continuing this philosophy into the late eighteenth century, American Thomas Jefferson revolutionized the notion of freedom by providing men with the power to govern the state. Throughout his life, Jefferson sought to develop a democracy to assure freedom among all people.

In his "Declaration of Independence" of 1776, Jefferson emphasizes the importance of the individual in creating a just and equal government: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Jefferson incorporated many of the philosophies on natural rights and private property from Locke into his own political writings. Jefferson emphasizes the importance of these "certain unalienable Rights" and states firmly that the people hold the power to decide what government to implement. Although this document was published more than two centuries ago, Jefferson's words continue to signify the essence of freedom.

No formal government can provide its citizens with total freedom. If a government were to place no restrictions on its citizens, an anarchical society would form and consequently, no punishments for acts of injustice would be levied. This was the dilemma of Hobbes' theory.

In western civilization, most would claim that people are ultimately free when society places no unjust, unnecessary, or unreasonable restrictions on them. While people are given an opportunity to act and think independently, governments must also protect the civil liberties, powers, and privileges of its constituents by instituting rules and regulations. A society that implements freedom does not only offer people the ability to choose their course of action but also spreads freedom equally among all people.

In today's society, freedom is an individual's ability to decide autonomously on social, economic, and political issues without government interference.

Political freedom allows people to influence a government's decision in determining legislation and other policies that affect society as a whole. Some political freedoms include the right to vote, the right to choose a candidate for office, and the right to run for office.

Citizens are also capable of criticizing government and the policies that it implements-this political freedom is intertwined with the right of free speech, a particular social freedom.

Forming political parties or other groups is considered another political freedom that people in certain societies, particularly democracies, enjoy today. While political freedom is crucial for giving citizens the ability to choose their own standards of conduct, social and economic freedoms are necessary in supporting this political liberation.

For example, without the right to free speech, citizens would not be allowed to express their opinions about the policies established by the government or voice their political agenda in constructing new political organizations. Thus, the overall concept of freedom is intertwined in a multitude of disciplines.

Social freedom enables people to make their own decisions within a communal setting and encompasses several different rights that citizens can employ in their everyday lives. Freedom of speech is a primary example, giving people the right to express their opinions in both the private and public sectors. Without this right, people would not be allowed to exchange ideas and perspectives or decide on political policies.

Public opinion is another element of free speech that contributes to social and political freedom; governments often shape their policies according to the views of the general public. Like freedom of speech, freedom of the press allows people to print facts, ideas, and opinions without the government interfering. Along with printed publications, this right places few restrictions on radio, television, and cinema.

Freedom of religion is another liberty that is of prime importance-the impetus for people to emigrate to this country in particular. People can practice and believe in any faith of their choice; atheists are also accepted and protected.

The idea of freedom of assembly allows people to associate with whomever they choose and does not force anyone to correspond with another person against their will. Government does not have the power to control the spread of knowledge or formation of new ideas.

Thus, academic freedom grants students and teachers the opportunity to teach, learn, read, write, and research any field that one chooses.

On the legal side of social freedom, due process of law prevents the prosecution of a criminal without meeting certain guidelines. With these legal requirements, an individual is protected from an unjust imprisonment-people have the right to be informed of the charges placed against them. The writ of habeas corpus is an example of due process, requiring government enforcement officials to set a prisoner free if the court cannot place charges on that individual.

There are other social freedoms that are encountered on a daily basis. For instance, people have the liberty to choose how to dress and where to travel.

People are also free from government restrictions based on one's race or gender. On the whole, social freedom allows for many of the common actions and behaviors that take place both publicly and privately.

Economic freedom is the ability for people to make their own decisions on economic issues. With this freedom, people have the right to own and use property as well as profit from it. Moreover, people can choose and change their jobs.

Furthermore, people are free to choose where they want to keep their earnings, whether in a bank or in their home. Economic freedom also allows for people to decide when and how much to spend.

These freedoms are most commonly represented in the capitalist market system under the policy of laissez faire. This concept of free trade prevents government from involving itself in economic relations-everyone is free to pursue their own economic interests at their leisure.

Economic freedom offers citizens the right to achieve a reasonable standard of living.

However, governments still hold restrictions on a person's pocketbook, most commonly in dealing with taxation. These taxes protect the economic rights of those with small wages, disabilities or unemployment issues. While governments cannot offer its citizens complete economic freedom, people today can still make decisions on how to use the majority of their earnings.
In many current societies, people are granted a variety of freedoms but at the same time, are constrained by certain legislative boundaries. While these boundaries restrict our freedom to act independently, they also guard the safety and security of all human beings.

Thus, there is a precarious balance between freedom and control, but the individual is still the one controlling the direction of our society. Today, Hobbes' state of nature no longer holds true-we have been able to govern ourselves and proven that we can act in a civil manner.

Even so, each century human beings continue to push the envelope in vying for more freedoms. From women's suffrage and civil rights to gay marriage and abortion, the concept keeps evolving.