What is freedom?

For us radicals, the struggle for freedom is central to our beliefs. However, we frequently forget to ask the question “What is freedom?” This is a very complicated question. The leftist definition tends to be broad and indicative of a universal human freedom. Definitions usually resemble something like “living without oppression” followed by a list of the types of oppression we should be living without: “racism, sexism, ageism, religious intolerance, heterosexism, environmental degradation, classism, etc.” Other times, explanations of freedom are characterized by what the radical is for, rather than against. “Freedom is living in a world where all are equal and power is organized horizontally, instead of top-down.” Essentially no one has power or authority over others.

I do not believe in freedom anymore. Don’t get me wrong, these types of “freedom” I described above are models of a world I would love to live in. However, these freedoms also carry with them oppressions that we radicals love to overlook. What if you firmly believe that you are better than others because of your race? What if the wife wants to cook and the husband wants to be the sole economic provider? What if you hate gays?

Yes, these people are wrong.

Unfortunately for radical ideologies, they are only wrong because we (or at least I) believe they are. Our beliefs are legitimate because they are built on the history of ideas created and perpetuated by the thinkers that started laying out radical left-wing ideologies less than 200 years ago. Sure, there have existed collectively run societies for thousands of years, but our notions of freedom are primarily based on the theories first developed by European intellectuals in response to industrialization and the growth of capitalism. What makes them right? All they did was sit around writing about how wrong everyone else was and how great their theories of the world were, getting high on self-righteousness. Did they save the oppressed peoples of the world? Did they even help change it for the “better”? The biggest change Marxist ideas created was the Soviet Union and we all know how great of an alternative that was.

I know I’m getting a bit carried away but still I think it’s a fair point. Why should we hold their ideas to be the truth of freedom? I can quote Kropotkin, Marx, Bakunin, and Rudolph Rocker all day, but what if they’re wrong? The idea of freedom is a sham. It is just a word to describe various an idea that can be defined in an infinite number of ways. It is not a single truth that can be attained.

And what about the freedom to hate? I hate bigots because they hate people for no reason. I feel like I have a justifiable hate, but they think they do too. Nothing actually makes prejudice or oppression wrong. Nothing makes it right either, though. Freedom is just something I learned, just like racism is something the racist learned. They have the same right to hate, as I have to try to create “freedom” (actually, the ideology of racism came about before European anarchism, socialism, and Marxism, maybe they’re more legitimate).

So what am I saying? Essentially that we are wrong, or rather that we are just as right as everyone else. I am not trying to say that we should just give up. I have fought hard to create small models of the world I would like to live in. In truth, I’m not really sure what I’m trying to say. At the very least, I would say it is important to always be self-critical, especially while being critical of others, because at the end of the day their views are just as valid as ours.

the GADFLY