This file is copyright of Jens Schriver (c) 
It originates from the Evil House of Cheat 
       More essays can always be found at: 
       --- http://www.CheatHouse.com --- 
                ... and contact can always be made to: 
                    Webmaster@cheathouse.com 
-------------------------------------------------------------- 
Essay Name       : 1117.txt 
Uploader         : E.Whitehead
Email Address    : 
Language         : English
Subject          : Philosophy
Title            : "The Many Faces of Freedom: An Exploratory Essay"
Grade            : 95%--A
School System    : Cape Fear Community College
Country          : U.S.A.
Author Comments  : 
Teacher Comments : "More than anything, you captured the true nature of the assignment"
Date             : 5/96
Site found at    : http://www.schoolsucks.com.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Many Faces of Freedom: An Exploratory Essay
					by: Elizabeth Whitehead							     	
	There are a multitude of varying perceptions regarding the concept of freedom.  Whether the freedom of the individual, of our nation, or of the human race--there is a constant state of conflicting emotions in our country which date back to the colonial days.  Just as the new settlers struggled to identify and actuate their ideas of freedom, so do Americans today.  Nothing has stricken more personal chords throughout history than the struggle and debate over differing ideologies of freedom.  Furthermore, history shows that these debates led to wars which spanned the globe and in which millions of lives were sacrificed for freedomsı cause.
	As I delved into this complex arena of discussion, I found this ongoing debate internalize within me as I discovered the intensely personal nature of the topic.  Many questions arose:  How do I, personally, view freedom?  Are Americans governed by restrictions of freedoms for the sake of the whole or does the government grant freedoms for the sake of the few?  Did our Founding Fathers subscribe to an ideology of freedom that persists today?  Or has our centrally controlled government converted our ancestors guidelines of freedom to hold more power over the people?  How do opposing views on the allocations of liberties affect the stability of our country as a free society?   These are all questions which face many Americans today but I took my research to an even further level of contemplation--the freedom of the human race.  This philosophical view brought even more in depth questions such as:  Are we as humans capable of handling complete and ultimate freedom?  Do we need some sort of guidelines and laws to sustain us as a race?  And most importantly, are people ultimately afraid of true freedom?  Following is my exploration into these questions.
	William C. Havard very basically defines freedom as ³the ability to make choices and to carry them out².  He states that freedom and liberty are virtually synonymous.  In order to have complete freedom, people must have no restrictions on how they think, speak, or act.  People are responsible for realizing what choices they have and must have the license to act on those choices.  Ultimately, to be free, people must not be controlled by anyone else.  Yet, Havard states that ³no organized society can actually provide all these conditions at all times².  Here en lies the core of this continual paradox of freedom.
	³Liberty, too, must be limited in order to be possessed² expressed Edmund Burke.  These limitations Burke spoke of ascribes the idea that in order to have a free society, there must be laws.  In a legal perspective, as long as society does not impose unreasonable boundaries, people are free.  It is, therefore, societyıs responsibility to protect the peopleıs rights (³liberties, powers, and privileges²).  Havard continues: ³A free society tries to distribute the conditions of freedom equally among the people².  In building this free society, Americaıs Founding Fathers devised a democratic system of government.  Democracy is best described by the the SIRS Researcher as a system that is: ³based on a social contractı in which the individual surrenders certain freedoms for the good of the community, while the community protects that individualıs freedom in general².  The fine line that this political structure inevitably draws between the individual and the community has been the core of political debates in our country for decades.  Where and in what circumstances should that line be drawn?  Are we, as Americans deprived to the selfish point of forsaking othersı freedom?
	Robert S. Ross, author of American National Government, states:³Throughout history, the most important aspects of the democratic way of life have been the principles of individual equality and freedom².  Then in contrast to that statement, an essay from Emily Thirouxıs Cultures: Diversity in Reading and Writing, by Mario Vargas Llosa states that ³the ideal of equality is incompatible with he ideal of freedom.²  He continues: ³We can have a society of free men or of equal men, but not one that combines both equally².  If Llosa is correct, maybe this is why we have so many continual conflicts within our nation.  Is it possible our country is striving for something that can not be attained?   This battle for complete equality and complete freedom is causing dissatisfaction of all parties involved.  Are these conflicts of interest doing more harm than  good?  Maybe Llosaıs theory can explain the conflicts between the government and growing militia groups in our country.  
	All we have to do is turn on the television and watch the news to see examples of the growing number of anti-government zealots who feel their personal liberties outlined in the Constitution are being threatened.  This expanding, radical, right wing views the government as a power hungry system that restricts freedoms whenever they get in the way of political agendas.  Kenneth Stern, the author of Politics of Hate: The Militia Presence in America, says that there are rapidly growing militia groups in every state of the nation.  Stern was interviewed on a program called ³20th Century--with Mike Wallace² which aired on the A&E network.  Wallace led an in-depth discussion on the events that took place at: Ruby Ridge, Idaho; Waco, Texas; and Oklahoma City.  A leader of a militia unit in Idaho, was on the program, and called todayıs government a ³New World 
Order that wanted  to subjugate Americans and take away their liberties.²  They feel, just as Ralph Waldo Emerson once said, that ³the less government, the better².  Is this where true freedom lies--outside of the government system and itıs constrictive laws?  The Branch Davidians certainly thought so and now it is the Freemasons in Montana, who simply want the freedom to govern themselves.
	William J. Murray, author of Unconditional Freedom, also believes our current government is the root of our destructive society.  His book is a guide to teach you how to ³manipulate reality to gain ultimate freedom².  Murray believes that we are enslaved by our dependence upon the social structure of our culture.  More explicitly, that Americans dependence on shelter, transportation, government services, and manufacturers makes us slaves instead of citizens.  He feels we need empowerment through ridding ourselves of these vices and living of of the land.  He offers this advice on how to build  an egalitarian society:
	Eliminate all restrictive zoning ordinances and codes.  Strip out the streets, parking lots, and burned-		out tenements, re-soil the land, and plant huge community and personal gardens, as well as grassland 		for free-range fowl and some livestock and a recycled water system that also replenishes stocked 		ponds.  Install simple, rent-free housing.  Install computers in each home for all educational needs so 		children and adults alike can improve their skills in any a they wish, as fast as they wish.  			Transportation in such a community could be accomplished easily on foot, horseback or on bicycle.
Murray's theory is based on the concept that there should be equal political, economic, social, and civil rights for all people.  This egalitarian ideology unfortunately goes directly against the grain of the capitalist society Americans have worked so hard to create.  We have to face the fact that the average American citizen is striving to be anything but average.  An egalitarian system eradicates the whole competition of society which, in turn, creates a massive average class with no motivation to succeed.  These and other reasons, keep Murrayıs utopian society out of the realm of realistic solutions for solving this dilemma.  
	Through all of these differing views on freedom, none suit my own identifications.  The only source 
where I found clarity and enlightenment about freedom was Erich Frames, Escape From Freedom. Our countryıs obsession with power, wealth, and success is to the point where it seems capitalism, itself,  has taken over our freedoms and deposited them in the bank for safe keeping.   Fromm expounds and clarifies 
these feelings about our capitalistic society: 
	In one word, capitalism not only freed man from traditional bonds, but it also 	contributed tremendously 	to the increasing of positive freedom,  the growth of an active, critical, responsible self.  However, 		with this one effect, capitalism had on the process of growing freedom, at the same time it made the 		individual more alone and more isolated and imbued him with a feeling of insignificance 			and powerlessness.
	Underneath all of these feelings of insignificance and powerlessness is where I believe each of our ultimate freedom lies.  It is stuck in a bank until a rainy day or waiting for the next promotion to take that vacation.  In other words, Americaıs freedom is not being utilized to its potential.  This is why I related to Frommıs book so well.  He believes in positive and negative freedom.  Each of us have our own individual power over freedom if we just open our eyes.  A capitalistic society can either be your open door or your chains just as the government can be your subjugator or your protector. And no matter what government you reject, or how isolated from the world you become--it will never take away the responsibility of having to answer to yourself.  Basic laws of survival ensure that.  And with responsibility comes a loss of freedom.  Therefore, my personal belief is that we are all; as individuals, as a nation, and as human beings, capable of true freedom only through use of our minds and through constantly changing our perceptions.  Adapting your perceptions to the changing world we live in is the most effective tool  in attaining true freedom.  These tools can empower you to open doors you would have never known existed.  Isnıt that ultimate freedom?  The freedom of a consistently changing consciousness.  Accepting a specific ideology as your only truth, narrows perspective and puts limits on your freedom worse than any government ever could.  Our mental freedom to explore limitless thoughts and our ability  to react to those thoughts in a unique, individual way--this is the ultimate freedom for me and no government can ever restrict that.
     										



											


								










Whitehead 5
Works Cited
Darwin, Bernard.  ³The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations.  3rd ed.  New York: Oxford
	University Press, 1979.
Fromm, Erich.  Escape From Freedom.  New York, New York: Avon Books, 1965.
Havard, William C.,  ³Freedom.²  World Book Information Finder.  1995.  CD-ROM.  Version 2.6.
Llosa, Mario Vargas.  ³Cuba: Freedom vs. Equality.²  Cultures: Diversity in Reading and Writing.  Ed. Emily 		Thiroux.  Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:  Prentice Hall, 1993.
Murray, William J..  Unconditional Freedom: Social Revolution Through Individual Empowerment.  Port 		Townsend, WA:  Loompanics Unlimited, 1993.
³The Essence of Democracy.²  Royal Bank Letter  Nov.-Dec. 1991: 1-3.  Democracy. 1992. Art. 33.  SIRS 		CD-ROM.  CD-Rom. SIRS, 1995.
Wallace, Mike, narr. 20th Century with Mike Wallace.  dir. Terry Martin.  ed. Emmit Bronwyn.  Arts and 		Entertainment Network.  28 April. 1996. 
--------------------------------------------------------------
