On freedom and its horizon

Published 30 May 2022, Last update 4 June 2022

Banality of the word “human rights” in daily life has a wide range of people being aware of that notion. While spreading its concept, the word has been losing its power — the concept became ambiguous in the world. Many use that word different ways, by which society itself is confused of its usage. Linked with human rights, freedom is often a key concept to be thought of. As an example, depriving one’s freedom, it can be said that one’s human rights is offended. When it comes to the domain of politics, freedom is inevitable to be spoken of[1] and it is essential to have, a priori[2]. It is a prerequisite to talk about politics.

In order to achieve one’s freedom, people discussed how it can be obtained. Intellectuals of previous ages put their eyes on inner freedom historically. The difference of inner freedom from the outer is that the inner space is established based on the processing of anything by oneself, in other words any other person doesn’t have “access” to it[3]. Others cannot penetrate into one’s inner zone. On the other hand, take a look at external freedom, that would be focused in public sphere, for instance. In the perspective of freedom of expression and speech, it often becomes a societal issue that some is suppressed for it. Since it is vital to have, suppression would prevent that society from working properly. Even in the case of claiming freedom of expression or speech, if that offend other citizens’ feelings, insisting their freedom of expression while showing their opinions could be harmful in society. Activism of spreading the recognition of freedom in their societies have expanded the space of freedom in public sphere, but in the meantime it should be taken in consideration that the way it is presented is closely related to how it is perceived by others. It’s easier to imagine that when some political claims opposite from the one of your preferences are demonstrated in public sphere under the name of freedom of expression intensively, you may feel not well from them. Thinking the potential feeling of others who look at them beforehand should be done, even as pupils are taught.

In antiquity, people tried to acquire freedom by employing slaves[4]. To maintain life, people are required to labour, their life was restricted by, or taken by, the necessary chores of life as labouring hours occupy their life in tremendous degree. They tried to put the necessities of maintaining their life outside them by slavery. And slavery was justified in ancient epoch[5]. In terms of categorization, labouring is to meet the necessities of life. For fulfilling inevitable necessities, even in the beginning of 21st century, people do labour for their life. The current of human beings’ hope to have labour out of their life has been continuously tried from slavery[6] to information technology. Automated process of technology would reduce the time spent in everyday repeated labours.

Elaborating the theory of freedom, it is indispensable to look at its relationship with history. History is succession of things woven by ancestors. That closely is linked with the current state of being free; as laws are accumulation of rules set up, it only slightly changes over the years; as inheritance from parents (and its cycle of inheritance further going back to) affects people’s life. Human behaviour is bound by the past ones[7]. Since the social systems or traditions are developed by forebears, basically saying, people tend to behave within them. Even if they try to expand the frontier, because it is consciously or unconsciously involved in the past ones, their comportment is influenced by them. Plus their desires also influence where it heads to. Those continuities with the past ties pieces of history one after another. Creating continually from the state that no things exist is not the history, it is not what’s been happening. The context of successive chain of human history and that those who are facing the present could build their next history would be another perspective to think about freedom.

Think of the political domain, historically one acquired the right to participate in politics by voting, but that hasn’t led to the continuous motivation of people to join. The horizon of freedom expanded by gaining that liberty, even based on that story, cycle of human life and its mortality have difficulty in keeping motivation held in one’s end. One of the reasons that people don’t feel motivated to politics is that  even if they vote for representative, politics doesn’t change to the better; people’s opinions feel like not represented by politicians, and others. people don’t feel expectations on politics. That is why it doesn’t motivate people to participate in voting. Even if some people try to call for others to vote, every time election take place, that doesn’t make a change in voter turnout unless their hopes accumulated in it. Due to this circumstance. even one doubts if many people have interests (and their opinions) in the first place. To vitalize politics in a whole community, encouraging people to vote is often seen on social media when election is about to come. Think of its history that the right to vote is gained, whereas it is understandable to hear that people should use the right to express their opinion, one would be better to think that it is the same one-vote, comparing a person who vote with careful consideration with another without consideration for their choice in voting. When the ratio of the latter increases, the decision is more affected by their choices.

The issue whether we should implement the Internet voting (e,g. creating an app to vote) is often related to the expectation that people will be more easily join politics. One should care that it will allow people to vote just one click. Although it may or may not increase voter turnout and it may have people being accustomed to politics that would eventually increase those who will be interested in it. Some people would vote without careful consideration. If people vote and that experience may get more interested in politics in the future, the opportunity of voting motivates people. We suppose that the liberty was acquired but voting is not the only way to be involved in politics. It would be better to think about the political activities, not limited to voting and election.

Footnotes

[1] Between Past and Future. Hannah Arendt. ISBN 978-0-14-310481-0. p.145.

[2] Between Past and Future. Hannah Arendt. ISBN 978-0-14-310481-0. pp.144-145.

[3] Between Past and Future. Hannah Arendt. ISBN 978-0-14-310481-0. p.145.

[4] The Human Condition. Hannah Arendt. ISBN 978-0-226-58660-1. p.84.

[5] The Human Condition. Hannah Arendt. ISBN 978-0-226-58660-1. p.83.

[6] The Human Condition. Hannah Arendt. ISBN 978-0-226-58660-1. p.84.

[7] Influenced by around 1:15-1:24 of Closer To Truth – Big Questions in Free Will posted by Closer To Truth on 4 November 2016. Accessed 16 October 2021. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uRTjfhIf4M