Freedom and Power

***

1

Freedom and Power are intimately connected.  In the extreme case, if a person were all-powerful she or he would be utterly free, while a person who was completely powerless and could not act in any way, would have no freedom.  We could ask, "Are Freedom and Power, at base, the same thing?"

2

Thomas Jefferson defined "Liberty," another word for Freedom, as "unobstructed action according to our will."  Without power, we might say, there is no freedom, since a person who is prevented (or "obstructed") from acting as he or she wishes (or "wills") has little or no freedom.  Conversely, without freedom to do as a person wishes, a person's power is significantly curtailed.

We U. S. Americans are proud to say, "We are a free people."  However, that can be true only to the degree that as a people, we are empowered to act as we wish - to vote, to change jobs or residences, to buy what we need, to make love or not, to raise children or to live without children, to do virtually anything we want.  (Only "virtually," of course, because we are not free morally or legally to harm others.)

So the first important question is, Are U. S. Americans in 2011 empowered to do as they please, so long as their actions do not harm others?  We would hope we could give a resounding Yes to that question.

And the second key question is, Do U. S. Americans in 2011 have a roughly equal opportunity to do as they please (without harming others)?  Surely most of us would hope to be able to say Yes to that question also... because if we cannot say, honestly and truthfully, that both conditions - both power and freedom - are present to virtually everyone of us, then we are not the free people we want and claim to be.  Even if a few or some people are empowered to do most of what they want to do, we are not a "free people" unless all of us have a roughly equal chance to achieve enough economic, social, and political power to do most of what we want.

3

Like those in other modern societies, Americans are proud to contrast themselves, with respect to power and freedom, with many cultures of the past.  For instance, we take pride in the difference between our culture and medieval societies, in which what power and freedom there was, was concentrated in the nobility, while serfs or peasants had very little of either, and artisans and merchants had barely more.  All people's station in life was not determined by their personal abilities, efforts, or achievements but by inheritance.  From the first, Americans have been proud to say that is not true here.

The medieval peasants farmed the nobleman's fields.  They were not free to move to other towns or other career opportunities; they could not realistically aspire to join the rich nobility, ever.  They worked hard even when they were ill, old, or infirm.  They were poor, subject to famine and disease.  They lived in homes that, even for that day, were primitive, unclean, cold, and cramped.  They owned little, perhaps not even the tools they used to work the fields.  They had no money or property, and were powerless to make significant changes in that situation.  In other words, they had neither power nor freedom.

Compared to the peasants as well as to the artisans and merchants who made up a small, "middle-class" group, the nobles were powerful and free.  They also inherited their social rank.  Nobles controlled the servants and peasants who worked for them.  They meted out what justice there was, not according to laws or even precedents, but according to their own interest and that of their neighboring nobles and allies.  If they had reason to, they could join the relatively comfortable clergy.  Their power brought them wealth, allowed them to eat well and to live in at least relative comfort.  Much more than the others in their society, they could do what they wanted; at least they were relatively more free than anyone else.  Also, at least in a small region, their power was virtually absolute.

4

Today, U. S. Americans think those in our society have far more power over their own lives - or in others words, are far more free - than most people in medieval times.

That has not always been true, of course.  For many generations, many southern Americans owned black slaves.  These unfortunates were, like medieval peasants, neither powerful nor free.

In America now, however, we like to say, "Anyone can grow up to become President," which if true or true of most Americans would indicate a remarkably wide distribution of political power.  America may be the only culture in which it is a cliche to ask a child, "And what do you want to be when you grow up?" implying that to Americans, every possibility is open.  This would indicate a remarkably widespread degree of individual freedom.

It would seem that in order to feel comfortable claiming that U. S. Americans are "a free people," we would ask ourselves a few hard questions.  Asking them would help us determine to what degree Americans are in fact empowered to a sufficient degree to be considered free, able to act, unobstructed, to do pretty well what they please.

5

What would prevent people from being empowered to this extent?

In our history of being a slave-owning society, a significant obstruction to freedom has been discriminatory laws, laws that are applied differently to different people or groups of people.  Today, part of the supreme law of the land - for all people, in all states - says explicitly that it would be illegal (unconstitutional) to apply laws inequitably in such a way.  Have we achieved this ideal, or are we as a people making good progress toward it?

The discriminating laws imprisoning slaves in bondage until 1863 consciously prevented slaves from moving toward freedom by prohibiting their learning to read and write.  Are there U. S. Americans today who are effectively prevented from moving toward freedom by their limited opportunity to get a good education?  Are we at least making progress in that direction?

A person who is sick or handicapped cannot be said to be - during that time of infirmity - to be free to do mostly as he or she wishes.  The infirmity itself is an obstacle in the way of empowering freedom.  Are U. S. Americans generally free of infirmity; are we a healthy people, generally speaking?  Are there many of us or are significant groups of us whose health is unnaturally low because of unhealthy environments or inadequate or unavailable heath care?  Are we making progress to be sure this is not true?

It seems obvious that someone whose wealth or income is so small as to be barely adequate to provide food - or smaller than even that - is not free to do as she or he wishes.  A free people would have few such individuals and would work to eliminate poverty as much as possible.  Are we progressing toward our ideals in this regard?

6

Do virtually all Americans today at least have a roughly equal opportunity - equal power - to attain financial security, good health care, a sound education, and an absence of laws enforced in ways discriminating against them? 

If not, we cannot rightfully claim to be "a free people," and unless we are at least making good progress toward being a society of secure, well-educated, relatively strong, and equally advantaged people, then - despite our Pledge of Allegiance - we have abandoned the pursuit of "liberty and justice for all."

Americans who, like their parents, are trapped in poverty, badly educated, unemployed and financially insecure, vulnerable to injury and illness, and living in a violence-ridden neighborhood are virtually powerless to do what they might do and what they want to do.  The millions of Americans in this predicament cannot be considered free.

And it is unfortunately not true that "America is the land of the free."

***