Born With Freedom
Freedom is a concept many in Western society are familiar with. Put into to definition restraints, "freedom" can be described as "living outside of slavery." Ghandi described freedom as an inner peace. Then there are others - the many people in the world that view freedom as a protective force: a positive idea that provides happiness and stability.
In Western society, freedom is something you're born with. There is no question; it's an inalienable right. God-given. Handed on a platter for even the most demented, sick, and twisted people to abuse. We don't question its existence because we witness this freedom everyday (though it's not noticed).
We can openly criticize our government and our leaders. We can decide whether we should go to work or stay at home. We decide what work to go to. We decide what mate we wish to wed. We decide what we define ourselves as being. We simply ARE.
This, as strange as it may seem, is a very alien idea in some parts of the world. Russia and China, for example, require news agencies to belong to the government for the express sole reason of censoring its media (pretty handy, if you ask me, and probably why Putin's approval rating is so high). In some parts of the world, women are still second-class citizens with no recognized rights to, well...anything. Some parts of the world seem almost completely abandoned to the entire concept of "freedom."
Iraq and Afgahnistan are two place where this was true. The ideas of "freedom" and "liberty" are no doubt unfamiliar concepts to these peoples, and a certain amount of cultural adjustment is in transition. Many are opposed to this adjustment because many fear what they do not understand. Fear can also keep a mind closed, and closed minds are very difficult to persuade.
Then there are other problems - different sub-groups vying for power all over the place. Those few that have a desire to rule with "an iron fist" are just as steadfast in their determination to keep the established norm of obedience and submission on the mass population. These few have even gained support from those that wish for the illusion of security. The many that seek freedom are, by now, assuredly, fearful to speak against such groups.
It looks simple from the other side of the world. The thought is "if they would just stop fighting, we could pull our troops out." Naive as it may be, it is an easy concept for our instant coffee minds to warm up to, and the problem then turns to impatience and frustration when the scene doesn't become the paradise that we think it should be.
It's depressing. It's disheartening. It's loathesome. The bloodshed and the violence from those people that need this freedom (but don't understand its limitless boundaries) is ultimately coming under the bigger spotlight. The idea of freedom is vanishing to be replaced with the illusion of security. There is no such thing as "stable" and "secure." The US is supposed to be both of these, and yet people die of senseless violence in this country every day.
We should allow the idea of freedom to blossom within this culture's youngest minds. The children, ultimately, are going to be the deciding factors in this struggle. For within their naive minds, the idea of freedom can be planted, and as they grow, not knowing any other way to be, freedom flourishes for them.
As I look for the end of this struggle, I feel that it will be passed on to my children's generation. Not because some president started a war with intent on stealing oil reserves (rediculous); but because of default - it's going to take that long to raise a generation into modern civility. Our children will become the ultimate decision makers in this conflict, because the world that we give birth to now is for them.
We do not fight an army. We fight no government. We fight no country. It's fascism that we fight. It's intolerance that we fight. And it's freedom that we hold dear to our hearts, and we wish to impress that on people across the globe.
If that is wrong, then I will be wrong.


8 Comments:
"We do not fight an army. We fight no government. We fight no country. It's fascism that we fight."
Who's the we in this sentence?
Come now. Don't pick an argument.
"We" are those who care about freedoms and liberties. "We" includes not only the US troops, British troops, and anyone else in these military operations, but also the Iraqi and Afgan militaries that fight against such ideas and restrictions.
Many people seem to forget that the "we" that I speak of is not just comprised of Bush supporters. On the contrary, it's all who despise mistreatment of free peoples.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
I'm not picking an argument, it's a legitimate question in the context of both the ongoing debate and recent events.
"We can openly criticize our government and our leaders.
Americans have less freedom now to criticize their government than at any time in their history (cf. "free speech zones" and the white house's investigation of CBS news, and DHS' infiltration of protest groups across the country including accessing library records). The Nixon regime fell for tactics that have become Republican norms.
We decide what mate we wish to wed
As long as we're straight. ;-)
Fascism:
"A form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion." [Robert O. Paxton, "The Anatomy of Fascism," 2004]
it's all who despise mistreatment of free peoples.
Which is why it's been so heartbreaking for the world to watch what's happened to you guys over the last 6 years. I support and acknowledge America's resistance and opposition to fascism abroad. Like many of those outside the United States I pray for the restoration of the Constitution and America's return to world table.
Political liberation is and always will be limited by interests and ultimately succeptible to Archonic force. What makes us free is the gnosis of who we are and who we were.
fas·cism (făsh'ĭz'əm)
n.
1. often Fascism
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
2. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
3. Oppressive, dictatorial control.
[American Heritage Dictionary]
(fsh´zm) (KEY) , totalitarian philosophy of government that glorifies the state and nation and assigns to the state control over every aspect of national life.
[Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition]
...without ethical or legal restraints...
Ethics to me is: deposing a tyrannical dictator and giving him a legal trial COMPLETE with defense lawyers; vaccinating 98% of Iraqi children between ages 1 and 5 against measles, mumps, rubella, and polio; allowing women to vote; 5 billion dollars from USAID used for roads, airports, railroads, bridges, power and sanitation plants, hospitals, and ports; the US Air Force has built a 37,000-square-foot hospital that treats about 9,000 patients a year; over 2.4 million Iraqis who had no clean drinking water in 2002 now have access to safe water; since 2003, the United States has rehabilitated nearly 3,000 schools, supplied over 20 million new textbooks, and trained 133,000 primary school teachers.
We could also discuss the political topics that you deem "unethical."
I certainly wouldn't argue that a tremendous amount of reparations have been attempted in Iraq. The concern in my comments was directed at the weakening of domestic democracy within the United States and the unprecedented centralization of power within the executive branch.
Your post was about Freedom, and an admirable paean it was. I'm just pointing out that America is less free now that an any previous time, and Americans are still rather quick to surrender that freedom.
all who despise mistreatment of free peoples.
Is it okay to mistreat people who aren't free? Enemy combatants, for example? Or random people who can be declared enemy combatants without a trial? Just curious.
I'm only poking you here because of the jingoistic tone of your post, which perhaps could have been tempered somewhat. It came across as a little too "AMERICA, FUCK YEAH", if you get the reference.
No, no, no, Msrg. Jordan, I believe you misunderstood my points.
I was not even attempting to be overtly American in this post, nor do I wish to portray that image (down with nationalism). By "we", and in this context, I should've probably better called it "western society."
The whole point of topic is to convey what I feel is a misaimed perspective on the current issues over seas. We look at these debacles and judge based on our own limited ideas of what freedom and democracy mean to us, but we (I feel the majority of us) don't understand that "freedom" and "democracy" are words that have entirely different and alien meanings to others who've never even given it a second thought.
There are those in Iraq and Afganistan...North Korea...who've never even seen the liberties that we enjoy every day. To be so foreign to such concepts can bring about one of the oldest cliches...man fears what they do not understand.
It's a theory on the rising violence. Feel free to disagree.
Oh I agree entirely. So much of the problem isn't a clash of cultures but a failure of articulation. Real democracy goes to the people and excites their imagination: "what kind of world do you want to live in? Let's build that."
In the west we equate freedom and democracy with McDonalds and WalMart (or in this case BlackWater and Haliburton), and THAT'S what's being articulated. We should not be shocked when the "undemocratic" world says "uh, no thanks".
It does seem to me that a core value of the Muslim world is to live closer to God. It's clear to them that adoption of "western values" will result in the "western reality", and therefore obviously not the way to go.
We need to draw a line between the liberation of each individual and a respectful, spiritual society - not just for the Muslim world, but for ourselves as well. We need to be speaking the language of Islam to bring out the "best" and most compatible values so they can see they don't have to stop being who they are in order to have what they need. And in that articulation we may have a thing or two to learn as well: Rumi is the best selling poet in the western world right now, and courses in Islamic studies are the fastest growing offerings on college campuses.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home