[1] Understanding Freedom (UF) - The Meaning of Freedom

The title of my blog is "Understanding Freedom".

The term "freedom" has a range of denotations. Let me make it clear in what sense I am using the expression:

An individual being independent of, free from or protected against arbitrary interference by another person or other persons.

Thus, freedom defines a social relationship, a state of affairs unique to the interaction of human beings.

The way I use the term, it does not mean "inner freedom" nor the physical "freedom" (i.e. ability) to have or accomplish something. It is entirely a negative term, denoting the absence of a certain type of interference - namely, the imposition of one person's will upon another person.

So, what do I mean by "arbitrary" and what by "interference", and when is "arbitrary interference" absent so that freedom prevails?

Freedom presupposes that the individual is given a private sphere, a realm of circumstances that no one else is entitled to interfere with.

Freedom is a protective condition that gives an individual the ability to act in line with her own plans and decisions.

Freedom is the absence of certain impediments to our conduct - specifically, the absence of that type of coercion by others that suspends a person's ability to act in line with his own plans and decisions.

"Arbitrary" means "in disrespect of personal freedom".

"Arbitrary interference" is the intrusion into or violation of the protected realm of the individual, an encroachment on personal freedom.

An example - that also shows how much the ability to discern the basic requirements of freedom is disappearing: Private property, the protected realm of the individual, is arbitrarily re-categorized as belonging to the public sphere, as when privately owned bars, restaurants and other places are called "public places" and rules are enacted that prohibit the owner and his guests to smoke.

It is common today to organize special interests, gain formal political legitimacy for these (mostly by representing them as the outcome of majority rule) and impose special concerns on the public in clear violation of the requirements of personal freedom.

Rather than putting political proposals to the test of being compatible with personal freedom, nowadays, the only test (if any is applied in the face of institutions either very loosely or not at all legitimized) pertains to procedure (majority approval) but not substance (adherence to the rule of law).

This is the totalitarian concept of democracy.

By contrast: A right - as the fundamental building block of freedom - is a permit to act in one's own self-interest with total control over one's own life and property as long as others are not injured nor their property taken or damaged.