Freedom Is Not Free
Basemat Doolen
Freedom is the power or right to speak, act and change as one wants without hindrance or restraint. Freedom is often associated with liberty and autonomy in the sense of "giving oneself one's own laws".[1]
In one definition, something is "free" if it can change and is not constrained in its present state. Physicists and chemists use the word in this sense.[2] In its origin, the English word "freedom" relates etymologically to the word "friend".[2]
In political discourse, political freedom is often associated with liberty and autonomy, and a distinction is made between countries that are free and dictatorships. In the area of civil rights, a strong distinction is made between freedom and slavery and there is conflict between people who think all races, religions, genders, and social classes should be equally free and people who think freedom is the exclusive right of certain groups. Frequently discussed are freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom of choice, and freedom of speech.
Sometimes the terms "freedom" and "liberty" tend to be used interchangeably.[4][5] Sometimes subtle distinctions are made between "freedom" and "liberty"[6] John Stuart Mill, for example, differentiated liberty from freedom in that freedom is primarily, if not exclusively, the ability to do as one wills and what one has the power to do, whereas liberty concerns the absence of arbitrary restraints and takes into account the rights of all involved. As such, the exercise of liberty is subject to capability and limited by the rights of others.[7]
Isaiah Berlin made a distinction between "positive" freedom and "negative" freedom in his seminal 1958 lecture "Two concepts of liberty". Charles Taylor elaborates that negative liberty means an ability to do what one wants, without external obstacles and positive liberty is the ability to fulfill one's purposes.[8][9] Another way to describe negative liberty is freedom from limiting forces (such as freedom from fear, freedom from want, and freedom from discrimination), but descriptions of freedom and liberty generally do not invoke having liberty from anything.[5]
Freedom from domination was considered by Phillip Pettit, Quentin Skinner and John P. McCormick as a defining aspect of freedom.[11] While operative control is the ability to direct ones actions on a day-to-day basis, that freedom can depend on the whim of another, also known as reserve control. Phillip Petit and Jamie Susskind argues that both operative and reserve control are needed for democracy and freedom.[12][13]
The FOC believes that the human rights that people have offline must also be protected online. The Coalition serves as a coordinating body that advances cross-regional diplomacy and commits to working together, and with all others who share these views, including through multistakeholder engagement, to support Internet freedom and protect human rights online worldwide.
The FOC aims to be a proactive Coalition that works with all stakeholders to ensure Internet freedom issues are on the policy agenda as a way to drive concrete policy changes and outcomes, and shape global norms to promote a rules-based, democratic, and inclusive world where human rights and fundamental freedoms are upheld in online and digital contexts.
Information and knowledge sharing, including through facilitating learning calls, monitoring and research activities, voluntary funding coordination, and sharing best-practices and guidelines on relevant policy and issue areas, as well as strengthening cooperation and coordination with outside stakeholders, where appropriate;
Freedom Farmers expands the historical narrative of the black freedom struggle to embrace the work, roles, and contributions of southern Black farmers and the organizations they formed. Whereas existing scholarship generally views agriculture as a site of oppression and exploitation of black people, this book reveals agriculture as a site of resistance and provides a historical foundation that adds meaning and context to current conversations around the resurgence of food justice/sovereignty movements in urban spaces like Detroit, Chicago, Milwaukee, New York City, and New Orleans. About the Authors Monica M. White is assistant professor of environmental justice at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.
For more information about Monica M. White, visit the Author Page.
Freedom Reads is a first of its kind organization that inspires and confronts what prison does to the spirit. We bring beautiful, handcrafted bookcases into prisons, transforming cellblocks into Freedom Libraries. The library is a physical intervention into the landscape of plastic and steel and loneliness that characterizes incarceration. In an environment where the freedom to think, to contribute to a community, and even to dream about what is possible is too often curtailed, Freedom Reads reminds those inside that they have not been forgotten.
In our deliberations, the Task Force kept in mind three specific goals for members of the Colgate community: growing in knowledge; becoming effective communicators; and learning from multiple and diverse perspectives. When considered separately, these are admirable goals. When these goals are viewed together, they aggregate to form a much loftier ambition: to share knowledge and foster understanding within a complex, rapidly changing, and diverse world.
A community whose members aspire to such a mission must be committed to certain values and to the cultivation of particular habits of heart and mind. Among these are empathy, curiosity, warmth of spirit, concern for others, and pride in our community. Such a community requires a dedication to inquiry and knowledge seeking, the desire to attain understanding and awareness, and the humility to recognize how far we fall short.
Colgate aspires to a shared commitment to learning, inquiry, and community that encourages individuals to listen and speak with care, so that all voices among us are heard. All of us should be sensitive to the positive and negative ways that we can affect one another, keeping in mind that words and deeds can help and harm; be understood and misunderstood; advance knowledge and impede it.
The Task Force also recognizes that the principles of freedom of expression and academic freedom are not without boundaries. There are certain forms of expression that stand outside the law, constitute no part of the search for truth, and, accordingly, find no shelter here. These include expressions that falsely defame a specific individual, that constitute true threats or harassment, that unjustifiably invade substantial interests of privacy or confidentiality, or that incite imminent lawless action. Further, to facilitate the exchange of ideas and arguments and avoid disruption of its educational functions, the University may enact content neutral rules concerning time, manner, and place of expression. But such concerns must never be used as a pretext for the University to suppress disfavored opinions or compromise the principle of intellectual freedom. The Task Force urges the University to be guided by the principles of the First Amendment and, within reason, to err on the side of permitting expression and inquiry without concern of punishment.
As a community, we must be mindful that the exercise of intellectual freedom without consideration of these other values can and does cause harm to others, and these harms often linger long after the harmful words have been spoken. Freedom of expression that is unconstrained by a spirit of toleration and a sensitivity to the views and backgrounds of others can cause needless damage to our community. At times, expressions of free speech, even when exercised in all fairness of spirit, can hurt others, particularly over matters about which we care deeply but differ sharply. The Task Force encourages all members of our community to recognize that expressions can carry different weights depending on both who says and who receives them, resulting in potentially disparate effects on different members of our community.
The Task Force considered the impact of privilege and exclusionary practices on the exercise of freedom of expression and academic freedom. We recognize that practices that exclude members of the community impede the exercise of freedom of expression and academic freedom. Over its history, Colgate, like the broader society of which it is a part, has engaged in exclusionary practices that have had a negative impact on members of the community. These practices should have no place at Colgate, both because they harm members of our community and because they impede the university's mission to nurture thinking, creativity, and leadership. Colgate should reaffirm its commitment to eliminate exclusionary practices, support the inclusion of marginalized and underrepresented groups, and promote equity of access and expression.
The Task Force is hopeful that this report will encourage conversations on these important matters within and across all campus communities. We respectfully submit this report to the Colgate community for its consideration.
Statue of Freedom is a classical female figure with long, flowing hair wearing a helmet with a crest composed of an eagle's head and feathers. She wears a classical dress secured with a brooch inscribed "U.S." Over it is draped a heavy, flowing, toga-like robe fringed with fur and decorative balls. Her right hand rests upon the hilt of a sheathed sword wrapped in a scarf; in her left hand she holds a laurel wreath of victory and the shield of the United States with 13 stripes.
Statue of Freedom does not wear or hold a knitted liberty cap, as would have been expected in nineteenth-century art. The knit cap provided to freed slaves in ancient Rome had been adopted as the symbol of liberty or freedom during the American and French Revolutions and was usually shown as red. The Statue of Freedom's crested helmet and sword, suggesting she is prepared to protect the nation, are more commonly associated with Minerva or Bellona, Roman goddesses of war. The history of the statue's design explains why she wears a helmet rather than a liberty cap. The story of her casting reveals that some of the people who worked to create Freedom were not themselves free.
93ddb68554