We are not sheep; we are prisoners, yearning to be free. That is why most people disapprove of Trump, who dresses his agenda of enslavement as liberation. The sheep have awakened and they are pissed!
Nor are security and liberty contradictory conditions. The frightened person is not free; the person who lacks security is enslaved by fear. True liberty and true security are corrolaries.
In the following essay, I will present the findings of a statistical analysis of the correlation which shows the dichotomy of liberty and security to be an illusion, fostered to enslave us by convincing us we must trade our rights for protection, the very methodology of the state as a protection racket.
To feel and be free, we need a standard of security. To be truly secure, we need a standard of freedom. The age-old tension between the two is a form of enslavement.
The connection between rational security and freedom is often best captured in song, such is the great Bob Marley's Redemption Song:
"Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery
None but ourselves can free our minds
Have no fear for atomic energy
'Cause none of them can stop the time
Won't you help to sing, these songs of freedom
'Cause all I ever had, redemption songs
All I ever had, redemption songs
These songs of freedom, songs of freedom."
The negative dialogue of the security of the police, armies, and weapons is a trap that has not made us secure but slaughtered by the millions in wars and locked us up in order to free us, but the positive dialogue of a security based on freedom, human development, social bonding, education, and opportunity creates the field of freedom, which predicts not a false security but the real human security we crave as deeply as we yearn to be free.
We are taught that to be safe, we must sacrifice our freedom. This is based on the now debunked concept that human nature is evil, greedy, violent, etc and that in order to be secure, we must constrain human liberty. We know from thousands of archaeological digs and anthropological studies that for most of human existence, the community was egalitarian, shared resources, and non-violent.
War, class society, slavery, and police, rulers, and gods arose with the Agricultural Revolution, when the existence of surpluses (and times of drought and deprivation) resulted in the creation of a form of government based not on mutual aid but of classes, including slaves and rulers, and the intermediaries such as the accountants and police who served the rulers.
With this new order, the old principles of equality, sharing, and peaceful relations were replaced with institutionalized inequality, private property, and raids and war. And with this new introduction of violence, a new theory of human nature emerged, claiming that we are, by nature, evil, greedy, violent. Christianity embraced and promoted this diseased concept, and the founders of modern political philosophy, from Hobbes to Burke and Hitler promoted the concept of an evil human nature, which was used to justify oppressive religion, ideology, and the instruments of torture, police power, and war as not only outlets for a bellicose nature, but, contradictorily, as a remedy. The absurdity that only violence could cure violence led to world wars in which tens of millions of innocents were slaughtered in pursuit of "national security."
Is freedom the opposite of security or the foundation?
But we need not go back to prehistory to find the principles which support human freedom--equality, mutual aid, and peaceful relations--and the freedom of being with those you know and trust and who treat you with equality and peace. We an study modern nations with sophisticated tools to examine the correlation between freedom and human development (human rights, education, healthcare, etc) and security. Keep in mind the distinction between the false security of the police state and the great armies, which have led only to slavery and war, and the true security which is found only in conjunction with freedom and enjoyment of human rights.
Auschwitz - Birkenau Concentration Camp - Along the barbed wire
(Image by Pedro Nuno Caetano) Permission Details DMCA
Auschwitz: Dictators love fences and walls, ways of separating people.
An interesting study of 190 nations will be linked below. It finds that " the freedom of people to pursue their own desires and hold the government responsible for its actions creates a spontaneous social field within which humans are most secure--violence is minimal, and human and economic development are best achieved. That is, freedom predicts human security."
This study avoids the human nature is evil dogma and examines the degree to which freedom and human development predict human security, ie the absence of threats. It finds that the more freedom, the less violence, the more security. The less freedom, the more insecurity and threats to well-being.
This study debunks the ancient antagonism between liberty and security and the endless arguments about how to balance the two contrasting values. Where freedom thrives, violence diminishes and thus security increases.
Jets fly in formation above USS Abraham Lincoln.
(Image by Official U.S. Navy Imagery) Permission Details DMCA
Is military might a protector of freedom or the enemy?
" In all, these analyses of freedom's relationship to violence well prove that the amount of war, revolution, turmoil, and domestic unrest and instability experienced by a people depend fundamentally on the degree to which they are free. Free people have the least violence; the least free the most."
This leads to the conclusion that those offering to reduce our freedom to make us safer are offering a false sense of security in exchange for the very freedom which creates real security. Another way to say this is to quote General Smedly Butler when he wrote: War is a Racket. It is part of the fraudulent state which operates as a protection racket. And this suggests an alternative based on the agreement of both anthropological studies of our long human pre-history, free of violence and slavery, and modern statistical studies of modern nations correlating freedom with security, lack of freedom with a field of danger and threats that then we are told can be cured by police and military violence.
The finding of a massacre about 10,000 years ago has been described as the only case of warfare between groups of hunter/gatherer societies, but since this was after the warlike agricultural settled communities had begun, it is very possible that it was a hungry agricultural group that massacred a hunter/gatherer group. The only other evidence of violence found to suggest a raid or war is undated. This is truly the exception that proves the rule.