OUR FREEDOM, THEIR FREEDOM

                                      OUR FREEDOM, THEIR  FREEDOM 

 Why are people and organizations who oppose any form of establishment seen as a threat? If we try to explore the reason and dig deeper we find something queer realities which consist of hate for freedom for all.

 When tempting to analyze hate for freedom we should make attempts to understand the roles of material agents as well as of non material but tangible agents. Impact of capitalism generated degeneration and free market with neo liberal ideas  are much talked about reason but we must be aware of roles of technological disruptions, propaganda, and above all of forced unawareness about own desire for freedom.

Capitalism and neoliberalism are economic systems that promote free markets, private ownership, and individual choice. However, they also create inequality, exploitation, and environmental degradation. For For example, the World Bank reports that the richest 1% of the world’s population owns more than the bottom 50%. Many anti-establishment movements, such as the Occupy Movement and the Zapatista Movement have emerged to protest against these injustices and demand a more democratic and fair society.

We should examine the impact of tech on our understanding of freedom and think whether consumerism about technology is liberating us or enslaving us leading us in the realm of propaganda which force upon us unawareness about our understanding of freedom and thereby limiting our choice for freedom.  Technology is a tool that can enhance or limit our freedom, depending on how we use it. Technology can help us communicate, learn, work, and create across boundaries and barriers. For example, the internet has enabled access to information, education, and expression for billions of people. However, technology can also be used to control, manipulate, and spy on us. For example, the Cambridge Analytica scandal revealed how personal data was harvested and used to influence political outcomes. Moreover, technology can also create new forms of dependency, addiction, and isolation. For example, many people spend hours on their smartphones, neglecting their social and physical well-being.

     Propaganda is a technique that uses information, media, and communication to influence public opinion and behavior. Propaganda can be used to promote or undermine certain values, beliefs, and agendas. For example, propaganda can be used to spread false or misleading information, such as “fake news”, to sway voters or discredit opponents. Propaganda can also be used to create fear, hatred, or loyalty, such as in the case of extremist groups or authoritarian regimes.

Ignorance is a state of being unaware, uninformed, or misinformed about something. Ignorance can be a result of lack of education, access, or interest. Ignorance can also be a result of deliberate suppression, censorship, or distortion of information. Ignorance can affect our freedom by limiting our choices, opportunities, and actions. For example, ignorance can make us vulnerable to manipulation, exploitation, or discrimination. Ignorance can also make us indifferent, apathetic, or complacent about the issues that affect us and others.

And here we encounter with a vexing question that whether well being is improving our choices of freedom or confining them. Our own confinement within the four wall of richness of services is preventing us from valuing freedom , is not it? we face a difficult question: does well-being improve or reduce our freedom? Well-being is a state of being healthy, happy, and prosperous. Well-being can be influenced by many factors, such as income, health, education, environment, and relationships. Well-being can be seen as a goal or a consequence of freedom. However, well-being can also be seen as a threat or a trade-off for freedom. For example, some people may sacrifice their freedom for more security, comfort, or convenience. Some people may also lose their appreciation for freedom, as they become trapped in their own bubbles of consumption and satisfaction.

          Now I turn to another aspect. Who are interested in limiting the freedom of people at large? In general, the accepted view is that elites are opposed to the freedom for the masses. However, this generalized view is too simplistic. We should delve deeper into the complex dynamics of power and freedom. There we find different types of elites are opposed to the freedom of each other and on the other hand, masses also discriminate among elites for their access to freedom. For example, power elites, such as politicians and bureaucrats, try to limit the freedom of capital elites, such as businessmen and industrialists, to keep them subservient to themselves, whereas capital elites make efforts to dominate power elites by influencing policies and regulations. These two, though bargain with each other, may join hands in an effort to influence the freedom of the masses by controlling the media and the education system. In some other cases, one section of the mass may allow its chosen elites to dominate other elites, for example, one religious mass may support its elites to dominate elites of another religious side. A recent example of this is the communal violence that erupted in Delhi in 2023, where Hindu and Muslim elites incited their followers to attack each other, resulting in the loss of lives and property.

   In this way, freedom is a very hard-pressed virtue for which disparate interest groups are in continuous conflict and competition. Therefore, it is important to critically examine the claims and actions of various elites and masses, and to safeguard the freedom of all people from any form of oppression or discrimination.         

 One more reality that emerges from this analysis is that the expansion of the ambit of freedom to encompass maximum possible sections of society makes the state of affairs more competitive and beneficial for overall society. This is because when more people have the freedom to express their views, pursue their interests, and participate in decision-making, they contribute to the diversity and vitality of the society. They also challenge the existing structures and practices that may be oppressive or discriminatory, and demand accountability and transparency from the elites. This creates a healthy competition among different groups and individuals, and fosters innovation and development. For example, the civil rights movement in the United States, which fought for the freedom and equality of African Americans and other minorities, led to the enactment of landmark legislations and policies that improved the social and economic conditions of millions of people. It also inspired other movements around the world, such as the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa, the feminist movement, and the environmental movement. Similarly, the freedom of speech and expression, which is guaranteed by the Constitution of India, enables the citizens to voice their opinions, criticize the government, and expose corruption and injustice. It also allows the media, the academia, and the civil society to play a vital role in informing and educating the public, and influencing public opinion and policy. These are some of the illustrations that show how the expansion of the ambit of freedom benefits the society as a whole.

         To conclude, we have seen how the concept of freedom is central to understanding and advancing human development. Freedom is not only an end in itself, but also a means to achieve other ends, such as economic growth, social justice, and human dignity. Freedom is also a complex and contested notion, that involves various dimensions and levels, and that is influenced by various factors and actors. Therefore, we need to critically examine the claims and actions of various elites and masses, and to safeguard the freedom of all people from any form of oppression or discrimination. As Amartya Sen eloquently puts it:

"Development consists of the removal of various types of unfreedoms that leave people with little choice and little opportunity of exercising their reasoned agency. The removal of substantial unfreedoms, it is argued here, is constitutive of development."

( Amartya Sen, Development as Freedom, 1999, p. xii. )