Freedom looms large in the minds of Westerners. We cherish our freedom. But I would contend that this freedom we cherish is illusory. What we experience is, at
best, a compromise.
In practice we are watched and controlled. Our thoughts are manipulated and our views are orchestrated.
Nobody is free.
So what are these freedoms we hold so dear? The right to believe in whatever God we want or none. The right to elect any government we want. The right to defend ourselves. The right to say what we want without fear of reprisal. The right to dress how we like.
So let us look at two of these ‘freedoms’ in more detail.
a. The right to believe in whatever religion we want – or none.
Well it is certainly true that we have come a long way in the West. We no longer burn people at the stake or in barrels of tar for believing in the wrong thing. We can, in theory, believe in anything we want. But is that true in practice?
Being born into a religious society means that children are immersed in religion. It’s on TV, the radio and in schools. It’s in songs and our language. It’s there on every street with churches, signs and clergy. There’s no escape. It is given huge prominence. We are indoctrinated to accept there is a God and he supports our brand.
Being born into a religious family means that this process of indoctrination is constantly reinforced with customs, rites, ceremonies, prayers, dress-codes and scripture.
By the time you are old enough to think and weigh it up you have been thoroughly brainwashed into believing. It is impregnated into your psyche. Freedom of belief? I think not.
Few escape the deeply seated ideas implanted from childhood.
When we add in, in the adult world and workplace, the prejudices, pressure to conform and expectations – it is impossible to escape. Can an agnostic ever be elected as President in the States?
b. The right to elect the person of our choice!
Well here again we have apparently come a long way. Every man has a vote. Heavens (a religious exclamation) we even let women vote. But do we have the freedom to elect who we want?
It is not hard to see that this veneer of democracy is rubbish. We can’t elect who we like.
It takes big money to get someone elected to parliament or the congress or senate and even more to get them elected President.
Where does this money come from? It comes from the wealthy who support their candidates. Do they ever put forward a candidate who would harm their interests?
The result is that we always get to choose from a select field of candidates who are in hock to the establishment and we have to select the lesser of two evils.
So how do we decide who the lesser of two evils really is?
The information we get comes from the media. The media is owned by the same wealthy elite who put up the candidates. They are very quick to point out the flaws in any candidate they do not like. Who don’t they like? Anyone who will not look after their interests.
Hence anyone who promotes less inequality or benefits for ordinary people gets short shrift.
Our newspapers, even the best, have a constant drip of propaganda. It erodes free will. As does radio and TV.
Aah – you say – but we have superior information from the internet.
Wrong.
The internet has been taken over by propaganda machines churning out false information to confuse, misinform or undermine.
Aah – but we know the sources. No. You only think you know the sources.
We are manipulated and controlled. Our extremely limited choices are orchestrated by unseen hands. The establishment always wins. The system is always maintained.
our political choices are illusory.
Hey give credit to the Americans, who in 1776 said that all men have a right to pursue happinesses.
Bumba – yes that was a big step wasn’t it. The pursuit of happiness would have been an anathema to many religious people. It was a pursuit that was the reserve of the rich.
True. They my not have really meant it when they used a generic All men.
Lol Bumba – you are suggesting they only thought that applied to wealthy white men? That’s possible. So it is good that they put it so that it refers to all people!
Maybe I’m overly cynical. They were nice to include non-propertied men. And slaves and Natives weren’t in that category I suppose. But give the “founding fathers” credit anyway.
Bumba – I think that, given the constraints of the times, the founding fathers did a great job. All I would suggest that instead of their efforts being set in stone and fossilised they should be used as firm foundations to build on.
True. It’s interesting that the founders “fathers” are given Biblical stature like Abraham and Isaac. But they did a very fine job and were apparently exceptional men of the Enlightenment.
They were truly enlightened and did quite a remarkable job – especially given the era in which they operated. I think they made a few mistakes though. That idea of the populace having the right to bear arms in order to overthrow their own government was a bit daft – particularly in a modern context.