What Freedom Is Not

An open conversation inspired by, and an extension of a piece by Jimmy Yetts.

 

 

A chicken farm doesn’t quite match the impression that may first come to mind when you think of one: a scenic delight where lush green pastures are dappled with feathery parcels of coloured hens. Content beyond belief in a sun-shiny blue sky. By contrast, the standard image of a chicken farm takes on a more industrial tone, where green pastures are turned to road-base and then decked out with row upon row of temperature controlled long houses. A far cry removed from the usual cosy chicken coup, these large units are called “sheds”, and compare more similarly to an aircraft hangar.

Typically, the chickens go into these sheds at just a day old. They start on a bed of sawdust which soon turns to a bed of faeces as the chickens eat and grow, eat and grow. The industrial method of growing these chickens is carried out through the manipulation of light supply, temperature, and air quality. Food is always available, as is water. However, the regulation of light, temperature, and air are the most pivotal elements to this method of farming, and each are scaled by degree relative to the age of the birds. This style of production can be so efficient that harvesting these animals for slaughter may commence as early as five to six weeks of age. Usually after eight weeks of growing on a floor of faeces, the harvesting and the clearing of sheds is complete.  

Believe it or not, this method of chicken farming is classified “free range”. The rationale for this is simple: while the animals are in fact confined to a shed, they are free to wander anywhere they wish - within these parameters only. In this respect, the idea that “freedom has limits” proves more than true. However, the question arises: can it be freedom at all if limits are applied?

It has been suggested that, “One critical difference between freedom and tyranny is that freedom has limits.” If we can pardon the irony in this statement it follows just a short half-step that this notion of “freedom” is not only a contradiction in terms, but a stumbling block to understanding what “freedom” is not... It is self evident that acts of tyranny can - and are, indeed - carried out under an umbrella of “freedom”. It is a terribly large umbrella, after all, and all manner of expression and thought can take form there. Yet, it is perilous to think that the desire to limit tyranny should instead be transposed upon the broader landscape of freedom itself.

For what is freedom if not an ‘all or nothing’ deal? A two sided coin, freedom for any one thing inherently permits its antithesis, too. If I am free to speak, I am also free to speak not. And if I am free to eat, I am also free to be eaten. Creatures of Nature, while bound by instinct, perhaps know this premise of freedom better than any. But we, as a species groomed into civilisation, are not at such liberty to live by these terms. Perhaps, not least, because we recognise our own vulnerability in the face of this colossal “freedom”. As such, we have devised measures of security by which we safe guard ourselves, our possessions, our kin, and our abstractions. These measures of security are the same in principle as those for a chicken farm. We, too, are free to wander where ever we wish - within established parameters only.

The first troubling consequence of this kind of protection is when our safe guards become a tyranny in and of themselves. What begins with the establishment of limits to freedom invariably results in either sustained attack, or a complete inoculation against it. What follows is an excerpt that talks directly to the concern that regulation, legislation, and law become less than progressive instruments for the exercise of “freedom”:

*”One hundred and twenty five years ago you didn’t have to ask permission from the government to own a property; build a home; get married; go fishing; start a business; sell food; use a transportation vehicle. Today you can do virtually nothing without being extorted by the government to obtain their permission first. If you still think you’re free, you are deluding yourself! You live in a tax farm as free range humans.”

The second troubling consequence of trying to impose limits to “freedom” is the deep scarring which stacks up like jail house scaffolding inside the minds of individuals. The conditioned response that malforms into the uneasy psychological complex. Returning to the chicken farm: should an individual bird ever trespass by fluke out into the light of day, away from all the structures and the safe guards that have become so familiar...what does it do? It could pounce on the first bug or insect that dared to twitch in its proximity...(chickens ordinarily do that.) It could crinkle its toes and commence to relish a scratch in the first real taste of earth that it’s ever had...(chickens ordinarily do that.) Perhaps the bird would leisurely fluff its feathers and roll over to indulge in a dust bath, as chickens are also prone to do...

Yet, this creature does none of those things. Instead, it malingers and dolefully paces along the perimeter of its compound, never venturing more than a few meters from the door. It clutches and clings to its presupposed freedom, replete with all those limits which furnish not its liberty, but its comfort.  This is a tyrannical imposition, and the animal does this because it has become institutionalised.

Now, whether we are as bird-brained as the chicken, or not, humans are all too prone to the same impressionable sensitivities as they. As such, it becomes unequivocally vital that we take precautions to not confuse our own sense of 'security' and 'comfort' with the much greater reality of “freedom”. Of which, there can be no abridged version. You either have it. Or else you have the illusion of it. And never the twain shall meet.

Author's Note

This is a response, or rather an extension, of Jimmy Yetts' satirical poem "Barbarism Doesn't Stop at the Tip of Your Nose"
This is not intended to be confrontational, combative, or antagonistic, but rather serve as a dialogue; a philosophical discussion...even if only with myself. To see Jimmy's piece: http://www.writerscafe.org/writing/FJD72/2049300/

Reviews

[Beccy]

Charlie and I are family to a lovely eighteen month old border collie called Holly. She is free to roam the house, the garden, and the surrounding fields, (without the need for restraint,) when we take her for long walks. She is loved, amply fed and watered and always returns the instant we call her.

Freedom is thus perhaps no more than perspective; and ours is quite agonisingly over thought, when compared to that of my beautiful little companion. I am envious that she acts purely on instinct, and as such, will never assume ultimate responsibility for her acts of of free will, nor does she have, or need, our perception of what is right or wrong or good or bad.

I would venture that in her mind, her freedom is greater than mine; and I think in my next life I would like to come back as her.

Beccy.

PS. How about Liberminus for that new word; a fitting amalgam I feel. :))

[charlie]

It's uncanny that you mention your dog, Beccy. I had written another piece (I think I'll post it at WC, now...) which makes allusion to a dog. Never-the-less, I am thankful for your thoughts on the matter; that you would share them here. Much appreciated. As for "Liberminus" - I like that one. It gets my vote.

[peter Duggan]

I loved your words Charlie. I stopped eating meat a long time ago after learning what is done to the poor creatures that we are given to eat. But as you say who is free in this world that we live in. We are brainwashed from the day we are born. The government, he religions and all of the rest of it leaves us all in a prison. The closest to freedom that we can get, is to have out own minds, and throw all the bullshit that we are drowned within. I enjoyed your words, my friend...pter

[charlie]

Thank you for taking the time to visit here, Peter.

[Beccy]

Freedom in its purest form, is, I think, no more than a pipe dream. There can be no absolute exemption from external control, interference or regulation; nor are we capable as a species of properly determining our actions, for that would absolutely impact on the freedom of others. We are a predatory lot, and without limits, the rule of law, (Magna Carta,) being paramount in my view, I truly believe chaos would be inevitable.

I will be happy to stand corrected. :))

Beccy.

Beccy.

[charlie]

That's as far as my thoughts have got me, as well: that freedom is a pipe dream. A phantom myth. Consequently, we need a new word which more accurately speaks to this "freedom with limits". What ever it may be - 'security' or whatever... but it isn't "freedom",. That word, like straight oxygen, seems too pure for us to consume. Thanks again, Beccy. Much appreciated.

[...]

If freedom is end of tyrany. How you stop own tyrany against to self? Real freedom don't exist like tyrany is not total tyrany. Swim with a flow and try share your own freedom with people who need it most. Slaves, refugees , victims of abuse , farm animals. Best freedom what you can get its you forget about self and you are busy with your giving so you are not so focusing on your self. That's not my excatly thoughts. I saw it documentary Giant leap 1 and 2. I just borrow it and passing to on another person. Have funny free day .

[charlie]

Yeah. I'm wondering if that's what Yeshua meant when he said: "The Truth shall set you free" ?? ... I believe your suggestion carries weight. Thanks for your comment.

[Beccy]

In Animal Farm, Old Major relates a dream of a world in which all animals live without the tyranny of men: where they are free, happy, well fed, and treated with dignity.

Such is the illusion of freedom I suppose. Which of necessity is limited; or else chaos would rule, which would be far worse than tyranny itself.

An astute and thought provoking piece.

Beccy.

[charlie]

Thanks for stopping by, Beccy. I'm not sure chaos would rule in the absence of freedom-with-restraints... I'd have to think on that angle a little longer, and no doubt, in doing so will probably brush up against that hard to grasp definition that accurately identifies "freedom". I'm not volunteering for that task at present, though. For how does one define the unknown thing? ...
I really appreciate your taking time to read here. All the best.

[Dave Brown]

Can even our spirit be free
Could we function without some sort of guideline
I'd have to say we all are born with restrictions that only death or dementia can relieve, and consider freedom differently than does your chicken. We also think we are at the top of the pile, but perhaps there is an entity out there of which we are ignorantly unaware, which considers our concept of freedom to be even more laughable than that of the fowl.

[charlie]

Yes, I think actual freedom might be stratospheres above our common, popular understanding. Attainable, perhaps. Though not through any K-Mart kind of outlet. Thanks for your thoughts, Dave.

[charlie]

Lol. I understand, Jimmy. Thank you.

[Jimmy Yetts]

The point I was making in my typically short piece is that one's freedom stops where another's begins. (Limited.)
Tyranny is chaotic and respects nothing but its own maniacal will. (Honors no limits.)
End of discussion.