The Redefinition of Freedom

by Richard P. Weigand

I am angry at what has been done to freedom.

Freedom has not disappeared.

It has been redefined.

We still use the word. We still praise it. We still claim it. We still put it in speeches, slogans, campaigns, school lessons, court arguments, advertisements, and personal declarations.

But the meaning has shifted.

And when the meaning shifts, the life built on that meaning shifts with it.

Freedom once pointed toward self-direction, responsibility, conscience, discipline, duty, and the right to act without unjust control.

Now it is often made to mean permission.

Validation.

Release from limits.

Release from judgment.

Release from consequence.

The word remains.

The substance is being drained out.

That is the trick.

A thing does not have to be attacked openly. It can be praised while being redefined into its opposite.

The Old Freedom

Freedom once assumed that man was capable of governing himself.

That matters.

Freedom was not merely the absence of restraint. It was the condition in which a person could choose, act, answer, build, worship, speak, think, work, own, refuse, defend, repent, and improve.

It assumed responsibility because it assumed man was responsible.

It assumed conscience because it assumed man could know right from wrong.

It assumed discipline because it knew appetite alone would make a slave of him.

It assumed duty because freedom without duty becomes selfishness with a flag.

That old freedom did not mean we could do anything we wanted and call it liberation. It meant we could act as free persons and answer for what we did.

That was the dignity of it.

A free man was not merely unrestrained.

He was self-governed.

The New Freedom

The new freedom is smaller.

That is what angers me.

It is sold as expansion, but it reduces us.

Freedom is redefined as doing what we feel, being affirmed in what we feel, escaping the consequences of what we feel, and requiring others to validate what we feel.

That is not freedom.

That is appetite protected by language.

The new freedom does not ask whether an action is true, good, honorable, responsible, or destructive. It asks whether the person wants it, identifies with it, feels harmed by opposition to it, or can demand recognition for it.

This turns freedom into permission.

Permission from institutions.

Permission from culture.

Permission from therapists.

Permission from platforms.

Permission from bureaucracies.

Permission from approved language.

And once freedom becomes permission, someone else becomes the one who grants it.

That is not liberation.

That is dependency wearing the vocabulary of freedom.

Freedom Without Responsibility

Freedom cannot survive the removal of responsibility.

This should be obvious, but it is being made obscure on purpose.

When responsibility is removed, freedom loses its structure. Choice becomes impulse. Desire becomes identity. Consequence becomes oppression. Correction becomes harm. Judgment becomes cruelty. Self-control becomes repression.

Then the person is told he is more free.

No.

He is less free.

A person ruled by impulse is not free. A person unable to bear correction is not free. A person trained to experience limits as injury is not free. A person who needs constant affirmation from systems, experts, platforms, and institutions is not free.

He is managed.

He may be managed gently. He may be managed with compassionate words. He may be managed under the banner of care.

But he is managed.

And I am angry at the dishonesty of calling that freedom.

The Managed Citizen

The redefinition of freedom serves power.

A self-governing person is difficult to control. He can say no. He can refuse the approved opinion. He can accept consequence. He can stand on principle. He can endure disapproval. He can resist appetite. He can choose duty over comfort.

A person trained to define freedom as permission is easier.

He can be guided by incentives, penalties, platforms, therapeutic language, social pressure, institutional approval, and fear of exclusion. He can be told what is safe to say, what is harmful to believe, what is permitted to question, and what kind of person he is allowed to be.

That is the managed citizen.

He may be told he is liberated, but his freedom depends on staying inside approved meanings.

He may be told he is empowered, but his power depends on institutional recognition.

He may be told he is authentic, but his authenticity must use supplied language.

That is not freedom.

That is a cage with better lighting.

The False Compassion

This redefinition also comes wrapped in compassion.

That is part of the method.

We are told that limits harm people. Standards harm people. Consequences harm people. Disagreement harms people. Disapproval harms people. Expectations harm people.

So freedom is made to mean protection from anything that asks us to rise.

That is false compassion.

Real compassion does not make a person smaller. It does not tell him he is too fragile for truth, too wounded for responsibility, too oppressed for duty, too authentic for discipline, or too special for consequence.

Real compassion helps the person become more capable.

False compassion protects incapacity and calls it kindness.

I am angry at that.

I am angry because people are being cheated of their own strength. They are being taught to call weakness freedom, dependence freedom, indulgence freedom, and avoidance freedom.

That is betrayal with soft hands.

The Restoration

Freedom must be restored to its full meaning.

Freedom means self-direction under responsibility.

Freedom means the right to choose and the duty to answer.

Freedom means conscience can speak.

Freedom means truth can be pursued.

Freedom means the person can refuse the lie, even when the lie is popular.

Freedom means discipline has a place.

Freedom means limits can protect rather than oppress.

Freedom means consequence can correct rather than destroy.

Freedom means man is more than appetite, impulse, identity, wound, or demand.

Freedom belongs to the whole person.

A reduced man can only be given reduced freedom. A managed man can only be given managed freedom. A redefined man can only be granted permissions by the systems that redefined him.

That is why the redefinition of freedom matters.

It is not a side issue.

It is not a word game.

It is part of the central reduction.

Redefine man downward, and freedom becomes permission.

Restore man as a moral, spiritual, responsible being, and freedom becomes possible again.

I am angry because the word freedom is being used to train people away from freedom.

I intend to stay angry at that.

Cleanly.

Because freedom without responsibility is not freedom.

It is surrender with applause.

 

Related Reading:
The Redefinition of Man
What Is a Reliable Source?
Cognitive Sovereignty
Truth vs Narrative: What’s the Difference?
The Functions That Hold America Together

The Redefinition Series