The genesis of man saw to the demise of his freedom; freedom of self determination beyond the confines of external compulsions is the curtailing of man’s freedom from within. Man has subjugated those around him to servitude since Spartacus of the Roman Empire to the Junta of Myanmar. The freedom of man is thus, a lie.
To remove tangible external compulsions the UN created the manifesto: UN charter of human rights, at best, an ideal for freedom however judging by the number of dictatorships, it is realistically more idea than reality in effecting the subjugation of man. Beyond that however is modern servitude, where man today subjugate themselves to another in return for employment or other gains, tangible or not. This is compounded by a modern consumerist society advocating excess consumption where “greed is good” spurring man to work harder to attain a spot in the hierarchy of wealth and “haves”. However the very building block of society, law though seeks to protect man entraps him as well. Theoretically even one were to remove external compulsions, there lies the man within that binds him down; his inability to overcome his carnal nature and the very human nature of fear. Thus it is only if such obstacles are overcome can man truly be free, this is perhaps possible in two conditions in either Death or Dreams. Arguably there could be a third, through Religion. However be at either of the three, man would cease to be man for he would have lost the very characteristics of being man.
Man’s social contract has been enacted to safeguard the security of man and collectively those within his society, a manifestation of this contract are laws that man has created to govern himself. However the very nature of such a contract would mean we would have to relinquish certain personal liberties, therefore because man collectively require security he is thus bounded to abide by this social contract, and as such unable to attain true freedom but only a relative variant. Though laws govern an entire society, it pervades to every individual and depending on the country the freedom it ensues. In draconian countries such as those part of the former USSR an individual right to freedom was severely curtailed. However the majority peasant class chose to adhere to the laws in place by the communist government, they were in essence exchanging their rights in politics to protect themselves from exploitation by the various upper class during the Bolshevik revolution in 1917. Similarly in China after the Great Leap Forward, China plunged into economic depravity while after the Cultural Revolution countless lost their freedom to the free media, however the Chinese remained ardent supporters to the regime and its policies for they believed it was a better security in terms of livelihood. In contrast to the two countries lies America and affectionate known to many, the land of the free. America is known for its advocacy of human rights and its famous dictum the freedom of expression and free speech however even in a country that touts itself for being “free” there are still laws to govern Americans such as laws that criminalise murder and drug trafficking. In essence it suggests that men are willing and will trade their liberties in exchange for security. Thus men are unable to do everything or anything they please as such they are not truly free which is perhaps epitomised in the Singaporean penal code 377A where homosexual sex acts are criminalised and homosexuals are not free to copulate. This begets another point where individuals are not truly free not and homosexuals are not free to copulate.
Subsequently man cannot truly be free for even if they were to reject the law, it will be enforced unto them by others. The act of rejecting laws are by virtue the rejection of the social contract of a particular society, as such those who reject are in turn rejected. The dissidents would then be persecuted by the law and extension, society. Persecution would be the removal of various degrees of freedom that has previously been entail unto man. In extreme, it is exemplified by the act of execution in countries such as Singapore and China. Perhaps a better example would be the persecution of political activists in authoritarian countries such as Myanmar where Aung San Su Khye is imprisoned for her advocacy of democracy as opposed to the military Junta. Thus man cannot be truly free for he is unable to escape the binds of society.
The carnal wants of man prevents man from achieving true freedom for he would always be striving to satisfy his wants. Man live in societies whereby they are subjected to external influence as seen in the rapid change in Japanese culture directly after world war two with the influx of western culture. Today Japanese youths flock to attain symbols of social status such as Gucci bags or the latest Prada wallet. With Western consumerist culture pervading countries at an exponential rate, the wants of man would only increase so will the binds as they strive to attain their wants. In the latest “iPhone” (a phone created by apple) craze, exemplifies mans drive for consumption where youths and adults alike seek to get hold of one to the point where they placed their joy in getting one. A more conventional example would perhaps be man’s traditional greed for wealth. The wages and work hours of man have increased in relation to the spread of consumerism with the latter estimated at two extra hours over the past decade. However the increased wages are spent on growing more money such as investments instead suggesting that man are working extra hours not for the need of it but to achieve the former. This increase in prosperity in man is seen in the increased spending on luxury items such as increased sales by luxury car brands such as the Bentley and Rolls Royce. In relation this leads to a greater implication on man’s freedom for to acquire wealth man would have to work as such they place themselves under the subjugation of another man and sacrificing their freedom. They would now have to submit their freedom to another to achieve their goals of attaining wealth and their wants. Perhaps a darker twist to man’s carnal nature would be his lust which is possibly made more pertinent if it conflicts with social norms. This conflict is perhaps seen best in the case of paedophiles; adults who lust over children are criminalised by society and subjected to physical curtail of their freedom such as imprisonment and mental for they are prevent from exercising their love for the children body.
Even if one were to overcome carnal nature and society no matter how implausible that may be, there remains the inexorable laws of Mother Nature upon man; laws that defines what we are and our very human limitations. This law lies in the physiological needs of man for they are sine qua non, a must. Therefore because man has to fulfil his needs he will be unable to attain freedom for without, he will be unable to pursue freedom. This is played out throughout history as invading armies would lay siege on an enemy’s stronghold and forcing them to submission due to starvation however a more recent and relevant example would be the deaths of those in hunger strikes. In these hunger strikes for freedom such as Thileepan’s fast to death, he was unable to achieve freedom for his people as his body gave up on him and thus highlighting the concept that though the heart is willing, the body is and thus emphasises that limitation of the body that would hinder man from attaining his freedom.
The Greeks came up with four types of love and they are Agape; Selfless love or Eros; erotic love with the other two being Philia and Storge with the former being friendship love and the latter being affection within the family. Love is in essence the integration of man as one in the spirit of esprit de corps and its necessity in human life cannot be understated. It’s power can be seen from the family such as a mother’s care for her young to the political such as Black power movement; the black community integrated under the concept of Storge and cohesively fought for a better future. Man in essence require love to function for without, society would grind to a halt for without the basic unit of society; the family would not be able to function. However what love demonstrates is man’s need for companionship for love cannot exist in the singular and thus because man requires companionship, he can never be truly free. This need for companionship is seen in the essential need for communication in man and the evolution of communication in its goal to become more personal. This evolution is perhaps epitomised by how communication has transformed itself to overcome distance and speed from the conventional letter to the modern transnational webcam phone calls. The drive to overcome the barriers of distance and emulating real life communication highlights how human craves companionship and is actively trying to achieve it. Subsequently the human need for companionship is perhaps best seen in the detrimental effects on the health of those held in isolation chambers, in Port Arthur of Tasmania records of prisoners going insane through isolation has been with no exceptions and modern day isolation would include those by the Israeli army on Palestinian “martyrs” where scores leave deranged.
There has however been discourse to suggest that man can overcome his weakness and failings and this discourse largely lies within the realms of theology. All the major religions advocate that by walking with faith, man can overcome the binds on the secular world and achieve freedom in essence arguing that religion will be able to grant true freedom for man. From Christianity, the bible preaches that if one were to “seek first the kingdom of God, all will be given to him” thus freeing the faithful from his needs and want and by virtue allowing him to be free. However there perhaps lies a flaw in such an argument for the issue of religion is not tangible which lies in the metaphysical and more importantly the inherent paradox, that one would first require faith. Thus by virtue of the prerequisite of faith, it nullifies the argument for religion bringing about true freedom for man’s faith is limited because his doubt is infinite as exemplified in Matthew 8:26 where Jesus questions his faith.
Therefore to achieve true freedom, man has to either achieve all his needs and wants or be able to do without both the latter and former. The means to achieve such a state would only be possible through two conditions, in dreams or in death. In dreams, man would be able to fulfil his wants for everything hinges on his imagination; what he wants he merely has to think and it shall be done. Subsequently he would have no need to satisfy his physiological needs for most if not all dreams states are both temporal and transient however it is this characteristic that undermines the claim on freedom and dreams. Perhaps an apt example would be the recent move “avatar” where the plot hinges on the protagonist’s ability to remain in his dream state for as soon as he is removed, he returns to reality and the laws of reality would sever his freedom and in this case the symbolic ability of walking. Thus man cannot truly be free through dreams for he would ultimately have to leave the dream state. However a more permanent choice and an allusion to dream, death would perhaps ensure man’s ability to acquire true freedom. Death would allow man to achieve true freedom for akin to being in dream state, it would allow him to overcome his needs and wants. However this is questionable for through death, one can no longer be considered a man for one no longer holds the characteristics of man. As such by technicality alone, death cannot be considered a mean for man to achieve true freedom.
Man in essence prevents himself from achieving freedom; his inability to surpass his fragile shell and his psyche, the fundaments that make him man undermines his reach towards true freedom. At best man can strive to achieve relative freedom which is exemplified best in the divide between West and East Germany where the former had relative freedom over the East or man overcoming his societal constraints as seen in the hippies. Man and true freedom are therefore beyond a shadow of a doubt, two distinct entities.