Does the ordinary person love liberty?

[Pure]

HL Mencken said,

"The truth is that the common man's love of liberty, like his love of sense, justice and truth, is almost wholly imaginary. As I have argued, he is not actually happy when free; he is uncomfortable, a bit alarmed, and intolerably lonely. He longs for the warm, reassuring smell of the herd, and is willing to take the herdsman with it. Liberty is not a thing for such as he. He cannot enjoy it rationally himself, and he can think of it in others only as something to be taken away from them.

"It is, when it becomes a reality, the exclusive possession of a small and disreputable minority of men, like knowledge, courage and honour. A special sort of man is needed to understand it, nay, to stand it -- and he is inevitably an outlaw in democratic societies. The average man doesn't want to be free. He simply wants to be safe."--
H.L. Mencken, February 12, 1923, Baltimore Evening Sun

---
Speaking of the typical case, and in general, is the above true of the ordinary person? Does he or she love his/her liberty? (Americans should focus on American persons.)

---
Here's an alternative formulation of the question, for those who quibble about 'ordinary',

try this variation: How much do you think most Americans prize liberty?

 

[rgraham666]

Erich Fromm dealt with this in his book Escape From Freedom.

The biggest problem with liberty, for many people, is that it includes responsibility. Your actions and their consequences belong to you. People like this when it means taking the credit, dislike it when it means taking the blame.

So a lot of people attach themselves to some idea, and name it liberty. This way they can pretend to be free while avoiding any of the consequences of actual freedom.

Another major problem with liberty is the naivete of many of the people who espouse it. They free themselves of duties and obligations to society and the world. "The problems of others are not my concern," is their mantra.

 

[Liar]

According to the classic Maslow hierarchy, this is, in order, what people need.

1. Eating, breathing and fucking (for procreation).
2. Being secure physically, socially, economically...
3. Friends, family and fucking (for intimacy).
4. Respect from others and respect from self. Confidence and stuff.
5. Opportunity for development, creativity, self expression, fucking (for sports).

Seems to me that liberty would file into #4 and #5.

Or to put it even shorter. People love food, roofs, love and sex. If they have to choose between that and liberty, liberty would most often lose.

"Give me liberty or give me death" is for the few and vocal idealists. "Give me liberty, please" is probably a more common sentiment.

 

[TE999]

HL Mencken said,

"The truth is that the common man's love of liberty, like his love of sense, justice and truth, is almost wholly imaginary. As I have argued, he is not actually happy when free; he is uncomfortable, a bit alarmed, and intolerably lonely. He longs for the warm, reassuring smell of the herd, and is willing to take the herdsman with it. Liberty is not a thing for such as he. He cannot enjoy it rationally himself, and he can think of it in others only as something to be taken away from them.

"It is, when it becomes a reality, the exclusive possession of a small and disreputable minority of men, like knowledge, courage and honour. A special sort of man is needed to understand it, nay, to stand it -- and he is inevitably an outlaw in democratic societies. The average man doesn't want to be free. He simply wants to be safe."--
H.L. Mencken, February 12, 1923, Baltimore Evening Sun

---
Speaking of the typical case, and in general, is the above true of the ordinary person? Does he or she love his/her liberty? (Americans should focus on American persons.)

Ol' H.L. was a misanthropic SOB and a card-carrying cynic, but as usual, he was right on the money.

Most people in the USA have never known the feel of an oppressors boot heel on their necks or asked for 'their papers' by soldiers on the street.

Freedom, liberty, independence; all of these are abstract concepts to the average USA citizen, if they think about them at all.

However, increasing numbers of persons here seem to be willing to surrender more and more of their liberties to a faceless government bureaucracy in exchange for some freebies and a false sense of security.

Welfare (in all it's forms), Medicare, Medicaid, domestic surveillance abuses, the 'war' on drugs, gun control, an increasing tax burden; the list goes on.

There's an old story about cooking a frog; to wit; put it in a pot of cold water on the stove and let it swim around, its happy. Keep turning up the heat slowly. By the time the frog realizes the waters hot, it's cooked.

Right about now, we're halfway between 'Low' and "High'.

Anyone else feelin' warm?

Jus' wonderin'.

Peace.

 

[cloudy]

Most white people in the USA have never known the feel of an oppressors boot heel on their necks or asked for 'their papers' by soldiers on the street.

Fixed that for ya.

Very recently I was pulled over, at gunpoint, no less, for the crime of having a black passenger in the car.

Before that, in Canada, I was watched every time I went in a store because, of course, I was planning on stealing something.

 

[elsol]

Most people don't know what they have or don't know what they're missing.

Even the whole liberty thing... people don't really want liberty when they fight for something, usually they want someone to stop doing what they're doing to them.

 

[Rumple Foreskin]

IMHO, Hoffer had a bit more nuanced analysis.

Unless a man has the talents to make something of himself, freedom is an irksome burden.... We join a mass movement to escape from individual responsibility, or, in the words of an ardent young Nazi, "to be free from freedom." It was not sheer hypocrisy when the rank-and-file Nazis declared themselves not guilty of all the enormities they had committed. They considered themselves cheated and maligned when made to shoulder responsibility for obeying orders. Had they not joined the Nazi movement in order to be free from responsibility?
-- Eric Hoffer, The True Believer (1951)

Rumple Foreskin

 

[shereads]

For myself, definitely. I'm not sure about the rest of you.

 

[rgraham666]

Welfare is an attack on liberty?

Gee, thanks.

It's true though I suppose. Without it I'd have lots of choices. Lots of choices on how to die. Starvation, exposure, poisoning from food found in a dumpster, shivved for a warm blanket. The possibilities would be endless.

 

[3113]

The biggest problem with liberty, for many people, is that it includes responsibility. Your actions and their consequences belong to you. People like this when it means taking the credit, dislike it when it means taking the blame.

Excellent point.

I think people only want *certain* types of liberties. And it usually involves liberty from something that impinges on their desires. If there is some toy they want, then they don't want laws telling them they can't have it. If there's some place they want to go, some thing they want to do, they don't want laws restricting them. EVEN if those laws are for a greater good (like environmental protection) OR to protect the liberties of others (like, in the '60's the right for all to sit at a lunch counter or go to a school).

To most people, "liberty" and "freedom" are words that mean, "Give me what I want, when I want it!" Its a very selfish desire. And it doesn't extend to anything that they don't like, however fair (by the standards of freedom and liberty) it might be--like Gay marriage. Why shouldn't gays be allowed the freedom to marry whom they like? It doesn't impinge on anyone else's freedom or pursuit of happiness.

People will fight to the death to keep their guns, the toys they love. But they won't fight for another's right to marry or say a bad word on television. And that, in the end, is the real test of whether a person believes in freedom and liberty. Whether they'll fight for a freedom that doesn't personally matter to them--if that liberty is judicious and right.

 

[3113]

Very recently I was pulled over, at gunpoint, no less, for the crime of having a black passenger in the car.

Cloudy, Cloudy (shakes head). And here I thought you were a model citizen.

 

[cloudy]

Cloudy, Cloudy (shakes head). And here I thought you were a model citizen.

Fooled ya.

 

[TE999]

Fixed that for ya.

Very recently I was pulled over, at gunpoint, no less, for the crime of having a black passenger in the car.

Before that, in Canada, I was watched every time I went in a store because, of course, I was planning on stealing something.

I never said the system was perfect, cloudy.

What happened to you and your friend sounds on the face of it, unexcuseable. There's still a lot of racisim out there. Not knowing the circumstances of your incident, I cannot comment.

I was dealing in generalities, not specifics.

I guess I'll let our Canadian posters answer the last one.

But our freedoms are still being diminished, and I'll leave it at that.

Maybe some faster than others.

Peace.

 

[cloudy]

I never said the system was perfect, cloudy.

What happened to you and your friend sounds on the face of it, unexcuseable. There's still a lot of racisim out there. Not knowing the circumstances of your incident, I cannot comment.

I was dealing in generalities, not specifics.

I guess I'll let our Canadian posters answer the last one.

But our freedoms are still being diminished, and I'll leave it at that.

Maybe some faster than others.

Peace.

Oh, I completely agree...in fact, wrote a couple of essays about it that are posted here at Lit (one on freedom of speech, and one on freedom of religion).

I was just pointing out that some people have indeed felt the boot of their oppressors at their neck, and people are still getting "asked for papers" for no particular reason. In fact, I think it's probably getting worse.

 

[Misty_Morning]

Very recently I was pulled over, at gunpoint, no less, for the crime of having a black passenger in the car.

That's a pretty big accusation there.

Are you sure it wasn't cuz there was an indian driving the car?


JUST JOKING!!!!!

 

[cloudy]

That's a pretty big accusation there.

Are you sure it wasn't cuz there was an indian driving the car?


JUST JOKING!!!!!

pssst....I look just like a white girl... green eyes and all

 

[TE999]

Welfare is an attack on liberty?

Gee, thanks.

It's true though I suppose. Without it I'd have lots of choices. Lots of choices on how to die. Starvation, exposure, poisoning from food found in a dumpster, shivved for a warm blanket. The possibilities would be endless.

I never said welfare was an attack on liberty, rg.

I said it was a diminishing of liberty by turning your life and fortunes over to a faceless entity that doesn't care if you barely subsist or not.

In essence, the safety net has become a hammock, to the long-term detriment of millions of people. Unfortunately, the welfare system has become a new form of enslavement for many who depend upon it. That is a loss of liberty to me.

I'm not defending the system, BTW, but criticizing it.

Unfortunately, freedom scares some people. More's the pity.

Peace.

 

[TE999]

Oh, I completely agree...in fact, wrote a couple of essays about it that are posted here at Lit (one on freedom of speech, and one on freedom of religion).

I was just pointing out that some people have indeed felt the boot of their oppressors at their neck, and people are still getting "asked for papers" for no particular reason. In fact, I think it's probably getting worse.

Right you are.

Freedom, liberty, et. al. is dying the death of a thousand cuts.

Ask any smoker.

Or someone who doesn't mow their lawn on a regular basis.

Or someone who wishes to fly a flag (of any type) from a pole in front of their home.

Or someone who has had their door kicked in at 2:00 AM by a S.W.A.T. team looking for a baggie of Mary Jane (Whoops, wrong house!)

You already covered traffic stops.

And don't get me started on Eminent Domain, zoning, restrictive covenants, etc.

There are a hundred-and-one pissant laws out there that ensnare us every day.

That's a loss of liberty to me!

I'm not an Anarchist, by a long shot.

Just an extremely irritated Libertarian.

But everyone needs to believe in something, I beleive I'll have another beer (grin).

Peace.

 

[Huckleman2000]

That's a pretty big accusation there.

Are you sure it wasn't cuz there was an indian driving the car?


JUST JOKING!!!!!

Asian drivers. Don't get me started.

 

[Liar]

pssst....I look just like a white girl... green eyes and all

Den it's cuz yer a wimmin. We can't have DEM behind de wheel.

 

[Pure]

to rg

te999 said,

the safety net has become a hammock,

gettin' a good snooze, there, my friend?

 

[rgraham666]

I never said welfare was an attack on liberty, rg.

I said it was a diminishing of liberty by turning your life and fortunes over to a faceless entity that doesn't care if you barely subsist or not.

In essence, the safety net has become a hammock, to the long-term detriment of millions of people. Unfortunately, the welfare system has become a new form of enslavement for many who depend upon it. That is a loss of liberty to me.

I'm not defending the system, BTW, but criticizing it.

Unfortunately, freedom scares some people. More's the pity.

Peace.

LOL. That's funny.

I worked, in the private sector, for over twenty years. You can't come closer to slavery in the modern world than that. Your average corporation is as faceless as they come.

I'd love to be able to work again. I've tried since my illness asserted itself. All I ended up with is my illness reasserting itself. The dichotomies and hypocrisies of the modern working world drive me nuts. I can't handle them.

I'm glad I've got that safety net. I'd be a corpse or worse without it.

 

[RedHairedandFriendly]

Welfare is abused by many and it is those folks that give the system a bad name.

My sister has needed the welfare system, once she was back on her feet she was able to support herself and no longer needed it.

I think it needs restructured. I know of a woman that is purposely not getting a job because then she'd get insurance and have a copay, she's pregnant with her second baby. . .not willing to marry the father right now, because if they do before the baby is born then she'll be responsible for the bill, but if she gives birth as an unwed mother, the system will pay for her prenatal care and the child's birth. . .as well as all the child's care while growing up. . .

This is abuse of the system. There are other examples, but like I said in the beginning. . .there are many examples where without the system in place, several people would be worse off than they are.

Nothing is perfect. . .sadly not even liberty.

Liberty wasn't perfect when it was penned in the constitution. It is a growing and evolving thing - as long as we keep it important to us, otherwise it is just words on a paper that holds little value.

 

[rgraham666]

The big problem with 'restructuring' welfare is that the cheaters simply adapt and the people that need it get caught in the restructuring.

They 'reformed' welfare here in Ontario a decade ago. First by reducing it 23%. Then by 'tightening up' the rules.

The cheats as I said simply learned the new rules and did what was necessary to appear to be eligible.

The people who depended on it were screwed. We have a huge homeless problem now. And the worst case was when welfare decided that a woman getting a student loan was cheating, and cut her off forever. She committed suicide. The eight month old baby she was carrying died too.

 

[RedHairedandFriendly]

Yes, people would find ways around the rules and what happened to her is very sad. Was it welfare's fault? It may have just been the final straw to a long line of depression she was suffering.

Like I said, nothing is perfect, but without change nothing improves either and yes, sometimes change can be for the worse for some, many even; but generally we hope we do the right thing and improve it for the better.