Freedom And Equality

[Ol' Dirty]

Having both freedom and equality, say anti-socialists, is "impossible, as they are two conflicting forces. One is negative, the other, positive."

Incorrect, mon general. Freedom is a postive force, equality a negative one, true; but, one is economic, the other social.

Say one man has 2 cattle, while another woman has no cattle. To make them both equal, you would simply give the woman a moocow. Simple enough. But still, how do you make it (whatever it is) free?

Say one man is the slave of another woman? If you want to make the man free, you simpy destroy his ties. But how do you make them equal?

You see, you can't add two things if they are unlike. Understand?

Well, that's how I'd like to respond to cappies, so...

Go!

(P.S., if someone would like to move this to O.I. they may.)

[RebelDog]

Equality lies in the abolishment of property and authority. Freedom is more complicated. We can never have total freedom but we can have equality of freedom.

[Dean]

Equality, contrary to being opposed to freedom, is in fact a necessary component of freedom. Freedom from oppression, or freedom for equality, is the nature of one's orientation as a free and humane individual. To be above another is to dehumanize them and to strip them of their ablity to make their own future: in the same sense, to severe the chains of inequality is to recognize another person as morally equal, free and human. Even in oppression one chains themselves n the sense that they must use another person towards their own ends in order to achieve their personal ends; they become an object by claiming to be above man, and inhuman.

[JKP]

http://infoshop.org/faq/secA2.html#seca25

[Dean]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2006, 12:54 PM
http://infoshop.org/faq/secA2.html#seca25
Hah! It quotes Fromm, one of the greatest thinkers of the 20th century and whose works made me distance myself from the dogmatism of my Idol - worship and helped me understand the reality of freedom, equality and the depths of the human mind. I have read all of his most prominent pieces and I'd recommend at least one of the following for anybody interested in freedom, communism, etc.: "The fear of Freedom / Escape from Freedom," "Man for Himself" or "To Have or to Be?". Don't worry; he's very easy to read.

"That some people seriously suggest that anarchists means by "equality" that everyone should be identical is a sad reflection on the state of present-day intellectual culture and the corruption of words -- a corruption used to divert attention from an unjust and authoritarian system and side-track people into discussions of biology. "The uniqueness of the self in no way contradicts the principle of equality," noted Erich Fromm, "The thesis that men are born equal implies that they all share the same fundamental human qualities, that they share the same basic fate of human beings, that they all have the same inalienable claim on freedom and happiness. It furthermore means that their relationship is one of solidarity, not one of domination-submission. What the concept of equality does not mean is that all men are alike." [The Fear of Freedom, p. 228] Thus it would be fairer to say that anarchists seek equality because we recognise that everyone is different and, consequently, seek the full affirmation and development of that uniqueness."

[BobKKKindle$]

Freedom is a postive force, equality a negative one, true; but, one is economic, the other social

The Social makeup and functioning of Society is linked with the economic mode of production and the corressponding relations of production under which we function. So one cannot make a clear cut divide. Nor is Freedom an absolute term, the 'right' to own propety can infringe upon the right of others to be free from exploitation. Equality is the democratic control over the means of production and the abolishement of the private ownership of the means of production, for it is through the private ownership of the means of production that the Capitalist gains the monetary benefits of Commodities that are Socially produced. Freedom is the ability to act as one wishes as long as it does not conflict upon the right of others to a safe and secure environment, and the right of the individual to be free from poverty and deprivation. The Unequal control of the means of production (inequality) can conflict upon this right (freedom)


Say one man has 2 cattle, while another woman has no cattle. To make them both equal, you would simply give the woman a moocow

...This does not sound like Socialism to me. What you are essentially describing is what occurred in the early days of the revolution in Russia; Peasants seized Small landholdings for themselves, and did not, contrary to Lenin's wishes, organise into Collective Agricultural communes. I envisage Intensive 'backdoor' urban farming operating in a system of small collectives (possibly based on households)

[Ol' Dirty]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 06:02 AM

Freedom is a postive force, equality a negative one, true; but, one is economic, the other social

The Social makeup and functioning of Society is linked with the economic mode of production and the corressponding relations of production under which we function. So one cannot make a clear cut divide. Nor is Freedom an absolute term, the 'right' to own propety can infringe upon the right of others to be free from exploitation. Equality is the democratic control over the means of production and the abolishement of the private ownership of the means of production, for it is through the private ownership of the means of production that the Capitalist gains the monetary benefits of Commodities that are Socially produced. Freedom is the ability to act as one wishes as long as it does not conflict upon the right of others to a safe and secure environment, and the right of the individual to be free from poverty and deprivation. The Unequal control of the means of production (inequality) can conflict upon this right (freedom)


Say one man has 2 cattle, while another woman has no cattle. To make them both equal, you would simply give the woman a moocow

...This does not sound like Socialism to me. What you are essentially describing is what occurred in the early days of the revolution in Russia; Peasants seized Small landholdings for themselves, and did not, contrary to Lenin's wishes, organise into Collective Agricultural communes. I envisage Intensive 'backdoor' urban farming operating in a system of small collectives (possibly based on households)
I like what you said, but, responding to your second vocalization, I was merely making a metaphor for equality. I'm not really proposing that plan for a socialist society.

[shifoe]

Originally posted by Dean+Jul 13 2006, 03:45 PM--> (Dean @ Jul 13 2006, 03:45 PM)
[email protected] 13 2006, 12:54 PM
http://infoshop.org/faq/secA2.html#seca25
Hah! It quotes Fromm, one of the greatest thinkers of the 20th century and whose works made me distance myself from the dogmatism of my Idol - worship and helped me understand the reality of freedom, equality and the depths of the human mind. I have read all of his most prominent pieces and I'd recommend at least one of the following for anybody interested in freedom, communism, etc.: "The fear of Freedom / Escape from Freedom," "Man for Himself" or "To Have or to Be?". Don't worry; he's very easy to read.

"That some people seriously suggest that anarchists means by "equality" that everyone should be identical is a sad reflection on the state of present-day intellectual culture and the corruption of words -- a corruption used to divert attention from an unjust and authoritarian system and side-track people into discussions of biology. "The uniqueness of the self in no way contradicts the principle of equality," noted Erich Fromm, "The thesis that men are born equal implies that they all share the same fundamental human qualities, that they share the same basic fate of human beings, that they all have the same inalienable claim on freedom and happiness. It furthermore means that their relationship is one of solidarity, not one of domination-submission. What the concept of equality does not mean is that all men are alike." [The Fear of Freedom, p. 228] Thus it would be fairer to say that anarchists seek equality because we recognise that everyone is different and, consequently, seek the full affirmation and development of that uniqueness." [/b]
Definetely agree with you. I think what some people are misunderstanding is that you have to make clear what prerequisites you are using to determine "equality" If your argument is that freedom cannot and should not exist without equality that is where you are wrong. In presuming that equality even comes into play. Equality itself is an illusion, one that can only appear to be real when thinking of the term from a mathematical and economic stance. Are you born equal to everyone else? Is everyone born with the same resources like food, water, and land? The problem isn't the lack of equality in the world it is your desire for a materialistic and superficial one. Which is without a doubt rooted within the ideology of the political sytems most of us are influenced by and living in. The trick is getting rid of these false ideals and detramental forms of government. ;)

[LeninReborn]

I think the problem with concepts of "freedom" is that a society with massive civil liberties and little government intervention is that you may find that many people are not very "free" a all...in any capitalist society, you are only truly "free" (if such a thing is possible) if you are rich - otherwise you are tied down by financial restrictions and such...

[ComradeOm]

There was a thread (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=52705) in Learning on this subject not so long ago. Lazar (KC) correctly points out the Marxist position on this.