Liberty and Security

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

The left typically (at least libertarians) say that liberty is more important than security. To this, however, I ask if we can have complete security and be happy without having complete or even much liberty at all.

My conclusion is that an increase in liberty coincides with an increase in security assumping the liberty is socially imposed rather than natural. Other kinds of security arise from protection by external powers that eventually become corrupt.

I am particularly interested in what authoritarians feel about the liberty/security issue. To me, at least, it seems contrary to the socialism to think liberty is neccessary since socialism is security from counterrevolution.

[ahab]

I think liberty is more important because with liberty comes security, if we focus more on liberating ourselves rather than building a security foundation than we're focusing more on freedom rather than defenses. Anyways I think thats what your talking about, i dont really kno :P

[phoenixoftime]

IIRC Antonio Gramsci had some interesting views on this. I believe his idea of freedom was a highly self-disciplined society which would have self-imposed boundries to keep order and ensure freedom. (Feel free to correct me on this if I am wrong, btw).

I guess you could say I'm a little authoritarian - although I think democracy should be widely used I think there is always a place for a "rank structure," - so long as it is fair - and I do like the idea of top-down management to accelerate the development process. My belief is that a society of learned persons armed with self-discipline, compassion and critical thinking will naturally be safe - but to get things that way a firm, fair and clear line needs to be drawn. This line needs to be tough at first but can be taken away as people prove themselves.