Again, I'll begin with my customary wishes for your good health, and I wish this for you in all things: psychological, physical, financial, and whatever else qualifies as important to you. I'm happy to report that things are as they usually are with me, I've got some kind of a head cold and dreadful tiredness, the best thing to be said for my whining is that it's consistent. Ok. Done with Salutations.
This is not really a post it's the addendum I mentioned in my "last post" (yes it's getting kind of embarrassing, but I PROMISE you, this truly is the last you'll hear from me on this blog). What I've decided to do is, remove all followers and lock it, this will turn this blog into something I've wanted for some time: a private diary type of thing and a writing aid.
If you remember, my "last" post was meant to include a note or two about freedom, only I was a little tired to conclude as I'd intended. So here it is. (Once again, there's nothing terribly interesting about this for anyone it's not bread 'n circus or boo hoo, so I suggest you go do something else), I just want to write this, whether you read it or not doesn't concern me in the least.
A year or two ago, I was listening to a radio broadcast. The announcer asked his listeners what they considered to be the most beautiful word in the German language. My first thought was "Freiheit" (Freedom) inevitably someone rang up and suggested the word. (It really is a bit of an obvious candidate after all) the word which eventually won general consensus made me puke, it was as embarrassingly mooshy as sloppy excrement.
Freedom is one of the most perplexing, preoccupying abstracts of human existence. What is it exactly? Is it the capability to think, speak, act as one chooses? That would seem to be the most immediate, logical definition of freedom. But this definition is impossible within all social, cooperative societies, human or otherwise. Let me show you why: If freedom means the aforementioned, then paedophilia must be permissible, then beating your wife to a pulp would be perfectly within behavioural norms. As most societies regard such behaviour as anathema, then "Freedom to..." cannot be the sum total of freedom. There must also be "Freedom from..."
What does this mean? It means that children should enjoy freedom
from paedophilia, women should be able to live freely in the absence of physical fear. So now comes the
Paradox of Freedom: In order to have freedom, we must have laws. There is no freedom in the absence of law. If there are no laws (remember laws need not be institutionalised, there can be laws of tradition, culture and community) then society becomes predicated upon the only remaining constraint: the Law of Muscle. In other words, the Alpha dog rules, Brawn becomes the sole means to political and material success. Do you see?
So freedom is both a positive thing: the Freedom To and a negative thing: the Freedom From. But how about if we say "Well, stuff it, let the weak, the defenceless look out for themselves, (that nearly always means animals, women and children) We want TOTAL freedom to act as we please, no government, no cultural norms, I'm alright Jack, fuck you if you can't compete".
Well, what's wrong with this concept of freedom? Why should the strong be held back by laws? Why should man's behaviour be constrained in any way at all? Is there any drawback to this? (except to the defenceless targets of inevitable violence and control)
Well, yes, there is a drawback. Let's argue that we don't care about the weak, the defenceless, the impoverished, the functionally illiterate, let's just say "What the fuck, Do What Thou Wilt, that is the Sum of the Law" this is surely, unarguably, true freedom isn't it? If I want something, and I have the muscle power to see my plans to fruition, why shouldn't I steal, rape, murder, mutilate, cheat, exploit just as I please? Why should my desires and instincts be delimited in any way? What's the ethical/philosophical argument against that and who should arrogate unto themselves the power to decide what I can and can't do?
My response is this: if Man is allowed to live by pure instinct, with no consideration for laws, then he is not truly free at all. Acting out of instinct is not an exercise of "free will". Free will involves some kind of conscious choice about our actions. There is freedom inherent in the ability to decide for oneself, ie: I choose this course of action or equally: I choose not to pursue this cause of action. If I live only by the dictates of my emotions, instincts, impulses, I am not exercising Free Will, I am no more free than the oyster that must open it's shell according to the pull and sway of tides and light. If I live only guided by instinct, than I'm simply no more than an unreasoning clockwork spring. We can choose to obey or disobey laws, the point is, we are free to choose. If we simply live by desire, we choose nothing but to become slaves to our instincts.
Freedom is, and is not, so many things, I want to go on and on and say more, but I'm conscious that this is not a world beater in terms of exciting reading (it would be for me, but that's by the by). Neither I, nor anyone else can ever define for you what Freedom, that beautiful, elusive abstract really is. And if someone ever tries to tell you, simply remind them that once something is defined, it's automatically limited, and you would prefer not to have your will to reason on the subject limited in any way by anyone, thanks all the same.
So let me finish by telling you what Freedom means to me: you've heard the word "innerlichkeit" here on this blog before, at it's most basic it means "innerness"
Tennessee Williams in his brilliant play "Orpheus Descending" wrote "We are all of us sentenced to solitary confinement within our own skins" This is nothing to be afraid of. Your inner space is completely your own, it's the place you can freely, thoughtfully and calmly ask questions of yourself and the world around you. It is uniquely yours alone. No one is you and you are no one else. You don't need some new age fucking crystal or some hocus pocus "leader in prayer" to colonise, direct or control your thoughts. You alone must answer to your conscience. Is it ok with you that the defenceless, the poor, the functionally illiterate are exploited and impoverished to benefit a wealthy few? Is it ok with you that animals are kept in extremes of pain, deprivation and extremes of misery so that human animals can live a few years longer or stave off a few wrinkles from their aging faces?
Making the most of yourself isn't buying a better house, losing a dress size, getting letters after your name, it's using your head, it's involving your judgement, intellect and awareness of others in all of your calculations and sense of attachment to the world. Even if it means becoming detached from the things that just don't fucking matter at all: material bullshit that clutters up your mind and NEVER fulfills you for more than a few illusory moments
I've expressed something very complex crudely, imprecisely and clumsily. This is something for people a lot better informed and smarter than me to explain to you. I've done my best within my limits of time, vocabulary and intellect. My limitations are here for all to see and that doesn't bother me one bit. We all have them.
This is the last thing I want to say to you here.
Cheers and Love.
SFE
