History of Freedom & Its Future

[Bruce B]

Hillside,

How about just one little bitty label?

• Anything and everything can be dangerous or hazardous to your health.

End of labels.

Bruce

[prehistoric]

We keep going off in pursuit of trivial impositions on freedom, like seat belts, motorcycle helmets and warning labels. We talk about stupidity as if we personally had never done anything stupid. What about really big issues?

Let me try to give historical and global perspective. Freedom from "cruel and unusual" punishments is part of law. Why was this introduced? How does it relate to the ideal of equality before the law? When did it take effect?

Here's an example which is closer to us than Shakespeare, Newton or the American Revolution, petty treason. (For those who consider this medieval, I may need to explain how that period ended with the 15th century, farther from the time in question than that time is from the present.)

For a different kind of perspective and scale, think how the presumption in the discussions above has been that, barring personal calamities, people generally live long enough to collect social security (or equivalent). Here's something which happened in my lifetime, (and most of us don't even know about it,) China's Great Leap Forward. Is this relevant to a discussion of freedom?

Now, who wants to tell me about serious impositions on their freedom?

[Bruce B]

Let me try to give historical and global perspective. Freedom from
"cruel and unusual" punishments is part of law. Why was this
introduced? How does it relate to the ideal of equality before the
law? When did it take effect?

One landmark in US history was the famous and botched
Witchcraft Trials at Salem.

If nothing else, it introduced our refusal to accept spectral.

Obviously some countries practice 'cruel and unusual
punishments. The joke of that is the word unusual. If it's usual for
us to hang people upside down, then it wouldn't be illegal because
its usual for us to do it.

That leaves us basically with cruelty. I'll leave it at that to save me
from going on a tangent. But at least we don't burn supposed
heretics at the stake, thank goodness.

{cut}

Great Leap
Forward. Is this relevant to a discussion of freedom?

As far as I'm concerned have at it.

Now, who wants to tell me about serious
impositions on their freedom?

So now we are going to talk about marriage? Is that what you
want?

I have a good grasp of prisons. These places to me represent
police states, except I'd rather refer to them as police cities. The
should symbolize about as much loss of freedom as the
governments are willing to provide.

For me they can serve as a reference point. On one end, here is
loss of freedom, on the other end what do we have?

How can I help? What can I contribute?

[markofkane]

Right!! If they are worried about paying medical costs, why don't they just ban driving altogether? If a person has no medical insurance, but gets hurt badly in an accident, (and he was the lone driver/occupant, as in running into a tree) despite wearing a seatbelt, why should I foot the bill?


Well, if the day comes it happens to me, I hope someone else foots the bill.
Passing laws so that people will be less likely hurt themselves is over the top.

BTW. what if I defy the law, and die not wearing a seatbelt? Do you think giving me a ticket after I'm dead will matter??

Also, when they make laws telling me what to do, it inspires me to do the opposite for spite. (how about appearing to be wearing a seatbelt, so one does not get pulled over, but in reality, it's not snapped. )

Protect me from murderers and violent criminals, but what I do to myself is my own responsibility.


BTW, in MY state, wearing helmets while on motorcycles is not required!!! (I live in IL)

[Bruce B]

Let me try to give historical and global perspective. Freedom from
"cruel and unusual" punishments is part of law. Why was this
introduced? How does it relate to the ideal of equality before the
law? When did it take effect?

One landmark in US history was the famous and botched
Witchcraft Trials at Salem.

If nothing else, it introduced our refusal to accept spectral
evidence.

Obviously some countries practice 'cruel and unusual
punishments. The joke of that is the word unusual. If it's usual for
us to hang people upside down, then it wouldn't be illegal because
its usual for us to do it.

That leaves us basically with cruelty. I'll leave it at that, to save me
from going on a tangent. But at least we don't burn supposed
heretics at the stake, thank goodness.

{cut}

Great Leap
Forward. Is this relevant to a discussion of freedom?

As far as I'm concerned have at it.

Now, who wants to tell me about serious
impositions on their freedom?

So now we are going to talk about marriage? Is that what you
want?

I have a good grasp of prisons. These places to me represent
police states, except I'd rather refer to them as police cities. They
should symbolize about as much loss of freedom as the
governments are willing to provide.

For me they can serve as a reference point. On one end, here is
loss of freedom, on the other end what do we have?

How can I help? What can I contribute?

[Bruce B]

markofkane,

I'm with you.

Hillside presumably drives on icy roads and bridges in his long winters.

I'd feel bad if he got hurt, but I don't want a law locking him in his house, until the roads thaw out. His local highway patrol can assess road conditions and if things are severely dangerous, they can deal with restrictions on a case by case basis.

Bruce

[puppyluvr]

To clarify:
Im not in favor of the genocide of the ignorant. I just believe that if you regulate safety, the lesson is never learned. We dont need "daddy" Government to tell us fire is hot. stick your hand in it, you`ll figure it out..
People need to think for themselves, and they are being trained to do just the opposite. Mindless automatons, waiting for the Media and "Big Brother" to tell
them right from wrong, good from bad. Once we are used to being good sheep, they can lead us anywhere they want.

I just wish people would wake up and see whats happening around them...
If I could only get them out from in front of that damn Television.
Brainwashing propaganda machine....

[prehistoric]

...If I could only get them out from in front of that damn Television.
Brainwashing propaganda machine....

Let me try to provide a perspective here, also. If you want to talk about Propaganda, I can assure you Radio Pyongyang provides a steady stream. Check out this article on Communications in North Korea. The content on the AM stations is remarkably uniform. It is hard to tell about the FM stations, but spot reports by visitors suggest these are very similar. You don't need espionage to check the content, a shortwave radio will do.

Now, to address Bruce_B's comments about the U.S. prison system, I know prisoners frequently complain about food. How many complain about starvation? Also, he might be able to predict how those incarcerated here would react to an equally limited selection of information on the airwaves as that described above. How about freedom of the press? When the opposition newspapers are all outside the country, you can guess what that means.

Americans suffer from unselective consumption of a surfeit of bad information. This is considerably different from brainwashing. From views expressed on-line, it appears many are able to reach and hold dissenting opinions. Our future problems are more likely to involve information overload than lack of information.

Now, for a different perspective entirely. Aitch, if you're bothered by licensing laws for pubs, try a sojourn in Saudi Arabia.

To come back to the point, how did most of us end up with a different concept of freedom? I can't find a rosy period, after which everything declined, no matter how hard I look. Some process brought us what we value.

[klhrevolutionist]

What can we do to maintain freedom in the current climate? Acknowledging there is a problem is the first step. And as science goes we look at what we have documented meaning our history. I am of course defining our as in the world we live in, not just these united States. What has history taught us concerning the political battle of men ? Maybe that is the better question to ask because if we can define what it is that we should do then answering the rest of the questions should come naturally minus the demons that do not wish any of us well.

So long as we the people of this world look to others to take responsibilities for each of us the problems will never end. We must take the initiative to all be leaders and to be self-sufficient. We cannot expect the government at the local, county, state or federal level to do for us. We cannot have them to blame because the government does not care if it is blamed it will continue without punishment. so in answering this question again the way to correct this is to take responsibility for ourselves and our actions. We should not expect others to be their to pick us up if we fail because it is not their responsibility.

What does this mean ? It means liberty, failure and success are a cause of liberty. How does liberty tie into this tiny thread, in this tiny forum, in this tiny internet, in this tiny world ? It means we are responsible for ourselves and our actions. If we allow deprivation of freedom or despotism to continue then none of shall have liberty or freedom as we like to call it. If we wish to have our neighbors by force take care of us then he has no liberty and soon enough you will not have liberty because you too will have to be somebodies safety net and your liberty will be gone. Force onto others what you will, whether you think it is the best thing or not. You are depriving somebody of their liberty by forcing your will upon them.

What can we do to maintain freedom in the current climate? It is a good question, my answer is clear. I thank you for your time.

[hillside]

A slanted, slightly whacked, American version of the issue:

It seems that most of us live in such an atmosphere of liberty that we don't realize how good we have it.. We continue to quibble about minor issues like seat belt and helmet laws because there isn't really that much else to worry about. Or is there?

Yeah, you have to pay taxes, but you are still allowed to own property. You have to earn your way, but you are allowed to work at any job you want and live in any location that you want. If you live in California and want to drive to New York on a road trip, you can do so; if you can afford it. If you want to own a gun, you can, even if you may have to show that your not a criminal and maybe have to have it registered. Big deal, you can own a thousand guns if you want.

We Americans are more vocal about losing our liberties because we have been taught that only a couple of centuries ago, we lived under the tyranny of King George. (Wait a minute, didn't Britain also have some kind of parliament type thing back then?) We threw off that yoke through our superior strength of character and with the help of God, who is always on our side.

Bunk.

There are plenty of other countries that have as much liberty as we do, give or take. We are all capable of losing our liberty while we are whining about trivialities instead of paying attention to what our governments and especially what our big businesses are actually doing.

I for one don't believe rugged individualism is the whole answer, but instead, believe working together to accomplish the vision that we share is a big part of success. It would help if we could agree on what that vision is. That might be the first task and it might require some compromise on all sides. We are individuals, but we are also neighbors. We have to balance both existences.

Wake up, world. Maintaining freedom takes work, not whining!

[Aitch]

Americans suffer from unselective consumption of a surfeit of bad information

Aha, understanding as a statement

Yes, and with the emphasis on unselective

Now, for a different perspective entirely. Aitch, if you're bothered by licensing laws for pubs, try a sojourn in Saudi Arabia

Perhaps I didn't explain that point very well

The reason I made the title of this devolved thread as it is, is because I spent considerable time researching licensing whilst living in a pub

Essentially the lawyers/judges have lost the plot, and that has been passed forward to idiot politicians trying to 'fix something that isn't broke' dependant upon cromwellian puritanicism, pumped up in the media due to wayward youth abroad earning this country a name for drunken youth layabouts 'rampaging and "terrorising" local people' - see the connection?

What has transpired and become [unlawful] legislation, is the removal of continuity of logical argument for the legal precedent, so like a pack of cards, when tested it all collapses, due to 'having no legs' as lawyers say

The British legislation is being copied and implemented across Europe, in line with trends to maintain 'common law' and squeeze control legislation into International Statutes where none existed before
Most, if not all this is going on under our noses, and because this is a common model world we live in, if no-one objects, it is 'accepted by default'
The problem is, we have completely different legal models
everything 'we', you and I, do, we do in a climate of other people, our daily interactions would give rise to vehement and immediate objection
were it to be outside the 'common law' which for the main part works, as most of us believe essentially in each others fundamental rights
However, prehistoric has touched upon a model of existence where people do not have that same model
It seems to me that our collective problem is why those of us who both recognise this and have the freedom to discuss it, do not apparently have the drive of common intent to prevent such unpleasantries from repeatedly becoming a 'powerful force' in our world model
That, as they say, is the future path our children tread

A reminder:

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

Pastor Martin Niemöller

Come on, we all know this stuff, don't we?

Don't degenerate an important topic into pettiness

think global freedom and what we can do, please, by our own individual processes, and common ones

Aitch

[markofkane]

Owning property is an illusion. Because of a law called "eminent domain" you have to give up your property if the government wants it.

If you don't pay taxes on the property, you will lose it.

You are more or less "renting" it until the "landlords" decide to evict you.

Complaining about seat belt laws is "whining"??

The government would love it if nobody whined. It would make it so much easier to replace liberty with totalitarianism .

Sure, seat belt laws are minor, but it's still a crack in the foundation of liberty. The more cracks you add, the better chance of it crumbling.

It's just one of many laws that add to the problem.

My famous quote "One who lies down and lets people walk all over them deserves to be called a doormat"

Who wants to lose their liberty, one crack at a time? Do you ignore the cracks until the dam breaks?

[puppyluvr]

We are all capable of losing our liberty while we are whining about trivialities instead of paying attention to what our governments and especially what our big businesses are actually doing.

Agreed. But much like a child pushing the envelope, if we dont fight the small attacks on our "rights", they will just take more and more. As they are now. Because they know we will let them.
[/quote]Who wants to lose their liberty, one crack at a time? Do you ignore the cracks until the dam breaks?

The Government is not only eroding our freedoms, the Media is creating a whole generation of kids who dont know they existed.
Apathy is the norm. They really dont care.
And not just the US, this is quickly becoming global in scale.
The reason I went on a rant about ignorance... ....was that exact apathy. Its what they want, a "warning label" society.
People are so numb anymore. Meanwhile, we let go of our freedom, bit by bit, (like our national parks..ect...)
and no one notices, as a global dictatorship evolves around us.
One World, One Government...
Think I`m a nut? Look into it. Its too real.

I believe the future of freedom was the point, yes?
If we dont wake up, freedom has no future.
Thats the point.

[markofkane]

That's right. Most people seem to only worry about making $$$ and which FAT-Food restaurant that are going to eat at. Like I said, a lot, if not most, people are apathetic in saying/thinking "It's not my problem" "We cannot do anything about it, so suck it up" "It's not so bad, at least we are not as bad off as people in Iran" "Who cares?" "At least we are safe"

"I got mine, who cares about you"

It is also true our government and schools make kids ignorant of their rights, because if they don't know they have them why would they care if they were taken away?(and they offer a perverted translation of the bill of rights) You cannot care about something you do not know about. Kids are our future?? We're doomed.

[Aitch]

I believe the future of freedom was the point, yes?
If we dont wake up, freedom has no future.
Thats the point.

How apt that statement is, & I go back to my earlier 100 monkey syndrome point

The 'if we don't wake up' is IMHO just such a possibility

There are clear signs that there are awakenings occurring more frequently than the apparent apathy theory would have us believe

It is often said, 'Oh, there's no point, I'm only one person'

to which I invariably reply, 'Ah, so everybody else is more than?'

That to me is where the wake-up really needs gelling together into the collective consciousness

People seem to have gotten suckered into inadequacy belief
The 'religious' - not worthy, tainted, sinner garbage

In my experience, in order for a new self awareness to occur, it is necessary to do some simple housekeeping....
Throw out your bad ideas, and absorb a good one
Some people simply call it 'changing my mind'

That, IMHO is as much as I can do, to affect my freedom, and yours
There is no - 'you must' directive that can remove a total conviction,
and just like the borg, once we have achieved 100 monkey consciousness
there is no going back

thus are the shackles of control, broken

it is a choice, but one which requires a simple action

Aitch

[prehistoric]

The reason I made the title of this devolved thread as it is, is because I spent considerable time researching licensing whilst living in a pub

This thread could take another jog in a new direction. Let's let this pass, unless someone wants to start yet another thread.

Essentially the lawyers/judges have lost the plot, and that has been passed forward to idiot politicians trying to 'fix something that isn't broke' dependant upon cromwellian puritanicism, pumped up in the media due to wayward youth abroad earning this country a name for drunken youth layabouts 'rampaging and "terrorising" local people' - see the connection?

I am out of touch with the pub scene, drinking being particularly unwise for one like myself. I do recall episodes of celebrations which changed venue repeatedly, until a somewhat unclear sequence of events brought contact with minions of the law.

There is a definite connection between "chucking out time" and events on the police blotter, some rather expensive. There is a general inability to find ways to make restitution for destructive behavior. One aspect, particularly distressing to anyone trying to prevent murder and mayhem, is that those exhibiting the least responsibility are neither reasonable nor good witnesses. The behavior, and results, are real problems, if not necessarily the one under discussion. Tracing cause and effect are difficult, except for the influence of alcohol. I believe you are describing attempts to hold those who serve this responsible for the behavior of customers.

What has transpired and become [unlawful] legislation, is the removal of continuity of logical argument for the legal precedent, so like a pack of cards, when tested it all collapses, due to 'having no legs' as lawyers say.

I am not familiar with the arguments and precedents being used there.

I can say that there were real social problems in Cromwell's day, and the legislation imposed at that time worked to reduce random violence, at a cost his countrymen did not tolerate after his death. The introduction of Gin, and sellers advertising "Drunk for a Penny; Dead Drunk for Two." radically altered the economics of inebriation. If not for this, these laws would have disappeared.

His policies were effective in other ways. His New Model Army won battles, in part, because it was sober and alert at the outset. Whatever opinion you have about his ideas and actions elsewhere, you can scarcely deny his effectiveness on the battlefield. (Can you name a British monarch who pacified all the British isles at the same time?) This sort of thing gets the attention of rulers. You might compare the organization of your present armed forces with the force mentioned above.

The British legislation is being copied and implemented across Europe, in line with trends to maintain 'common law' and squeeze control legislation into International Statutes where none existed before
Most, if not all this is going on under our noses, and because this is a common model world we live in, if no-one objects, it is 'accepted by default'
The problem is, we have completely different legal models
everything 'we', you and I, do, we do in a climate of other people, our daily interactions would give rise to vehement and immediate objection
were it to be outside the 'common law' which for the main part works, as most of us believe essentially in each others fundamental rights.

Again, I am not current on the state of European law. I can verify that systems based on the Code Napoleon are unlikely to tolerate civil disturbance. The "whiff of grapeshot" which propelled him to the top shows his characteristic solution.

However, prehistoric has touched upon a model of existence where people do not have that same model.
It seems to me that our collective problem is why those of us who both recognise this and have the freedom to discuss it, do not apparently have the drive of common intent to prevent such unpleasantries from repeatedly becoming a 'powerful force' in our world model
That, as they say, is the future path our children tread

Here we come back to the connection with my post above. The things which have changed more than anything else in the last 200 years are communications and information. Because of unprecedented change in scale, we are all in one anothers backyards. We don't have centuries to let things settle down. We will have to deal with people already living, with all of their mistaken opinions. Exterminating the opposition is not an option. This should give you some comfort, but it also means you will have to tolerate the existence of Saudi clerics and worshipers of Korean god-kings, unless or until we all reach a common level of enlightenment and agreement.

Added: Once again, I have typed too slowly to respond before a new post. I will take some time for deliberation before replying.

[Aitch]

Last week in Strasbourg, the Council of Europe's Steering Committee on Human Rights adopted a controversial draft of a new European Convention on access to information—a draft that fails toaddress criticisms and suggestions from civil society and government officials and even adds a new exemption for heads of state and royal households.

http://www.freedominfo.org/index.htm

For three years Heather Brooke fought what appeared to be an unequal battle with House of Commons officialdom and the Speaker Michael Martin.

But yesterday the freedom of information campaigner was celebrating victory after the High Court ruled that MPs must be more open about a £12million a year housing perk.

The verdict means that Mr Martin has squandered nearly £200,000 of taxpayers' cash in a failed attempt to keep the accounts secret.

Heather Brooke Story

"The United Kingdom has the most surveillance cameras per capita in the
world. With the recent news that CCTV cameras do not actually deter
crime, how can the local town councils justify the massive surveillance
program? By going after pooping dogs."]

I don't know what is going on with the UK, it's like they're using 1984 as
an installation guide.

In case anyone missed this clever turning of the tables, however, here's the story of a music band who not being able to afford to produce their video,performed in front of 80 of the estimated 13 million (public) surveillance cameras in UK, and then got the footage by filing a request under UK's Data Protection Act.

http://www.arsgeek.com/?p=3961

A woman caught up in a mysterious Internet hijacking scandal that has sparked a federal privacy investigation into the Canadian Human Rights Commission says she was shocked, angry and confused at suddenly finding herself publicly associated with white supremacists. ... In response to a subpoena, Bell Canada linked Jadewarr to Ms. Hechme's personal Internet account, and provided her address and telephone number at the public hearing. [Source: Colin Perkel, Internet hijacking 'disturbing', says Ottawa woman, Canadian Press, 27 Apr 2008

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... ional/home

The Ninth Circuit's recent ruling (pdf) in United States v. Arnold allows
border patrol agents to search your laptop or other digital device without
limitation when you are entering the country. EFF and many civil liberties,
travelers' rights, immigration advocacy and professional organizations are
concerned that unfettered laptop searches endanger trade secrets,
attorney-client communications, and other private information. These groups
have signed a letter asking Congress to hold hearings to find out what
protocol, if any, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) follows in searching
digital devices and copying, storing and using travelers' data. The letter
also asks Congress to pass legislation protecting travelers' laptops and
smart phones from unlimited government scrutiny.

If privacy at the border is important to you, contact Congress now and ask
them to take action!

In the meantime, how can international travelers protect themselves at the
U.S. border, short of leaving their laptops and iPhones at home? ...

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/05/pr ... es-while-t

Download "Freedom of Information Around the World 2006: A Global Survey of Access to Government Records Laws," by David Banisar

Thought you knew about freedom? - Just a few thought provokers

Aitch

[Bruce B]

Now, to address Bruce_B's comments about the U.S. prison system, I know prisoners frequently complain about food. How many complain about starvation? Also, he might be able to predict how those incarcerated here would react to an equally limited selection of information on the airwaves as that described above. How about freedom of the press?

Prehistoric,

Information

Being an inmate generally positions a person to become much,
much more well informed than a citizen on the outside. It has to do
with the availability of television, newspapers, magazines and
libraries. Mostly time, lots and lots of time to educate
oneself.

Starvation

NO! Excepting people with eating disorders, insatiable appetites
and things like that. Even at that it could be argued the supervised
environment is much healthier for them, than if they were left to their
own devices.

Communication

It happens, it happens and it happens. Even under circumstances
when it's not supposed to happen - it happens.

Justice

In many ways we can draw parallels between the prison cities and
the cities we live in.

Justice in prison is markedly different, it happens at an accelerated
pace. Often, nearly instantaneously, sometimes within a few days.

Justice just doesn't work the same way on the outside.

Solutions

If you end up thinking to yourself, "There aren't any easy solutions."

You could be right.


Bruce

[prehistoric]

When I provoked some comments above, I confess I had an ulterior motive. One reason for choosing North Korea as an example was the influence it had on Eldridge Cleaver. (I am not using the Wikipedia reference here for a reason, there are serious inaccuracies in that article. For example, they confuse his 1968 "Soul on Ice" with the 1978 "Soul on Fire", leading to the remarkable discovery that he described his experiences outside the country in a book published before he left.)

Here was a man who knew very well what life was like in a U.S. prison. Starting as a convinced Marxist he toured several countries with Marxist ideology. North Korea was the place where he could no longer sustain illusions about the nature of a totalitarian state which claimed to do everything in the name of the people. He had written a controversial book, and even gotten parts of it published, while in a U.S. prison. He had also studied Marxist ideology. While he was in North Korea he kept his doubts to himself and did not write or publish criticism of what he saw. He also waited until he had left that country to read works of a different political character. For him, life in that country was worse than prison. This ultimately led to his return to the U.S., despite outstanding charges against him.

I can't really pass judgment on the range of beliefs and opinions he tried out in the rest of his life. He had been through a shattering experience. He found racism can cross major political divisions, so long as there are human beings on both sides. He discovered means are at least as important as ideals. (You may never reach those ideals, the means you use affect the present.) He found he had more in common with some of his political opponents than he did with some who supported him.

He did not change his beliefs because of argument or punishment. Even violent conflict left them unshaken. In the end, it was seeing how those ideas had been applied (or misapplied) in one place after another which caused a complete reassessment.

There is a common theme in this with some other times and places. Charles I of England was executed. Oliver Cromwell died in bed. The monarchy was not discredited. Nobody has had the temerity to use the title Lord Protector since Cromwell. Assassination does not remove mistaken ideas.

[alienjeff]

From pizzasgood's forum post signature:

"I have a tendency to wear my mind on my sleeve / I have a history of losing my shirt"--Barenaked Ladies

In light of this, he might want to change that quote to:

"I have a tendency to snort coke and not drink it / I have a history of a squeaky clean facade" --Steven Page of Barenaked Ladies