Freedom

Nothing is more fundamental to America than the notion of freedom. Recently I've been thinking a lot about what freedom really is. I've come to the conclusion that freedom is very difficult to define and that fact is really at the root of much of our political discord today.

Is freedom simply the ability to do whatever one wants whenever one wants? A teenager would probably define freedom in that way, but is that really freedom? The famous sociologist C. Wright Mills had this to say about freedom, "Freedom is not merely the opportunity to do as one pleases; neither is it merely the opportunity to choose between set alternatives. Freedom is, first of all, the chance to formulate the available choices, to argue over them -- and then, the opportunity to choose."

What got me thinking about freedom was all this talk about energy independence and the financial problems being encountered by General Motors. Those on the right decry any mention of driving smaller, more effecient vehicles as infringing on their personal freedom to drive whatever they wish to drive. Those on the right similarly scoff at the suggestion of turning down your thermostat, putting on a sweater and making sure your tires are properly inflated as attempts to control the way they live. Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma seems to have captured this right wing view of freedom when he asks this rather amazing question, “But what if I want to drive a gas guzzler?”

Any idea that not driving a gas guzzler because it is better for the environment and better for the economy and potentially frees us from fighting wars of choice in oil rich Middle Eastern countries all take a backseat to Tom Coburn's idea of freedom which is summed up by his asinine quote. OK. Well at least we know how the right generally and Tom Coburn specifically define freedom. Maybe not.

It seems Senator Coburn's idea of freedom only extends to the right to drive a gas guzzler and not the right to use tobacco.

“What we should be doing is banning tobacco,” Coburn said in a recent Senate floor speech he gave during a debate on a tobacco regulation bill. “Nobody up here has the courage to do that. It is a big business. There are millions of Americans who are addicted to nicotine. And even if they are not addicted to the nicotine, they are addicted to the habit.”

Coburn makes a good point, but why is tobacco to be outlawed while Hummer's that get 10 mpg are to be protected as some form of free speech or freedom of expression? Coburn goes on to profess his concern for the health of Americans.

“If we really want to make a difference in health and we want to eliminate dependence on tobacco, what we have to do is to stop the addiction.”

Another good point from the Senator, but as President Bush famously said as a country we are addicted to oil, so why not fight that addiction with the same common sense approach he is advocating to fight nicotine addiction?

This paradox between freedom and the public good is one that is not easily resolved. It is not only Senator Coburn or Republicans who seem to have difficulty deciding what freedom is, but this example served to illustrate my point and that is why I used it. I will continue to explore the idea of freedom on this blog in the future.