if the government gives people a freedom, hypothesize that organized private entities will come to exist to exploit that freedom.
inspired by women's rights. were women granted equal rights to employment (and to institutions supporting employment like education) intentionally to give corporations a new source of labor to exploit? then, if both parents work (are forced to work), the stresses of work may result in a decrease in mental health of both parents simultaneously, whose effects are felt by the children. this is an externality.
organized crime is another more obvious example. it flourishes when and where government is weak, which could be interpreted as a form of freedom.
many make the comparison between big corporations and organized crime.
freedom of religion, then organized religion exploiting people through indoctrination.
freedom of speech? not sure about this one. we are looking for a situation in which person A exploits person B's right to free speech, to the benefit of A and detriment of B. maybe seeding viral misinformation for political purposes.
when politically choosing more or less freedom, one is actually trying to choose the lesser of evils, who will oppress you less, the government or private entities. if the law favors private entities ("more freedom"), competition and market forces might steer things toward less oppressive private entities. or it might not: monopolies, lock-in, network effects. also externalities as mentioned above cause people to make suboptimal choices.
"freedom" and "liberty" favor the organized. as such, they are means for the organized to oppress and exploit the less organized. it's likely a feedback system: the organized use oppression to prevent the oppressed people from themselves organizing. perhaps freedom and liberty paradoxically result in oppression more often than not. the privately organized will politically favor more freedom and liberty.
No comments :
Post a Comment