Is this a flaw in freedom?

A statement made by a recent commenter made it clear that they believe the friction seen within the freedom “movement” is a flaw. Instead I would say it is a strength. Freedom is simply, “the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint.” Sadly, many believe freedom is the same as liberty or equality. This article addresses these questions put forth by other individuals.20130109-173251.jpg

Hierarchy when not forced by states and aggressive action is natural in our world. Anyone who studies animals, plants and even insects soon see that hierarchies exists regardless the social engine. As free individuals who accept responsibility for their own lives and actions understand is that they are able to decide whether to be apart of that hierarchy or not. Hierarchy is not of itself evil, it is only evil when forced actions and interactions are the result. The commenter stated, “By embracing the idea of capitalistic individualism one does not remove hierarchy.” In this he is correct to a degree, for capitalism regardless ones approach is a system set up to benefit those with the greatest access and control of it. This is a simple fact of any rigid system and becomes especially apparent with monetary systems and state rule. However a system does not hierarchy make, nor is hierarchy evil of its own.

He continued on and said, “One enforces it. The liberty movement will cannibalize itself as con artists in search of the individualist buck rise to the top like pond scum.” And yet again has made a salient point that indeed reaches into the depths of any social movement regardless name. Psychopaths, socio-paths and narcissistic humans are drawn to anything in which they may be able to hold sway over others through word or deed. The only way to prevent this is to continue educating, promoting knowledge and by exposing those who are frauds for the sake of profit for whom they really are. It is my goal and has been my goal to do so with regularity here on jessetalksback. Of course, by default this makes me a target for the angst of many, though it has seen fruition with those true frauds being found out for whom they really are. 20130113-191018.jpg

Next he said, “Until you realize that the only way to eliminate the tyranny of government is to insure that all are equal in a system wherein no one leads because no one is better than anyone else you will struggle to reconcile your methods with your ideals.” This is where the commenter fails to follow through with a brilliant beginning. Because hierarchy is natural order and is normal within and without nature regardless your belief, this idea that somehow humans can become bees or ants is flawed at its core. Bees and ants are hive minded creatures, they are not individuals, they are not capable of functioning alone and are simply part of a much larger entity. Humans have long proven to be anything but hive minded creatures. We can and do regularly function and live quite well completely alone as well as within groups. Unfortunately, this individual has also made the mistake of believing that equality is the same as freedom, or worse that equality is somehow better then freedom.

Freedom as we have seen is commonly defined as, “the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint.” While equality is commonly defined as, “the state of being equal, esp. in status, rights, and opportunities.” By definition equality requires that individuals not be free to decide what is best for themselves, rather it requires that individuals decide based on what is best for all. Again, humans are not hive minded creatures, we are more akin to wolves or deer in that we desire and maintain family groupings and natural order emerges from that, hierarchy as it were. Government and the long maintained fallacy that government is necessary has been ingrained into we humans to the point where it is extremely difficult for most of us to break that psychological hold. Many who claim to be liberty activists also cannot sever the ties that monetary systems, the very core of governments, have placed on them. Yes, we all use some form of monetary approach, however, we can break those bonds by simply seeing these systems regardless name for what they truly are. Control. 20130114-211936.jpg

Lastly the commenter states, “Inequality is not equality. It always leads to tyranny. There is no getting around it. The minute you decide you have the right to determine who “deserves” food, shelter, healthcare, education,… you consent to be part of hierarchy and you will be ruled.” It is with this that I find the most disagreement though I understand the approach. The assumption is made by the commenter that without government someone still needs to decide what others get. This is an automatic fail, in fact it is beyond that it is an illogical assumption based in flawed knowledge of what freedom really is. No man can free another man from that which binds them mentally and emotionally. While many stories abound of those men, those great heroes who have freed so many others physically, these same heroes simply reconstituted the bonds of slavery to a mental and emotional state versus simply a physical one.

Freedom is a purely individual thing. Each of us has the ability to be free right now today. However, we must break the bonds of slavery that hold our minds, thoughts and emotions in check. We may remain physical slaves of others due to whichever state is currently in control, however, by freeing our minds we have become truly free. As the Scarecrow said, “If you can go and find me a leg just like this one, I shall be very obliged.” I enjoy the assistance and help that comes from reading others works, watching others videos and listening as others explain their thoughts. However, until I take myself in hand I cannot be free. And as I have said many times, I do not want to be equal even though broken down I may be, I simply want my freedom and no man can stand in the way of that.

Thoughts? Questions?


Free the mind and the body will follow




About Jesse Mathewson

Jesse Mathewson is the author of the popular blog, and provides commentary to many varied places based on a background that includes education in criminal justice, history, religion and even insurgency tactics and tactical training. His current role in his community is as an organizer of sorts and a preacher of community solidarity and agorism. He also runs Liberty Practical Training, a self defense school specializing in the practical applications of defensive approaches versus the theoretical. As an agorist, voluntaryist and atheist his life is seen as crazy and wild by many, though once they get to know him most realize he is a bluntly honest individual who will give you the shirt off his back if he believes it is necessary to help you. Very simple, "That which is voluntary between all individuals involved is always right, if it is not voluntary, it is always wrong."
This entry was posted in Agorism, Authored by Jesse Mathewson and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Is this a flaw in freedom?

  1. Shepard says:

    Thanks for the blog post!


  2. Pingback: This is a new beginning a freedom fighters last chance | NoMoreRestrictionsFreedomNow

  3. Mike Shipley says:

    I feel that a rejection of “equality” as a political value is a reactionary overkill … In fact, notions of egalitarianism have long been part of classical liberalism and this is what has become twisted. We lost the idea that “from liberty springs equality” and instead somehow came to believe that the system should FORCE equality in ways that actually lead to inequality. Whether this has been through the political naivete and therefore vulnerability of marginalized groups when offered state power, a coordinated effort by powerful people to abuse these populations for their own personal gain, or a combination of both, this does not take away from the original beauty of the concept of egalitarianism AS IT PERTAINED TO CLASSICAL LIBERALISM or as we call it today, libertarianism. The simple truth is that if we are all FREE, then we are all EQUAL IN FREEDOM and this is worth striving for. Whether it is through a legal structure, or some other form of organization, justice must be blind to economic inequalities; which is why Lady Justice is depicted with a blindfold … she must treat all, rich and poor, with the same set of principles. This obviously was very unpopular with the aristocrats of Old Europe, who were used to being above the law. This is what egalitarianism truly had always reached for: not a system that was overtly more or less cruel to different populations groups, but one that was devoid of such distinctions. The modern notion of “equality”, however, has turned this on its head. It sees no problem dividing people into groups and treating them differently (for example, “tax the rich”!!) and thus losing its moral claim to the liberal values it once held dear – egalitarianism among them. In order to reclaim this important principles, we must not reject it completely, and find ourselves arguing that somehow political inequality is desirable … In fact, once we accept the notion that egalitarianism is not worth speaking out for, we become no better than those who are deliberately creating inequality in its name. It is a principle too important to let go of …. It’s a moral high ground which we should stand upon, and defend.


    • It can be, equality as it is used politically now is not the same as classic liberalism desired. But then you know this I think. 🙂

      Regardless, it is to the terms others use and their use inherent that we humans tend to the most personal detriment for until we discard what others think is right to follow our own path based in those who came before us, before we do this, we cannot be free.

      I love bouncing ideas back and forth with yourself and others Mike and thank you for that opportunity.


      • I’ve always seen the whole “equality” thing as a bit of a red herring, IMO. First of all, equality doesn’t exist in nature, because evolution is a thing. If all sets of genes were all equally well-suited for their environments, then natural selection would never occur.

        But at the same time, the fact that people are innately unequal doesn’t justify things like slavery, genocide of “inferior races” (inferior by what criteria?), or other forms of oppression. That’s because you can’t derive an “ought” from an “is”.

        It’s kind of a useless term really. “Human equality” is a useless term because it neither describes reality accurately nor prescribes any course of action. Why waste time over it?


Comments are closed.