Interesting article on the differences between personal & collective freedom.
OPINION: There is a difference between 'negative liberty' and 'positive liberty'.
www.nzherald.co.nz
Unfortunately the people who would benefit most from reading & understanding it probably won't.
Anyone who can write, read, or believe
restrictions designed to protect us from Covid-19 actually enhance our overall freedom must be suffering from a fatal dose of cognitive dissonance.
* To think that compulsory house detention leads to freedom is ridiculous.
* Forcing people to leave their jobs and in many cases lose those jobs is not a freedom.
* Banning people from travelling interstate or overseas is the opposite of freedom.
* Preventing Australians from going to a Queensland hospital because "Queensland hospitals are for Queenslanders" is a draconian freedom stripping action of a near-totalitarian government.
* Forcing people to take a medical procedure is the last thing that a definition of freedom entails.
* Shooting protestors is not an exercise in freedom.
* Banning people from seeing dying loved ones and severely restricting their access to funerals doesn't happen in free societies.
* Banning church attendance is anti-freedom at its very essence.
In summary, taking by force the individual's right to personal decision making is diametrically opposed to the concept of freedom.
The following definition of freedom tells us that none of the restrictions are in any way associated with freedom, even if you equivocate between nebulous concepts as negative and positive freedom:
Freedom: noun
- The condition of not being in prison or captivity.
- The condition of being free of restraints, especially the ability to act without control or interference by another or by circumstance.
- The condition of not being controlled by another nation or political power; political independence.
Finally, relying on
The Conversation for any semblance of scholarship is laughable. More far left and big-government biased you can't imagine.