Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Freedom is not a goal, but a direction

edwardsnowden.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 266 posts

Re: Freedom is not a goal, but a direction

#51

Post by NikolaNovak »

ttfkam wrote: post #45
lvass wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You can still do that in any society. Even though it's illegal, you can run a red light or cheat on your taxes By that logic, there is no such thing as restriction of freedom, as it assumes even someone's ability to jail you does not restrict your freedom in any way. People in jail are free as a corollary. How is this not absurd? It only makes sense if you hate freedom and want to argue against it to people low on r…

Apparently you haven't read anything by Jean-Paul Sartre.

One can read and disagree (that's what makes reading philosophy hard; you want to argue, discuss, counter the narrative, take it into another direction, deny the assumption, put forward another hypothesis or explanation... but the book just sits there, static and smug, plowing ahead with whatever very specific point and perspective auther has already made up their mind on :)

Re: Freedom is not a goal, but a direction

#52

Post by marginalia_nu »

TecoAndJix wrote: post #47
marginalia_nu wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you plunge a sword into your chest, you also can't make choices later on. Does that mean it's impossible to choose to plunge a sword into your chest?

You are free to make a choice even when the end result is restricting future freedom (sword=death, illegal action=prison/death). So you can in any moment "be totally free" in virtually any society as long as concerns for freedom in future moments are irrelevant to you

Yes, this is indeed my point.

Re: Freedom is not a goal, but a direction

#53

Post by rob_c »

Not sure I agree with the title. Freedom should be a right that isn't to be taken from you, not a journey or a goal. Shame the rest of the article reads like a love letter to Ai (not a complaining about the artist I like his work).

But given the article's author, whenever he speaks or writes I'm expecting more somehow...

Re: Freedom is not a goal, but a direction

#55

Post by 0xdeadb00f »

ttfkam wrote: post #41

You do not extend tolerance to those who would deny your humanity. Want to know how to fight back against authoritarianism? Look to the folks who've been fighting against racism for (literally) hundreds of years. Racism in the US is just fascism that hasn't hit white people yet.

That's a pretty interesting and thought provoking point. Well said!

Re: Freedom is not a goal, but a direction

#57

Post by bobornotbob »

ttfkam wrote: post #41

You do not extend tolerance to those who would deny your humanity. Want to know how to fight back against authoritarianism? Look to the folks who've been fighting against racism for (literally) hundreds of years. Racism in the US is just fascism that hasn't hit white people yet.

"You don't extend tolerance to those who " is the argument that was made by every authoritarian regime in the world.

Re: Freedom is not a goal, but a direction

#58

Post by defaultprimate »

ttfkam wrote: post #41

You do not extend tolerance to those who would deny your humanity. Want to know how to fight back against authoritarianism? Look to the folks who've been fighting against racism for (literally) hundreds of years. Racism in the US is just fascism that hasn't hit white people yet.

>You do not extend tolerance to those who would deny your humanity.

Straight outta Mein Kampf

Re: Freedom is not a goal, but a direction

#59

Post by Ialdaboth »

BobbyJo wrote: post #22
mfcl wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was thinking, I can currently go from NA to Europe today if I wanted to. But that level of technology and orchestration would not be possible in a lawless and barbaric society (at least I don't think so). This possibility offers me a lot of freedom (traveling around the world) and in exchange, I had to follow rules and work. I gave some freedom and got more in exchange. The same thing applies for many other things…

It's a non-static, non-homogenous, equilibrium. It changes with technology, environment, and culture. As surveillance gets easier, we need to choose having crime for the sake of privacy. As the manufacture of dangerous materials and weapons gets easier, we need to choose between living in a more dangerous world, or slowing human progress. Not every culture has the same risk tolerance. Not every time period has the sa…

You can have both surveillance and crime, they are not mutually exclusive.

Re: Freedom is not a goal, but a direction

#60

Post by ReactiveJelly »

bena wrote: post #32

I believe I've gotten downvoted here for voicing a similar thought. Some things can't be "solved", you constantly have to do the work. Democracy, relationships, tolerance, etc and I guess freedom, but that's similar to democracy. There's no end goal to them. You can lose them if you don't work at preserving them.

agreed. "The struggle for justice is an ongoing and necessary pursuit that should prevail over laws and institutions."

its a fight against entropy, same as road repairs.

its not that I don't want big sweeping reforms, but I believe in gradient descent. all good progress is good progress. like the UK restricting conversion therapy. I want it gone, but this is still an improvement.

Post reply on HN