Quote and Query

I read this quote by Benjamin Franklin: 'Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.' after reading someone say that a wise man once said that 'those who trade freedom for security, deserve neither freedom or security', and it made me think quite a bit.

For a start, how the meanings differ depending on the context, and what that could mean for different people. I'm going to try and describe my thought process in this matter, so it may seem a little bit odd or confusing - it is to me, and it's my brain!

First. What kind of freedom, and for what kind of security? Are we talking about the kind of freedom that you would associate with a job? Like instead of choosing an interesting career which may make it hard to find employment, you choose a run-of-the-mill salary-based job.

Since work makes up a large portion of our lives, that would, in essence, still be a situation of choosing security instead of freedom, and in what situation would that be acceptable? Since it's what most people choose, regardless of dependents or not.

If you take the quote directly, and take it to mean personal liberty and literal safety, what situations would this apply to? Should there be times when such a statement would not be feasibly applicable?

Could I create a situation in order to apply this statement to myself? I tried to think. First, I decided, I had to decide what 'essential liberty, and 'temporary safety' were, by my personal definitions.

What is 'essential liberty' to me? I would have to say that the root of my essential liberty is the freedom to act in a manner which ensures fairness through choice. For example, what I say, where I go, what I choose to buy, who I choose to see - or not, my interests, my hobbies, how I spend my money, my religion, my general non-specific behaviour and the ability to live in a style which causes little or no discomfort to my individual tastes, be that through my friends, family and people in authority who affect me directly.

What would destroy my 'essential liberty'? Being unable to chose my religion, how I live, what I say, believe, think, and where I go. Being unable to express myself, either through interaction with others, through my interests and hobbies, clothes, music and food, or being made to conform to another's belief in lifestyle without reason. Being submitted to abuse or unfairness and inequality in my daily life.

What does 'temporary safety' mean to me? Feeling physically safe, having a roof over my head, being warm and dry, not over-worked or constantly tired. Knowing where I will be tomorrow. Knowing when I can or will be able to eat. Being able to go to sleep knowing I'm not in immediate danger. The knowledge that my family and friends are safe. Being able to find and keep work or a career or being able to gain information and knowledge through schooling, college, study, libraries, etc...basically good and free access to information I want or need.

What would destroy my 'temporary safety'? Not knowing where I'll sleep that night, and similar circumstances, being constantly cold and wet and uncomfortable for long periods with no chance of relief, not knowing when I can/will eat and no resources to procure food for either myself or my family. Being in any danger, either short-term, constant, or having the threat of harm hang above me. Being harmed. Being unable to find gainful long-term employment. Not having any money. No education, or information, with no chance to gain either.

So, now that I have this in my mind. Can I create some scenarios? Easily.

Situation one:

 I find myself in a strange place, maybe hurt, maybe not. I do not have any money, it's cold, getting dark, and I don't know anyone to contact for help. I do not know where the authorities are, and I have no way to find out. I have no options.

After a few nights or more of this, with the situation not improving, I get an offer from someone. Work for them, on their property in exchange for room, board and medical treatment should the need arise. The problem? The property is in the middle of nowhere, and I will be unable to leave once I sign a contract. I have no other comfortable options and I am getting weaker by the day, with the threat of harm becoming more likely with each passing day.

Would I go? Would I trade my liberty, my freedom for safety and security?

Honestly? Yes.

Situation two:

There's a job promotion coming up, with an amazing jump in pay, enough to secure my finances for life by enabling me to buy a house and have extra for a nest egg and emergencies - and that's just for the short-term, long-term it looks even better.

The catch?

I have to change my religion to one suitably comfortable for the person/firm I will be working for. This entails deciding how I will dress, who I can speak to, and where I go. My expenses will be monitored, and my expenditure in goods may be vetoed. My personal life will remain free from scrutiny only so long as it's upheld in an honourable manner.

Would I choose the job? Would I trade my liberty, my freedom for safety and security?

In this instance...no. I wouldn't.

End scenarios.

So, what's the difference? In the first scenario I chose security, in the second, freedom.

The question I must then ask myself, is why? Why would I choose freedom in one situation, but not in the other?

I think I would have to say that in the first instance my standard of life was very bad. Regardless of how it occurred, I was not personally safe. I knew that I would come to harm and possibly lose my life, and thus any chance of ever regaining my freedom or security if I did not give up something there and then. Maybe not immediately, but eventually.

However, in the second case, it was only my level of comfort which was affected. My life was not hard, I was not in danger, and things wouldn't change for the worst simply because I did not chose to accept conditions on a promotion which I did not depend on or urgently need.

So the difference was life over comfort.

If the scenarios changed though, like I had skills worth money in the first instance, or street savvy, or money...I may not have chosen security. In the second, if I had debts and/or multiple dependents, I may have chosen security over freedom, to ensure the health and wellbeing of my family.

I guess I won't know how I'd really react, since both scenarios are merely imaginary. But I now have an inkling, and a slightly greater understanding of the quote and it's application.

Could I throw out an invitation from any readers here to give me their views on this, or their own scenarios and decisions, and their reasons why?

Hugs all,

~Shi-koi~