America - The Freest Country?

There was some discussion of this in the healthcare thread. One poster stated that it would be to find a country more free than the U.S., a few others sought ot quantify "freedom", etc. I din't think much of it, but I saw this post on SA that made me give it another thought:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GunnerJ

American Exceptionalism is one of the least examined yet most powerful forces in an American's worldview. We are taught from childhood that the US is the greatest nation on Earth, that we alone cherish liberty, that we have the best standard of living. It is so pervasive and insidious, from political speeches to nationalistic anthems in popular music, that it can be impossible to notice without some external standard for contrast, but for most people it manifests as an unexplained consternation at any suggestion that something America (as a national gestalt) does is inferior or wrong.

Imagine for a second that you run across someone stating without irony, "Well, of course, Darwinists have put a stranglehold on free scientific discussion." Capture the feeling of baffled annoyance at how fundamentally wrong and ignorant that statement is. That's how an American feels when someone says, for example, "Well, of course, America's military enforces an imperial ambition." Even American leftists and liberals are normally only willing to admit that America's actions and policies are flawed in execution, but have good intentions. Witness how so much of the pro-UHC critique of healthcare in the US has an undercurrent of "We're being shamed by those other countries, how can we let America fall behind anyone?"

I have a feeling that when LF posters say "death to america"...if they're Americans, it's not so much because they really strongly oppose their country's policies and feel badly for/angry about the wrongs America has done (though they might), it's more because their country is not living up to the grandiose expectations they have been conditioned to believe are its rightful and natural condition. (Or maybe I'm just projecting.)

---

I, for one, am inclined to agree. This is plainly manifest in many of my friends, and even I was brought up to beleive that American freedom was absolutely uparalelled. I would contest, however, that Holland, Switzerland, and (especially) any Scandinavian country are more or less equatable with us in terms of personal freedom.

Also, as a side note, American exceptionalism is a large factor in the healthcare debate, too. So while I'm trying to keep this narrow in focus, it is difficult for me to do so without making at least some mention to that debate.

But I've rambled enough. What do you all think?

There are two freedoms - freedom from the government, and freedom to do whatever you want. Or you could say freedom from and freedom to. America isn't perfect in either one of those, but I believe that America leads the world, or at least most of the world, in how they balance them. This, I believe, results in America being the world's most free nation, even though there are naturally imperfections.

I reply to your other question where you can't think of a freer nation and I say Switzerland again.

Am I wrong?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

Am I wrong?

---

Not necessarily. I just disagree, though Switzerland would be very high on the list, possibly tied.

Actually my main point was that it is very hard to use a nominative statement as a fact.

Freedom is personal and as such nominative. So to use a nominative statement as a quantitative fact is fraught with problems.

As for benchmarking freedoms look at lifestyle factors. Look at lifespan (which is a good litmus test for health both physical and mental), crime rates, prison population, equality of opportunity (economic, vote, legal), literacy, ease of education access and quality, class structure and others. Then for freedoms focus on what is the spirit of the law and what is in fact allowed. Most freedoms are in fact liberty (freedoms bounded by law) and some of these laws are a lot more strict in all nations then we realise.

For instance watch what happens to your house if you don't pay your rates. Many of us don't realise that real estate is more like long term leasing then absolute ownership. Just check out what can happen to a farmer if a gold seam is found 6 inches beneath the ground.

=][=

That and I don't think being healthy equals less freedom for oneself or society.

Prison population is one thing I was thinking off.. America would be let down badly there..

Although technically isn't somewhere like Somalia the most free place on earth....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

Although technically isn't somewhere like Somalia the most free place on earth....

---

It isn't a good idea to confuse anarchy and liberty.

Yeah, I'd say our prison population is a pretty hard strike against us being the "freest." Not a knockout blow, but definitely a hit.

But in one area America is going from strength to strength—the incarceration of its population. America has less than 5% of the world’s people but almost 25% of its prisoners. It imprisons 756 people per 100,000 residents, a rate nearly five times the world average. About one in every 31 adults is either in prison or on parole. Black men have a one-in-three chance of being imprisoned at some point in their lives. “A Leviathan unmatched in human history”, is how Glenn Loury, professor of social studies at Brown University, characterises America’s prison system.

Conditions in the Leviathan’s belly can be brutal. More than 20% of inmates report that they have been sexually assaulted by guards or fellow inmates. Federal prisons are operating at more than 130% of capacity. A sixth of prisoners suffer from mental illness of one sort or another. There are four times as many mentally ill people in prison as in mental hospitals.

As well as being brutal, prisons are ineffective. They may keep offenders off the streets, but they fail to discourage them from offending. Two-thirds of ex-prisoners are re-arrested within three years of being released. The punishment extends to prisoners’ families, too. America’s 1.7m “prison orphans” are six times more likely than their peers to end up in prison themselves. The punishment also sometimes continues after prisoners are released. America is one of only a handful of countries that bar prisoners from voting, and in some states that ban is lifelong: 2% of American adults and 14% of black men are disfranchised because of criminal convictions.

That is the difference between America and the European States. While American culture values Personal independence over Social Interdependence, Europe does quite the contrary. Bringing the Healthcare example, if you are out of healthcare insurance in America, for whatever reason (Ranging from being so ill stricken that a healthcare insurance's price is astronomical to simply not caring) you're on your own. People don't give a :daisy: if you die due to healthcare insurance complications. It was your problem. In Europe, you get treated free (Or partially free, paying only a small fee). Likewise if you are in a difficult or handicapped position, in America you can't count on governmental aid to help reduce the gap of your limitations to others (For instance, if you're middle-aged in the USA but you can't find a job in your area of expertise as you're too old, you can't count on the assistence of the government.) While in Europe, you usually find tax bonuses and other assorted incentives for companies to employ the more older unemployed who have a much greater risk of long-term unemployment, which is one of the major causes for concern in an economy. Thus, you see that there is Social Interdependence in Europe, where the government intervenes by giving incentives for the society as a whole to do the right thing.

I usually see a good example for European Socialism: Its like the Jedi Persuasion. The government attempts to encourage society to adopt a certain "stance" in accord with the policy conducted in the government. Of course companies aren't forced to take the incentives the government sets up. I believe the way policy is conducted in Europe (European Socialism as opposed to American Liberalism/Capitalism/Individualism) results in a much fairer society as a whole.

Let's see..

A) The government spies on its citizens (Echelon, anyone?).
B) Media is often being cencored (was just recently it was allowed to show troops coming home in body bags again).
C) Censorship against "bad" language on mainstream TV.
D) Second most video camera filled country on earth, watching your every step.
E) Insurance companies has HUGE rights to check medical background and other things (had a depression, dont tell the doctor, your life insurance will cost more!).

I could go on...

But meh!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Yeah, I'd say our prison population is a pretty hard strike against us being the "freest." Not a knockout blow, but definitely a hit.

But in one area America is going from strength to strength—the incarceration of its population. America has less than 5% of the world’s people but almost 25% of its prisoners. It imprisons 756 people per 100,000 residents, a rate nearly five times the world average. About one in every 31 adults is either in prison or on parole. Black men have a one-in-three chance of being imprisoned at some point in their lives. “A Leviathan unmatched in human history”, is how Glenn Loury, professor of social studies at Brown University, characterises America’s prison system.

Conditions in the Leviathan’s belly can be brutal. More than 20% of inmates report that they have been sexually assaulted by guards or fellow inmates. Federal prisons are operating at more than 130% of capacity. A sixth of prisoners suffer from mental illness of one sort or another. There are four times as many mentally ill people in prison as in mental hospitals.

As well as being brutal, prisons are ineffective. They may keep offenders off the streets, but they fail to discourage them from offending. Two-thirds of ex-prisoners are re-arrested within three years of being released. The punishment extends to prisoners’ families, too. America’s 1.7m “prison orphans” are six times more likely than their peers to end up in prison themselves. The punishment also sometimes continues after prisoners are released. America is one of only a handful of countries that bar prisoners from voting, and in some states that ban is lifelong: 2% of American adults and 14% of black men are disfranchised because of criminal convictions.

---

Also consider the fact that a significant amount of the US prison population consists of non-violent drug offenders.

Freedom doesn't mean anything.

As the other topic pointed out, each individual has is own view of freedom. For one, it's the right to bear arms, for the other, it's the right to have an abortion, for yet another person, it's the right to believe in a religion.

Most of the time, one person will think that her view of freedom is the right one, while trying to limit other persons's liberty when said liberty goes against her own values (one could think of the freedom to have an abortion, often dismissed by the traditional apostles of 'freedom', but obviously, there are other examples on the other side of the political spectrum - I for myself, despite being a leftist, oppose unlimited freedom of religion).
Freedom is also cultural. For the US, and for the people who admire the US, freedom mostly means little government. For myself, and I think most Europeans, access to a decent healthcare system is also part of 'freedom'.
For a french, unchecked freedom of religion is not freedom. Hence why we are very touchy about laïcité, whether it's related to catholicism or to islam. Yet, as the POTUS rightly pointed out when he visited France in June, the french conception of freedom of religion is not really freedom: people can't do whatever they want and don't give a crap about the rest of the society. Another example of 'my freedom is free-er than yours': I think my freedom to not have to bear with other people's religion is more important than their freedom to show me they're catholic or muslim.

Thing is, the US from their very beginning, have been claiming to be the land of the free, the country of freedom. They created this mythology, and decided to stick to it, even though history has shown repeatedly it's nothing more than a national myth (one could bring up the fate of the native populations, the ACW, the MacCarthysm era and the overall censorship of any communist or socialist idea, the limitations of civic liberties enforced during all the wars fought by the US, the Patriot Act, and the list goes on).

I'm not saying the US have a worse record than any other western country - I don't think they do : European democratic countries have repeatedly trampled freedom when they had to, or thought they had to. I also think the US puts more emphasis on individual freedom, at the expense of society (and I don't think it's a good idea), though it seems to me this individual freedom is strongly kept in check by a wannabe police state.
What I'm saying is that the myth of the the US as the most free state in the world is just another national myth, which really has little ground. Just like France (which is in many ways a country similar to the US) likes to present herself as the country of the Human Rights (tm), and as history shown us, this is quite a big joke.

Quote:

---

That is the difference between America and the European States. While American culture values Personal independence over Social Interdependence, Europe does quite the contrary. Bringing the Healthcare example, if you are out of healthcare insurance in America, for whatever reason (Ranging from being so ill stricken that a healthcare insurance's price is astronomical to simply not caring) you're on your own. People don't give a :daisy: if you die due to healthcare insurance complications.

---

Besides, what's the use of freedom if you're dead/severely ill?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

Although technically isn't somewhere like Somalia the most free place on earth....

---

I just thought the same. :2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

It isn't a good idea to confuse anarchy and liberty.

---

Isn't anarchy the ultimate form of freedom from government then?
And if you're free from government, then there are no government restrictions on your personal freedom either, which is why Somalians can be pirates and Americans can't! :smash:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

I reply to your other question where you can't think of a freer nation and I say Switzerland again.

Am I wrong?

---

But they're not a real country. I have it on excellent authority that they're just a collection of Italian, French & German crimelords, forming a tax haven.

I think Meneldil has the straightest shot so far. Very few and far between are the people that actually admit to this, but in general, "freedom" means freedom to do what I want and "freedom" to prevent you from doing what I don't want you to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

It isn't a good idea to confuse anarchy and liberty.

---

Neither is it smart to confuse anarchy and chaos...

Firstly, I follow Jolts statement of Personal independence and Social Interdependence as the 2 defining characteristics of freedom. Which one you prefer is culture related but it doesn't mean that one is more important than the other.

Secondly, I question the benefit of being the 'most free' country. I believe that everything should have boundaries in order to achieve a greater surplus value than could otherwise be achieved. Just think about what the free market resulted in for the moment. Nearly everybody now agrees that 'laissez faire' isn't the solution.
Similarly, I don't believe that neigh unlimited freedom, be it personal or social, is a desirable situation to be in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Very few and far between are the people that actually admit to this, but in general, "freedom" means freedom to do what I want and "freedom" to prevent you from doing what I don't want you to do.

---

Oh yeah? Well then, Mister Smartypants, what exactly did Mel Gibson die for?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Oh yeah? Well then, Mister Smartypants, what exactly did Mel Gibson die for?

---

Freedom!!

:inquisitive:

Wait, do yo mean in Braveheart or The Patriot? If the latter, he died because it was an awful movie.

USA USA USA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

USA USA USA

---

LOL, good one!

Took me some time to get it, but now I did it's sarcasm at its best :laugh4:

No need to make a point, or think about the issue... Just wave the flag and be patriotic...

Of all the countries iv read about the Netherlands seems like the most free. America is nowhere the most free since the prison population is enormously huge, the goverment WANTS people in prison, have no doubt about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mooks

Of all the countries iv read about the Netherlands seems like the most free. America is nowhere the most free since the prison population is enormously huge, the goverment WANTS people in prison, have no doubt about that.

---

Depends, we certainly have the most civil liberties but the Americans are better protected (in law at least theory and practise huh) against their governments, the Netherlands is a bit of a townshall-junta, you wouldn't believe how many rules there are for very small things, and it can get very childish and very random.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mooks

Of all the countries iv read about the Netherlands seems like the most free. America is nowhere the most free since the prison population is enormously huge, the goverment WANTS people in prison, have no doubt about that.

---

?

So that it can pay for them instead of them paying for themselves???

On the topic, I don't believe that USA is the freest country in the world. I'd put many European countries ahead of US...

As Meneldil said, it's just a national myth... A myth that goes a long way back, when people were slaves and/or were treated as second class citizens because of their colour, ancestry, religion etc..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mooks

Of all the countries iv read about the Netherlands seems like the most free. America is nowhere the most free since the prison population is enormously huge, the goverment WANTS people in prison, have no doubt about that.

---

Are the people there even freer than what they are in Poland? :poland:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

It isn't a good idea to confuse anarchy and liberty.

---

True. That is at the basis of the so called "Social Contract". While in anarchy you have total freedom from a theorical point of view, the fact is that if you annoy/oppose/have something valuable to someone else in that total freedom area, there is virtually nothing to oppose them from harming/killing you but yourself. If/once they killed you, there is no government to trial for his murder. It is the law of the strongest. Likewise, since there is no Social Cohesion, you are forced to take matters into your own hands, and if someone does oppose you, since there is no other way of preventing other inidividuals from stepping in what you believe is/should be yours (In Nations there is a thing called Law, to which individuals can go to, to force other individuals on the same society to abide by the society's rules), you generally have to defend your possessions through force.

In Anarchy, you sure have no duties, but problem is, you also have no rights. It is the law of the strongest. How do you become stronger in such a way of live? By banding together with other people to bully/kill third-party groups/individuals so you/your group can get what you want. Thus we get to where Somalia was a few years ago. A country run by clans/gangs, each with their own little territory where they could exploit as much as possible for their own well being.

As such, in Anarchy, if you are not the strongest, you have no freedom. If you try to have that freedom, you usually wind up dead.

In a cohesive Social construction, you also don't have full freedom, but you have it inside legal boundaries, and you can use those boundaries to theoretically do anything you want, despite how many people you bother. (For instance, pornography has appalled many people. In Anarchy, you'd probably see some conservative/religious individuals take the matter into their own hands and exterminating those which do not follow their own principals. In Society, they cannot do that, for as long as the majority of society, through the laws, allows such industry to exist.)

Thus you can conclude that you have much more practical freedom in a society than in anarchy.

I'll point you to HoreTore's message:

Quote:

---

Neither is it smart to confuse anarchy and chaos...

---

What you're describing is chaos, not anarchy. Somalia is not an anarchic country, it's merely a chaotic country.

People wrote hundreds of books about anarchy. I doubt many of them described it simply as the law of the strongest.

Oh but in practical ways, it is and there is no way around it. By strongest I mean obviously the most capable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Let's see..

A) The government spies on its citizens (Echelon, anyone?).
B) Media is often being cencored (was just recently it was allowed to show troops coming home in body bags again).
C) Censorship against "bad" language on mainstream TV.
D) Second most video camera filled country on earth, watching your every step.
E) Insurance companies has HUGE rights to check medical background and other things (had a depression, dont tell the doctor, your life insurance will cost more!).

I could go on...

But meh!

---

A) My government does that too. And worse.
B) Check.
C) Yep. I'd consider ours to be worse, but hey.
D) Cameras are bad, but I can't find a statistic to back up that remark. All I can find is that Britain is the worst.
E) That doesn't really have anything to do with liberty, in my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Neither is it smart to confuse anarchy and chaos...

---

Quote:

---

anarchy [an-ark-ee]
Noun
1. general lawlessness and disorder
2. the absence of government [Greek an without + arkh- leader]

---

"Freedom" to be a slave, that's what the illusion mostly consists of.

Quote:

---

cha⋅os[key-os]
–noun
1. a state of utter confusion or disorder; a total lack of organization or order.
2. any confused, disorderly mass: a chaos of meaningless phrases.
3. the infinity of space or formless matter supposed to have preceded the existence of the ordered universe.
4. (initial capital letter) the personification of this in any of several ancient Greek myths.
5. Obsolete. a chasm or abyss.

---

Anarchy as a political state - as defined since the 18th century - obviously refers to the lack of governement (or to the lack of state). Not to general disorder. I think you know this already, but since you decided to use dictionary and what not.

Even people from the World Bank (which could hardly be described as a leftist agency) describe Somalia as being in a state of chaos rather than in a state of anarchy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jolt

Oh but in practical ways, it is and there is no way around it. By strongest I mean obviously the most capable.

---

I beg to disagree. The second Paris Commune wasn't ruled by the strongest or by the more capable, and I think the same applies to the anarcho-syndicalist communes of the Spanish civil war era. As those are more or less the only example of applied anarchism we have, I can't see where you got the idea that anarchy = chaos.
Note that I don't think anarchism proved to be efficient, or to be a possible political state. I'm just sayin' it's not simply rule of the strongest or chaos.

Americans tend to conflate the terms anarchy and chaos. That too goes pretty far back in our "national myth" since we view the early Confederation days as having been too problematic.

Freedom in the USA is mostly freedom "from" as it was put ealier.

Our freedoms are mostly encoded as limitations ON government rather than specific assertions of rights. You aren't really granted the freedom TO do very much, so much as the government is prevented from infringing on your ability to do what you want.


Interestingly, the right TO keep and bear arms is a "to" statement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

As Meneldil said, it's just a national myth... A myth that goes a long way back, when people were slaves and/or were treated as second class citizens because of their colour, ancestry, religion etc..

---

Just for information, America brought freedom and equality long after the British did and Britain were the ones who dismantled the slave trade and the practise of slavery.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

?

So that it can pay for them instead of them paying for themselves???

---

Look at the deficit and how much it is increasing, I really doubt the government really cares about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Americans tend to conflate the terms anarchy and chaos. That too goes pretty far back in our "national myth" since we view the early Confederation days as having been too problematic.

---

But.... Doesn't relatively many americans define themselves as libertarians?

Anarchy, as a political term, simply means not having a government. What you put in place of it defines your brand of anarchism, it could be unions, extended family units, militias, etc.

But then again, american libertarians seems to enjoy putting people in prison, while a true anarchist would have an extreme hatred against putting anyone in prison....

On the point about Prisons in America they do have privately operated prisons which (not sure about this bit) have thier value based on the amount of prisnors they have... (as the goverment pays per prisnor)

So privately owned prisons certainly want more prisnors then all you need is a corrupt officail (or campaign contributions as thier called) and all of a sudden a crack down starts and thier rolling in money....

I watched an intresting documentary called the drug war the last white hope and it talks about alot of this stuff...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

It isn't a good idea to confuse anarchy and liberty.

---

Don't confuse freedom with independence either. A 17th century frenchman had less freedom but more independence than a 21st century London City financier.

It's a balancing act. A fun fact, the European country with most legislation text is actually Spain. It is also the european country where less legislation is enforced as a percentage of the total. As usual, quality and quantity do not go hand in hand.

I would have a lot more respect for a government which enforced a very small amount of legislation rigidly and without exception than Spain.

Personal freedoms-wise, well, we're getting less and less. In that sense Somalia probably is the freeest place on the planet.

ohh forgot about that...

Well the context of the discussion seemed to be focused on how much our goverments interfere with our lives... so Somalia would obviously win in that regard...

If you are talking about freedom to live an enjoyable life with little goverment interference we would have to look at things such as crime figures as well, maybe even health as well (UHC for the win ~;))

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

Well the context of the discussion seemed to be focused on how much our goverments interfere with our lives... so Somalia would obviously win in that regard...

---

Uhm..... The Somalian warlords don't interfere with the lives of their underlings? :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Uhm..... The Somalian warlords don't interfere with the lives of their underlings? :inquisitive:

---

Not particularly. If you have a gun you can try and establish your own territory. To be honest, I don't even know what they're fighting for up there anymore. I don't think they know either.

No country's citizens are free. They still have an oppressive apparatus looking over them their entire life.

Ah well.

Uhm..... The Somalian warlords don't interfere with the lives of their underlings?

True I guess, I mean aslong as you don't bother them (or you aren't unwillingly of some use to them) your pretty free to do what you want

Im guessing the laws would be something like don't harm me or my guys or steal from me or my guys, outside of involuntary recruitment (i would think they volunteer being penniless anyway) maybe forced seizure of property as well but again our countrys take property too (admittedly they usually compensate people for it)

Although ill admit I don't know much of the Somalian warlords domestic policys...

I think we should all take a quick scan of Hume's work on this subject, Leviathan, for a refresher on just how much infrastructure "freedom" requires.

In such condition there is no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain: and consequently no culture of the earth; no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea; no commodious building; no instruments of moving and removing such things as require much force; no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

I mean aslong as you don't bother them (or you aren't unwillingly of some use to them) your pretty free to do what you want

Im guessing the laws would be something like don't harm me or my guys or steal from me or my guys, outside of involuntary recruitment (i would think they volunteer being penniless anyway) maybe forced seizure of property as well but again our countrys take property too (admittedly they usually compensate people for it)

Although ill admit I don't know much of the Somalian warlords domestic policys...

---

No, that's wrong. the various warlords, militas etc are best viewed as different governments fighting each other. And as for the laws? It's martial law.

Hmm, Andorra springs to mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

On the point about Prisons in America they do have privately operated prisons which (not sure about this bit) have thier value based on the amount of prisnors they have... (as the goverment pays per prisnor)

So privately owned prisons certainly want more prisnors then all you need is a corrupt officail (or campaign contributions as thier called) and all of a sudden a crack down starts and thier rolling in money....

I watched an intresting documentary called the drug war the last white hope and it talks about alot of this stuff...

---

Private prisons are only a few % of the total US prison population. While propably not helping (due to the reasons you described) it has more to do with the war one drugs combined with "tough on crimes"= long prison sentances, "personal responsibillity"=there's no such thing as structural societal problems that causes crimes and "prisons a rehability centers"= what kind of whacky lefty ideas is this? Prisons should be punishment centers that you fear not some freaking R&R.


As I hinted about in the other thread, as there's such a thing as too much freedom, how does good freedom look like?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

No, that's wrong. the various warlords, militas etc are best viewed as different governments fighting each other. And as for the laws? It's martial law.

---

Are they accepted as national governments by the UN/other countries? Concerning laws, there is also marital law in which a man becomes slave to a woman, or so I read constantly on this here internet, it applies to many western countries.

Pure freedom is hardly reachable, you'd have to grow wings and gills and be able to survive in space to get that(as it is we're slaves to our technical machines once we go there :no:) and that's just for freedom of movement, one of the many areas of freedom.

What about Sealand and the likes as the most free country?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Pure freedom is hardly reachable,

---

Existence is a compromise. :smash:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peasant Phill

What about Sealand and the likes as the most free country?

---

We will see when a country called Sealand starts existing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

We will see when a country called Sealand starts existing

---

They must exist, they invade northern Norway almost every year...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meneldil

Freedom doesn't mean anything.

As the other topic pointed out, each individual has is own view of freedom. For one, it's the right to bear arms, for the other, it's the right to have an abortion, for yet another person, it's the right to believe in a religion.
[...]
What I'm saying is that the myth of the the US as the most free state in the world is just another national myth, which really has little ground. Just like France (which is in many ways a country similar to the US) likes to present herself as the country of the Human Rights (tm), and as history shown us, this is quite a big joke.

---

Yes, that's pretty much it. Freedom is relative, it depends a good deal on what one considers freedom.

If I have a definition, I'll give an answer to the question of whether America is the most free - as measured by that definition.


In absolute terms, applying a gut definition of freedom: for all its imperfections, America has been remarkably succesful in providing a better life, for more of its citizens, for a longer period of time, than, let's say: 'a whole host of other countries who broadly apply the same definitions of succes and freedom as the US'.

Quote:

---

Freedom is relative

---

So that means west virginia must be the most free place on earth, after all if its all relative its all free

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4594392/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

I think we should all take a quick scan of Hume's work on this subject, Leviathan, for a refresher on just how much infrastructure "freedom" requires.

---

That be Hobbes work, managed to get him in the bad books of both sides in the civil war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meneldil

I beg to disagree. The second Paris Commune wasn't ruled by the strongest or by the more capable, and I think the same applies to the anarcho-syndicalist communes of the Spanish civil war era. As those are more or less the only example of applied anarchism we have, I can't see where you got the idea that anarchy = chaos.

---

How much of that is due to the fact that the existing social structures never had time to be properly dismantled?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

That be Hobbes work, managed to get him in the bad books of both sides in the civil war.

---

The sad thing is I knew that and still typed Hume. Entirely my bad, apologies.

I'm tired of Americans who have never been to other parts of the world (and likewise people who have never been to America) who like to say "America is the freest country on earth" it's juvenile. Freedom is an entirely subjective term, depending on whose saying it. Yes, we're definitely one of the freest countries on the planet, but no more than many others. I'm inclined to agree with Husar, the system has flaws, lots and lots of flaws, but maybe it attempts better than most to strike a balance between Economic, Judiciary, and Civic Freedoms. I however wouldn't say, that it's the best system for everybody, and begs a deeper question, what is freedom, exactly?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wakizashi

I'm tired of Americans who have never been to other parts of the world (and likewise people who have never been to America)

---

Not sure you placed the brackets right. Educated americans usually think too highly of Europe for whatever reason no idea. Let's take France for example, ask the average Frenchmen to point out a random European country he/she/french will have no idea. Met some francaises who didn't even know germans speak german, one was a doctor the other was an architect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Not sure you placed the brackets right. Educated americans usually think too highly of Europe for whatever reason no idea.

---

I believe you're right, actually, I know you're right (I have several members in my family that follow this exact line of thought). It's an elitist view, that Europeans, and their culture are far more enlightened than the otherwise brutish, and dim Americans. There's also quite a few Europeans, who themselves believe in this superiority. I could give an example, of an Orgah who seems to think this, but I'm sure you already know who it is (and it's not Louis) :laugh4:. But this nothing new, it's been going on for centuries.

Although, I think your example highlights a human flaw, and not one that is strictly American or European.

I don't think its just America... some people in Britian cast jealous glances towards the mainland thinking of us as loutish thugs...

I would think among the majority of the population Americans are less likely to be like that being the worlds superpower... Im sure the British thought themselves something special back in the day...

“ask the average Frenchmen to point out a random European country he/she/french will have no idea”: Depends on the age of the “average” French. Old generations had to learn maps by heart (and named all the capital cities and rivers and main productions and …. of countries…):laugh4::laugh4:

“Met some francaises who didn't even know germans speak german, one was a doctor the other was an architect.”
I knew it. When I was kid we had compulsory language at school, and choice for the first language was English or German. I knew the level went down right after I left….:laugh4:

“I could give an example, of an Orgah who seems to think this, but I'm sure you already know who it is” I want names!!!!
:yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Not sure you placed the brackets right. Educated americans usually think too highly of Europe for whatever reason no idea. Let's take France for example, ask the average Frenchmen to point out a random European country he/she/french will have no idea. Met some francaises who didn't even know germans speak german, one was a doctor the other was an architect.

---

I've hanged out with the worst kind of scums at times (in high school) and they all knew germans speak german :rolleyes:
I know the average french undergrad is not really smart, but not knowing Germany? Either you met the dumbest french girls ever, or you're simply making it up. People still have to learn by earth the name of every european country and of its capital, as well as the major rivers and mountains if they want to get into a university (and the vast majority of people go to the university). Heck, there's a whole 2 months-long geography lesson about Germany, its culture and its economy in high school.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brenus

“I could give an example, of an Orgah who seems to think this, but I'm sure you already know who it is” I want names!!!!

---

I plead guilty. After having studied for more than 8 months in Canada, I think the Canadian education system would make the french one look marvellous. People in 4th or 5th year of Poli Sci, Geography or History would get beaten to pulp while trying to pass any kind of french first year exam. And I'm not even talking about the completely useless courses, such as 'Philosophy of Love', 'Celtic Culture', 'Feminist Marxism' and other assorted mumbo-jumbo.
Things might be different in the US though.

Quite obviously, I did my best to show all the crude Canadians and Americans I've met that I'm superior (and freer) on every level, and to act as the biggest arrogant *** ever.

Conclusion: Frenchmen visiting America are freer to act as :daisy: than anyone else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meneldil

I plead guilty. After having studied for more than 8 months in Canada, I think the Canadian education system would make the french one look marvellous. People in 4th or 5th year of Poli Sci, Geography or History would get beaten to pulp while trying to pass any kind of french first year exam.

---

The American university system is much better than the Canadian. You will never see a Canadian university ranked nearly as highly as Harvard or Yale, and for a good reason. On the other hand, Canadian pre-university education appears to be quite good compared to what I have heard about America's.

@Menendil

Why would I make it up? And they were both pretty much there and I pretty much believe them, they didn't sound like the stupidest women in France.

edit: and I didn't say they never heard of Germany, I said they didn't know Germans speak German.

I think we are a bit harsh on Americans at times. Just some random stuff off the top of my head, but I remember there was a Guardian article recently that said 4/10 Brits don't believe in evolution. Also, I remember a video where a reporter was asking some questions to French people walking about the streets, and quite a few of them thought the sun revolved around the earth.

And don't even think about asking them to point out a country on a world map. :no:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wakizashi

I believe you're right, actually, I know you're right (I have several members in my family that follow this exact line of thought). It's an elitist view, that Europeans, and their culture are far more enlightened than the otherwise brutish, and dim Americans.

---

I like to behave like this for fun. And if I told you every time it would not be as much fun anymore. :clown:
I think different countries in the western world are...different.
The USA (America is a really large continent with many countries for Europe's sake!) is behind in healthcare, Germany is behind in corporate identity, the UK is behind in destroying cameras, France is behind in language etc. :clown:
All countries have their ups and downs but are generally much better than North Korea. :2thumbsup:

Oh yeah, of course saying this makes me some rainbow-coulored liberal lalaleftie who is completely naive and doesn't see what kind of fascist regimes are enslaving him.

Quote:

---

All countries have their ups and downs but are generally much better than North Korea. :2thumbsup:

---

Lies and slander, how dare you insult our great Leader Kim Il-Jung and his immortal father, Kim Il-Sung?! That will be prison for you!

Manse! Manse! Manse!*


*cry similar to the Japanse "banzai", meaning "ten thousand years".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Not sure you placed the brackets right. Educated americans usually think too highly of Europe for whatever reason no idea. Let's take France for example, ask the average Frenchmen to point out a random European country he/she/french will have no idea. Met some francaises who didn't even know germans speak german, one was a doctor the other was an architect.

---

Well to be fair I heard a story of an Irish girl who couldn't point on the map where France was. x_x

I remember watching a video where Americans pointed to Australia as being Iraq.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

I remember watching a video where Americans pointed to Australia as being Iraq.

---

You can find those, or similar, for almost every country. Remember also that they only show the stupidest people in the final video clips. Unfortunately, that can lead to misconceptions about some countries when people presume that the people in them are simply ignorant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

You can find those, or similar, for almost every country. Remember also that they only show the stupidest people in the final video clips. Unfortunately, that can lead to misconceptions about some countries when people presume that the people in them are simply ignorant.

---

There's nobody stupid enough in other countries to say a triangle has 1 side. xD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jolt

There's nobody stupid enough in other countries to say a triangle has 1 side. xD

---

Not to mention, only Americans are so self-obsessed they can't see both sides of a triangle. :no:


@Frags:
- I must insist on the use of the cédille in 'Françaises'.

- You are correct that the French share at least one peculiarity with the Americans. One that is to no small degree responsible for their mutual image abroad as 'arrogantly self-obsessed'. Namely, that both do not travel abroad much, and may hence be somewhat lacking in understanding and appreciating foreign cultures.

Seventy percent of Frenchmen did not travel to a foreing country last year. While this is not a shocking percentage for, and possibly to, Americans or Australians, it is in stark contrast to most other West European countries, especially North Europe.
The French go skiing in the French Alps. Sunbathing on the Southcoast. To visit a foreign and distant land, they go to Brittany. (Bretagne, the French region, not the Great Island) To see Germany, Strasbourg suffices.

The French holiday abroad no more than a Spaniard goes sunbathing in Greece. What for anyway? Some people are born lucky. Others have to get on a plane for it. A lifetime doesn't suffice to discover all the wonders of France, so why waste it on visiting foreign countries whose inhabitants work all year long just to be able to flee their countries and spend two weeks in France?

Birmingham, Ruhrgebiet, Rotterdam? What am I supposed to do there anyway? :confused:


- Did you ask the shockingly ignorant Françaises whether allemand was spoken in Allemagne? Or whether German was spoken in Germany?
I just don't see the first happening with a doctor and an architect. Possibly the latter.
Or maybe they were already at the stage were they answered 'no' to all your questions.

'Care for a drink?'
Non!
Will you please sleep with me?
Non!
Do you know that the Germans speak German?
Non!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Birmingham, Ruhrgebiet, Rotterdam? What am I supposed to do there anyway? :confused:

---

In the case of Rotterdam I suggest marking targets and hope the Germans still have it in them. Instructions will follow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

@Frags:
- I must insist on the use of the cédille in 'Françaises'.

---

Trying to prove my point, aren't you? :beam:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

I remember watching a video where Americans pointed to Australia as being Iraq.

---

It was the chaser boys https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJ3RrqBqk14, and it wasn't iraq, but apparently iran, north korea and france are all on terra australis. Australia also has it's fair share of idiots https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcBDBi5qzjc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

[...]The French holiday abroad no more than a Spaniard goes sunbathing in Greece. What for anyway? Some people are born lucky. Others have to get on a plane for it. A lifetime doesn't suffice to discover all the wonders of France[...]

---

I admit to having similar thoughts regarding holidays and australia.

And on the whole freedom thing, I think it's very much a matter of personal interpretation, and australia fits my personal interpretation quite well. Since moving out of home I'm hard pressed thinking of more than 1 or 2 things that I've wanted to do and not been able to, and they have been related to financial, rather than legal, restrictions

"I just don't see the first happening with a doctor" Doctor in what? Paraspychology?:beam:

Our friend was a little gullible, or he should choose better. Well. Depending of what he was seeking for, of course. I mean, a rewarding intellectual exchange of course...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Americans tend to conflate the terms anarchy and chaos. That too goes pretty far back in our "national myth" since we view the early Confederation days as having been too problematic.

Freedom in the USA is mostly freedom "from" as it was put ealier.

Our freedoms are mostly encoded as limitations ON government rather than specific assertions of rights. You aren't really granted the freedom TO do very much, so much as the government is prevented from infringing on your ability to do what you want.

Interestingly, the right TO keep and bear arms is a "to" statement.

---

this would appear to be a characteristic of common law countries, the principle being that you define the few things that cannot be done, rather than recognise and regulate the many that can.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwordsMaster

Don't confuse freedom with independence either. A 17th century frenchman had less freedom but more independence than a 21st century London City financier.

It's a balancing act. A fun fact, the European country with most legislation text is actually Spain. It is also the european country where less legislation is enforced as a percentage of the total. As usual, quality and quantity do not go hand in hand.

I would have a lot more respect for a government which enforced a very small amount of legislation rigidly and without exception than Spain.

Personal freedoms-wise, well, we're getting less and less. In that sense Somalia probably is the freeest place on the planet.

---

agreed, and again this may be a symptom of a civil law system where an attempt to define all the freedom to's results in a flood of laws which are then treated with contempt by the subject populace.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Seventy percent of Frenchmen did not travel to a foreing country last year. While this is not a shocking percentage for, and possibly to, Americans or Australians, it is in stark contrast to most other West European countries, especially North Europe.
The French go skiing in the French Alps. Sunbathing on the Southcoast. To visit a foreign and distant land, they go to Brittany. (Bretagne, the French region, not the Great Island) To see Germany, Strasbourg suffices.

---

On the otherhand, I love going to different countries, it is not al about sunbathing or ski-ing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Not to mention, only Americans are so self-obsessed they can't see both sides of a triangle. :no:


@Frags:
- I must insist on the use of the cédille in 'Françaises'.

- You are correct that the French share at least one peculiarity with the Americans. One that is to no small degree responsible for their mutual image abroad as 'arrogantly self-obsessed'. Namely, that both do not travel abroad much, and may hence be somewhat lacking in understanding and appreciating foreign cultures.

Seventy percent of Frenchmen did not travel to a foreing country last year. While this is not a shocking percentage for, and possibly to, Americans or Australians, it is in stark contrast to most other West European countries, especially North Europe.
The French go skiing in the French Alps. Sunbathing on the Southcoast. To visit a foreign and distant land, they go to Brittany. (Bretagne, the French region, not the Great Island) To see Germany, Strasbourg suffices.

The French holiday abroad no more than a Spaniard goes sunbathing in Greece. What for anyway? Some people are born lucky. Others have to get on a plane for it. A lifetime doesn't suffice to discover all the wonders of France, so why waste it on visiting foreign countries whose inhabitants work all year long just to be able to flee their countries and spend two weeks in France?

Birmingham, Ruhrgebiet, Rotterdam? What am I supposed to do there anyway? :confused:


- Did you ask the shockingly ignorant Françaises whether allemand was spoken in Allemagne? Or whether German was spoken in Germany?
I just don't see the first happening with a doctor and an architect. Possibly the latter.
Or maybe they were already at the stage were they answered 'no' to all your questions.

'Care for a drink?'
Non!
Will you please sleep with me?
Non!
Do you know that the Germans speak German?
Non!

---

See this is how Americans feel. We have everything and we're much politer. The only thing Europe has on us is old stuff. You know who also has more old stuff then me? My Nana and as you can tell by the health care threads me and her are having a tiff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

We have everything and we're much politer.

---

:inquisitive:

You see, the problem with that is even if it's true, it might just mean you lie more often(which is pretty weird considering you're also more religious).