FreedomClass 11 Political Theory Notes

The Ideal of Freedom

Human history is filled with stories of struggle. While some stories are about powerful groups dominating or exploiting others, many inspiring stories are about heroic struggles against this domination. The ideal that people have been willing to sacrifice and even die for is freedom.

At its core, freedom is the desire for people to control their own lives and destinies. It is the opportunity to express oneself through personal choices and activities. This desire for independence is not just for individuals; societies also value freedom to protect their unique culture and future.

• Nelson Mandela: In his autobiography, Long Walk to Freedom, he describes his personal struggle against the apartheid regime in South Africa. Apartheid was a system of unjust constraints based on race, denying black people basic freedoms like where to live, how to move about the country, and whom to marry. For Mandela, the long walk to freedom was the fight to remove these obstacles for all people in South Africa, which cost him twenty-seven years in prison.
• Aung San Suu Kyi: Inspired by Gandhiji's ideas on non-violence, she fought for freedom in Myanmar. She was kept under house arrest for years, separated from her family. In her book of essays, Freedom from Fear, she argues that true freedom is freedom from fear—fear of others' opinions, of authority, or of speaking one's mind. She believed that to live a dignified human life, one must overcome such fear.

What is Freedom?

A simple way to define freedom is the absence of constraints. This means an individual is free if they are not subject to external controls or coercion and can make their own independent decisions.

However, this is only one part of the story. Freedom also has a positive side: it is about creating the conditions for people to develop their creativity, talents, and potential.

A truly free society does two things:

1. It enables its members to develop their potential.
2. It does so with a minimum of social constraints.

Swaraj: An Indian Perspective

In Indian political thought, the concept of Swaraj is similar to freedom. Swaraj is made of two words: Swa (Self) and Raj (Rule). It has a dual meaning:

• Rule of the self: This refers to political and constitutional freedom for a nation, a key demand during India's freedom struggle.
• Rule over self: As highlighted by Mahatma Gandhi in his work Hind Swaraj, this means learning to rule ourselves. It is about self-respect, self-responsibility, and self-realisation.

Why Do We Need Constraints?

Living in a society means we cannot have a total absence of restrictions. Some constraints are necessary to prevent society from descending into chaos.

The Sources of Constraints

Restrictions on our freedom can come from different places:

• Domination and External Controls: This can be through force or through government laws, such as colonial rule or the apartheid system. A democratic government is important because it allows citizens to have some control over their rulers, protecting their freedom.
• Social and Economic Inequality: Freedom can be limited by social structures like the caste system or by extreme economic inequality. Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose argued for an "all round freedom" that included not just political freedom but also the abolition of caste barriers, social inequities, and an equal distribution of wealth.

The Need for Rules

Disagreements and conflicts are a natural part of society. People have different ideas, ambitions, and compete for resources. To manage these conflicts and prevent violence, every society needs some rules and mechanisms to settle disputes.

These rules act as necessary constraints. For instance, to live in a free society, we need constraints that ensure we respect each other's different views, opinions, and beliefs without one group coercively imposing its views on another. Legal and political restraints are needed to protect our freedom from being bullied or harassed.

The important question is not whether we need constraints, but which constraints are necessary and justifiable, and which are not.

Harm Principle

The philosopher John Stuart Mill, in his essay On Liberty, provided a powerful principle to help distinguish between justifiable and unjustifiable constraints. This is known as the harm principle.

Mill stated: "...the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others."

To explain this, Mill made an important distinction between two types of actions:

• Self-regarding actions: These are actions that have consequences only for the individual doing them. Mill argued that the state or any other external authority has no business interfering in these matters.
• Other-regarding actions: These are actions that have consequences for others. If these actions cause harm to others, then there is a case for external interference to prevent that harm.

In India, constitutional discussions use the term 'reasonable restrictions' for such justifiable constraints. This means that while restrictions on freedom may exist, they must be reasonable, capable of being defended by reason, and not excessive.

Negative and Positive Liberty

Political theory discusses two different dimensions of freedom: negative and positive liberty.

Negative Liberty

This concept is about 'freedom from'.

• It seeks to define and defend an area of life where an individual is inviolable and can do, be, or become whatever they wish without external interference.
• This is a "minimum area of non-interference" that is considered sacred, as it is essential for human dignity.
• The main question for negative liberty is: 'Over what area am I the master?'
• The goal is to make this area of non-interference as wide as possible.

Positive Liberty

This concept is about 'freedom to'.

• It focuses on the conditions that allow an individual to develop their personality and potential. The main question here is: 'Who governs me?', with the ideal answer being 'I govern myself'.
• It recognizes that one can only be free in society and seeks to improve society to enable individual development.
• This means ensuring people are not constrained by poverty or unemployment and have access to necessary resources, education, and opportunities to participate in decision-making.

Freedom of Expression

Freedom of expression is considered a fundamental value that belongs to the "minimum area of non-interference" (negative liberty). J.S. Mill gave four powerful reasons why this freedom should be protected, even for ideas that seem false or misleading.

1. No idea is completely false. What appears false often has an element of truth. If we ban it, we lose that element.
2. Truth emerges from conflict. Truth doesn't just appear; it is discovered through the clash of opposing views.
3. Conflict of ideas is always valuable. When we expose truth to opposing views, we ensure it doesn't become an unthinking cliché and confirm that it is trustworthy.
4. We can never be certain that what we consider true is actually true. Ideas once suppressed as false by society later turned out to be true. A society that bans ideas it dislikes runs the risk of losing valuable knowledge.

Challenges to Freedom of Expression

In practice, there are often demands to ban books, films, or plays.

• The book The Satanic Verses by Salman Rushdie was banned after protests.
• Filmmaker Deepa Mehta faced strong protests when she wanted to make a film about widows in Varanasi, and the film could not be made there.

Banning is an easy short-term solution, but it is harmful to a free society in the long run because it creates a habit of banning. This raises the question of when, if ever, constraints on expression are justified. Constraints backed by the state or powerful social groups can severely restrict freedom. However, if we willingly accept certain restrictions (like a work contract that prevents revealing private information), our freedom is not considered to be limited in the same way.

Ultimately, freedom is not just about the absence of constraints. It is also about our ability to make choices and to accept responsibility for our actions and their consequences. This capacity for reasoned choice needs to be developed through education and judgment.