Indepence, Freedom, and Interdependence
The word “freedom” has been so misused – from the freedom to drive as fast as we want via freedom fighters to the freedom to marry. To me freedom does not mean to be allowed to go down the well-trodden road, to live the status quo. That’s easy. To me freedom means to be encouraged in going down the new and narrow path, to create new ways of living without being told that this is wrong or undoable but rather by being supported with the basics, like a livable wage and health care.
This means that I have the freedom to be single without the negative consequences of not getting the 1,100+ rights married folks enjoy. It includes the freedom to leave my job if it isn’t satisfying without the negative consequence of loosing my health insurance. Without a fair and equitable social safety net, freedom is impossible because we cannot freely choose to avoid the status quo, especially when we are single, a way of living more of us are embracing. That is, freedom requires that we acknowledge our interdependence and take care of each other – both through building more resilient networks as well as through changes in what the government supports so that no particular form of living is treated preferentially, like being married or not currently is.
Many will argue that we can choose, we just have to accept the consequences. True. I am free to cut off my arm, too. The consequences of exercising our freedom by choosing to be single or to leave our jobs make the choice almost as foolish as cutting off a limb (especially in this economic environment). The safety net, if we can even call it that, which exists in the US does not support individual freedom and certainly prevents our independence since we’re dependent on employers for our health insurance rather than interdependent as a society that provides a safety net to all of us. Current societal structures exert normative pressure. Thus, the government supports the status quo and punishes those who dare to step outside by pulling the safety net out from under us. And as Michael Warner points out, it’s pretty much impossible for any of us to measure up to all the normative pressure on us. We are all not normal in one way or another (something Brené Brown also stresses to counteract the shame that arises whenever we step out of the normativity of the status quo). Accepting that fact would allow us to embrace our interdependence even with people who may choose to do things we don’t agree with.
On a personal level, I would like to free myself from societal expectations of living my life a certain way, that is, attain inner freedom. For example, I want independence from the notion that I have to make a certain amount of money, live a certain way, and participate in the insane idea of growth, in order to be considered successful. I’ve tried that and didn’t feel successful. Now I define success as living an authentic life, of pursuing what is important to us. Yet, I’ve spent the first 40 years of my life pursuing the success definitions of others. I am working on gaining independence from my need to do that. I do that by choosing to be single (aware of the negative consequences), for example, while building a support network that celebrates my interdependence with others because I belief that none of us can ever live truly independently.
So, freedom and independence contain both internal and external elements. Society can enable us to obtain freedom by offering a safety net – something that all of us create to support each other. We can gain independence for ourselves by letting go of normative ideas that force us into certain molds that do not fit us well. And embedding interdependence into our lives enables both because it gives us the freedom to live the lives we yearn for, which can include more independence from normative pressures.
If that’s how we view things, I’d be happy to call on all of us to fight for our right to be free!
Note this post is part of the #singlesblogfest organized to raise awareness about the need for unmarried equality.
Share this post with others:
I found your website while posing the question, Is freedom without a safety, truly freedom? I hope that you are still reading and posting on this site. I am going to go out on a limb and guess that you are a Liberal. I’m also going to guess you are young lady. Your proposal of needing a safety net in order to be free is the fallacy of socialism. You must understand that a dependance on a safety net is exactly what confiscates your liberties. You surely have heard the saying Freedom isn’t free in a different context but you need to see it from a different perspective. You will be liable to the people that provide the safety net or it will be pulled out from under you. As you explain about PERSONAL freedom, you have to be who you are in order to be free. I applaud that point of view when it comes to your PERSONAL life, as long as your being free does not hurt any one physically or does not cost anyone else. Also your personal freedom should not be imposed on anyone else, especially minors.
Let me tell you how I see freedom ought to work. What we need is, firstly to get the government out of our lives as much as possible. As a grownup I know what is best for me. I don’t need a group politicians called “the government”, to figure out what is best for ME! Secondly, I should not pay excessive taxes to provide a safety net for others, me and my family included. As I am responsible for myself, so too should everyone else. If I fail in my endeavors to educate myself, provide for myself, protect myself, and provide health protection for myself, then the only person who should suffer the consequences is ME. Personal responsibility needs to go hand in hand with freedom. When free people corrupt their freedom and trade it for the security of a safety net, they may as well be handcuffed and enslaved.
Thank you for letting me comment, and I do hope to hear back from you.
Rachel – while reading your post I was trying to think laterally and seeing what would and wouldn’t apply to what you were saying, and am wondering about this sentence……… you said
” To me freedom means to be encouraged in going down the new and narrow path, to create new ways of living without being told that this is wrong or undoable but rather by being supported with the basics, like a livable wage and health care.”
What about polygamy? (I know in some states it’s legal, but in many it’s probably illegal….. it’s illegal in Australia).
Is there a limit to creating ways without being told whwat is wrong? That’s if polygamy is even considered wrong. Who am I to say that it’s wrong? Just because I think it might be, doesn’t mean it is………
It’s interesting …….