Freedom only exists when there is freedom for everyone.

This idea recurs throughout On Freedom. In American history, there are countless examples of violence and oppression aimed at minority groups. Those who are marginalized continue to experience various forms of voter suppression and exclusion, notably within and as a result of the prison system. Since prisoners add to the population of an area but do not add voters, their presence strengthens the voting power of people who live near prisons. Prisons are often built in rural areas and are privately run, incentivizing politicians in those areas to build more prisons and to seek laws that will incarcerate more people, to generate more revenue and increase the power of their voting base. Snyder argues that all of these imbalances hinder freedom in general and undermine the concept of a fair government. The people in power certainly have more freedom than all of the marginalized groups that the system has abused throughout history, but Snyder argues that even those in power do not experience true freedom.

Oppressing others or benefiting from the oppression of others, one may increase wealth and political influence. However, without acknowledging the dignity and rights of others, oppressors are constrained by the same system. Freedom must be encouraged and defended by everyone, especially for groups of people different from one’s own. Having different ideas and values is to be expected. It is everyone’s responsibility to ensure that the varying ideas and values across all people are given the same opportunities to thrive.

People should focus on Positive Freedom, not Negative Freedom.

Throughout the book, Snyder labels different ideas as negative freedom or positive freedom. Negative freedom is “freedom from”: freedom from a tyrannical government, persecution, occupation by a foreign military, etc. It is the idea that once such a barrier is removed, people will experience freedom. Once the oppressive regime has been overthrown, everyone will experience freedom. Snyder argues that this is not the best way to view freedom and that such a mindset can hinder people. The alternative, positive freedom, is instead “freedom to”: freedom to attend college, change careers without fearing the loss of healthcare, speak out against the government, create art that challenges the status quo or people’s beliefs.

Snyder warns that negative freedom can often be touted as freedom from certain groups of people. Once one barrier is removed, the next barrier might be a group that you disagree with. Positive freedom, on the other hand, encourages people to work together. If everyone is trying to exercise freedom and move toward a more open future, then people are incentivized to affirm others (and their actions). Oppressive regimes often use negative freedom. The Nazis expressed a need for freedom from Jewish people. Stalin’s regime wanted to free people from private property. Labeling specific barriers is an easy way to motivate people, even if they are being motivated to cause harm. They are much less likely to think about what structures and institutions should be created. Positive freedom seeks to create. Countries with public healthcare and childcare, and free education, grant more opportunities for their citizens. People should focus on freedom to create and change their surroundings for a better future instead of focusing on specific barriers.

As freedom is removed, people focus more on how instead of why.

Oppressive regimes and institutions benefit when people don’t question why something is the way it is. Focusing on the how distracts people from the intention or result. Efficiency is often used as a distractor. Snyder gives several examples of this throughout the book. In Nazi Germany, concentration camps were streamlined and run with brutal efficiency, often to the point that the purpose of such camps was ignored by many. Prisons in America are designed and run to be efficient, often putting multiple prisoners in cells that were designed to house a single person. It is rare that anyone questions how this will benefit rehabilitation or whether there is any benefit, other than being able to imprison more people.

In a less extreme but more familiar example, Snyder discusses the machinations and effects of digital devices, specifically social media. Many people are concerned with increasing efficiency in their daily lives or simply making things easier, but they rarely think about why they are engaging in such activity. Social media works best when people only look at it for its functions, interacting and getting validation through others’ interactions. Many people neglect the why component. Social media companies generate revenue based on user interaction. Not only do they use targeted ads and content, based on user activity, but they collect and sell personal information and user activity to outside companies. Social media does not exist to bring people together, but instead to isolate people behind screens, separating them, and turning them into a commodity. The how is usually fairly simple in most people’s lives. The question of why can often lead to more philosophical explorations of motives, goals, and the meaning of human existence. Oppressed people are much easier to manage when they are kept busy and do not question why a system works the way it does.

Take a Study Break