Critique of Liberty

Mill’s Liberty states something like we are all free to do as we please as long as our freedoms do not encroach on the freedoms of others.

The flaw here is that it assumes that we should do everything that we want to. It then tags onto this the boundary limits of other people and we must resist our desires if they will interfere with other freedoms.

This mentality is the poison of our age. The belief that we are surrounded by a space of action that is entirely solipsistic and independent from the world that surrounds it. This is myth. It is the myth of Western property that believes that within a “property” we are at liberty and independent of the concerns of the world outside our window. I have never been able to accept this. I as John Donne perceived am not an island unto myself. That thought requires strong self-reference that I am trying to argue elsewhere is a rabbit’s horn.

Once the “property” concept of the self is evaporated what are we left with?

It is a very simple concept – that of ethical, considerate and thoughtful behaviour. Something that may be hard when we are young, but the process of civilising engrains in us. That Western society requires “freedom” is a symptom of its failing and the requirement that socially inadequate people are kept apart for their own safety.

This thought stems from thinking about what I would change in England. It began with the thought that dog licenses should no longer be issued– but realised this is trivial compared with the following simple changes.

The Public House structure should be strengthened and taken over by local government. Thus people have the choice to hang out in their private houses and also in the more sociable public houses.

Public houses would offer more services than simply drinking and food. Beds, TV, Games and all the  luxuries of private houses should be available. Obviously since they are shared they can be more extravagant – bigger better TV and channels etc.

Leisure centres would be taken on by local government and invested in so that people have easy access to all their leisure requirement. Again this is much more efficient that people building their own pools and tennis courts.

Libraries are an excellent service that the government provides this could be invested in further. Then people won’t need their own libraries, computer, document processing, photocopying etc

Public gardens would be invested in and expanded. This would enable people to join gardening teams and maintain the public space rather than again replicating gardens up and down the country each replicating tools and labour and achieving far inferior results together than if things were shared. This would integrate with the environmental projects that already exist.

With these three simple changes being brought together under a central concept people will find that they can get everything they once had to replicate privately in public. The only down side is having to “share” with other people. But turn that around it is an opportunity to meet other people and share activities and social existence. This I’m slowly realising is the very foundation and essence of Meaning and Life – there is nothing else in the universe but this. It will also become apparent that this is a better system because the problem of maintenance will be undertaken by professionals rather than the private scenario of having to become an expert in everything that turns up in the shops.

The practicalities: an obvious problem is that without accountability people will abuse the systems. In our society there will be the temptation (because it is not “ours”) to abuse the public space. Sadly because of “liberty” Public is synonymous with “doesn’t matter someone else will sort it out”. A scheme of allowances would be required. If you abuse the system then you lose the entitlement to exist publically and you must return to private living (something that I consider to be like a self imposed prison). To use public facilities will therefore need a complex vetting system with credits but if that can be established and accountability established then the public space can be recovered from the degradation it has suffered at the hands of J.S.Mill and others and human society in the West put back on the track of Meaning and Life.

An obvious implication is that the environment will be greatly improved as their is less waste through inefficient private behaviour. But, as has been noted many times in this blog it means less jobs available because people are no-longer privately buying so much. However this would enable people to spend more time in the community and replace the importance of “work” as a founding structure in Western society.

Its a very simple concept. It feels simple and right. It is natural unlike industrial reality. It suits the concepts of family, fun and friendship. It seems a very simple solution to the deep issues that afflict our society.