Freedom.

This word is tossed around quite often, isn't it? People say that America is free, and that we are lucky to live here. And we are, aren't we? After all, we have so many privileges that many other people never have or never will have experience. Even though most of us know very well what I'm talking about, I'll list a few examples just for the sake of it: we're allowed to vote for our own government officials, we're privileged enough to receive (generally) free education, and we're pretty much allowed to do as we please, correct?

Not quite.

Now, I could spend hours blowing holes in each of the three examples I had previously listed, but I won't waste my time there. If you're really interested in how each of those examples are not fully concrete, take the time to go and look it up. Yet for today, I have other things I want to talk about.

First off, what is freedom?

There's no real concrete answer to that, really. Although as an attempt to answer this question, I did something many other lost souls will do when they want a starting definition for a not-so-concrete term: I consulted a dictionary. According to the first definition listed under "freedom" in the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, Freedom is defined as "the quality or state of being free: as a: the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action."

A-ha! A dictionary I can argue with!

Now, read that definition, than read it again. Does that apply to your life? Is your life completely absent of necessity, coercion, or constraint in your choices or actions? Do you have total freedom from every minor necessity? Is anybody free to make any choice or any action they please?

Well, yes. The only problem is that by being totally free, we contradict our basic human nature of survival.

Let me explain. Millions of years ago, man was still wild. With no government, no laws, no constraints restricting the necessities of man's survival, man was free to act as he needed. If a man's survival was in danger, he was perfectly free to take advantage of another, possibly weaker man with whatever means to possible to ensure and secure his own survival. However, eventually, man also began to practice of agriculture. Suddenly, hunting and gathering wasn't as necessary for survival as it once had been, because man could manipulate the land and grow his own food. With this drastic change, man's survival became more secure.

However, with survival instincts still intact, man was still vulnerable in his own behavior to act to secure his own survival. As man began to grow and produce crops, other men remained a potential threat. The theft of goods was an inevitable possibility. Eventually, with men desiring to ensure their survival, societies formed. Although even in society, men still posed many threats towards each other. Thus, government was formed.

I believe Thomas Paine was absolutely correct when he wrote, "Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil..." Why was man resorting to government? Why is a government seen as both necessary and evil in the eyes of Thomas Paine? Indeed, man's survival instincts are both helpful and a painful hindrance all at once, because although they allow for the survival of the human race, they also overpower the mind of man during a desperate situation. When John Locke theorized that the purpose of a government was to protect the life, liberty, and property in his Two Treatises on Government, he was absolutely correct because man is incapable of protecting himself from his own instinct of survival, and the security of survival. If government is abolished, man will act out in a savage manner because there is no longer a higher order restraining his instinct of survival. When the first form of government was formed, man willingly gave up his freedoms that he would have had in the wild in exchange for this protection. By establishing a higher order, we give up much of our freedom for the sake of protection for our possessions, our lives, and the lives of our families.

Yet the question still remains: Are we free?

We're not free of constraint, that's for sure. We have many constraints on our lives for the sake of the survival of others as controlled by the government. Additionally, it is definitely true that government enforces these constraints as a means of serving their purpose. However, I still have not touched on the topic of government evil. If the purpose of the government is to protect humanity from itself, what makes a government evil?

The answer is simple. Government, unfortunately, is composed of men who also have their own survival in mind. Although they knowingly serve in an institution established for the protection of humanity, they are still composed of individual human beings who still have their own interests of survival in mind. They, being in a position of power, have the ability to come by many riches and powers which they would not have had the access to had they not been in a government position. Greed is inevitable of human beings because of the instinct to survive, and ensure survival. Even if excesses in riches and power is not necessary for the means of basic survival, the fact is that, instinctively, humankind believes that their chances of survival is more definite if they possess more. Everybody, princes and paupers alike, has this instinct instilled within their minds. Government, though necessary, is evil simply because it is run by men who are controlled by instinctual means of survival.

With my points of man's survival and the effects of the government in mind, I am forced to ponder our true freedom. We're supposedly allowed freedom as long as we do not harm the freedom of others, but we're also pre-programmed with a strong instinct to survive. It's all quite fascinating how restrained our freedom truly is, if you ask me. Why do I say this? Allow me to revert back to my point of an evil government: as I mentioned, princes and paupers alike are susceptible to greed, because they are under the impression that it will secure their survival. However, our greed and desire to survive has also drastically shaped our society today. How?

Inevitably, our society has become driven by riches. As I have said, the desire for wealth connects to a desire to survive; however, this basic survival instinct has also driven our society so far into a greedy oblivion. Our greedy oblivion, in turn, has also changed our view of just about everything, especially education.

It was not long ago that education was treated as the ability to learn, and foster knowledge. Yet with our society inevitably crawling into a black hole of greed, higher education has been especially affected by this change in the general view of society. Even as recent as fifty years ago, the purpose of having a college-level education was so that the lucky ones who were able to attend college gained new knowledge of the world around them. Curiosity was fostered, and knowledge was valued. "Job-training" was only secondary.

Yet now, education and knowledge growth seems to have become secondary, which is almost frightening. Fewer and fewer students desire true knowledge as more and more people enter into career fields that promise high salaries. Indeed, not every person is guilty of this motivation for success; however, as college education becomes required by more and more job fields, people down into even the elementary and middle school level have become concerned with college. The effect that the prospect of college has on high school is probably the most frightening. Today in America, more and more students are busying themselves with harder, college-leveled courses, athletic activities, extracurricular activities, and volunteer work. Is this a negative thing? No, most people would argue that this is a good thing. Many would portray these students as "good" students. Yet with the idea of "free time" diminishing from the lives of many of these students as their hopes of college education and high-paying careers is instilled into their minds constantly, where is the time to simply be "free?" Is this done by choice?

Yes, all of it is done by choice; however, it is done to ensure survival. According to our society, survival is ensured through the gain of riches and wealth, and riches and wealth are only gained through college, which I argue is simply an expensive job training. Are these economically-driven students free to break from their busy routines in order to have moments of "freedom?"

As you attempt to answer these questions, consider the modern-day teachings of not only students, but everybody. How many people do you know who work more than fifty hours a week? How many people do you know taking on extra work for the sake of impressing a teacher or a boss? Why do people do this? Riches. Why do people want to become rich? Secure survival. If the government were to be abolished by a group of radicals, would people sill work extra-hard for the security of their wealth and survival? No; without a restraining government, we have no reason to conform to the expectations of society, because savage animalism would take over human instinct, and we would revert to looting, murder, and any means that seem appropriate for our survival.

We are free to choose how we conform to society, but we are not as free as our ancient ancestors once were. We are free within our means, but our survival is more secure within the control of a government. Willingly, we give up much of our freedom in exchange for our protection. Is this a bad thing? No, but if you wish to be free of almost all constraint, feel free to venture out into the wild and attempt to survive out on your own. Chances are, nobody will try and stop you.