Obamacare destroys freedom (and I don’t care)

Might be niceFreedom is good. Everyone is for freedom, but it means different things to different people. For the Netherlands’ Party for Freedom (PVV), it means banning the Koran and putting more people in prison. For many US libertarians, it means the ability to pollute without consequence. For the Tea Party, it means deporting illegal immigrants and disallowing gay marriage. For President Obama it apparently means waging unauthorised war. So it is somewhat tempting to just ignore the word “freedom” as a meaningless slogan that people use. However, freedom is a real thing, and sometimes, even when sloganeering, politicians are correct to say that something reduces freedom. For instance, Obamacare is one of those things. When proponents of Obamacare say it doesn’t reduce your freedom, they’re clearly wrong. Freedom is one of those things that everyone claims to cherish, and so there are political gamesmanship reasons for denying this. But come on: before, you could be rich and avoid purchasing health insurance, and now you can’t.

Which brings me to this rather obvious point: there isn’t one giant freedom – there are many different ones. And some freedoms are more important than others. There are freedom of political dissent and freedom of assembly. And then there are freedom to buy inefficient lightbulbs and freedom to define your own units of measurement. All four are real freedoms, and if absolutely everything else was left equal by the change, I’d rather have all four of those freedoms. But only two of them do I actually care about. One reason I’m so unconcerned about the freedom-destroying aspects of Obamacare is that I don’t see how the freedom to be rich and not have to pay for health insurance is so very important. Obamawise, I’m much more concerned about the waging war without authorization thing.

This entry was posted in politics. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Obamacare destroys freedom (and I don’t care)

  1. Zuuko says:

    I agree with most of what you wrote, except the part about how the four examples are all freedoms but you care about two of them. The two lesser freedoms you noted shouldn’t be counted. Or at least, they are not equivalent to the more “important” freedoms. I know im not explaining this very well (prolly cuz im buzzed as I type this), but it reminds of the chris rock bit about single-mothers who party on a wednesday. The punchline is “yeah, your free to do that… But that dont make it a good idea. Your free to drive with your feet, but that dont make it a good idea either.”

    If there is a point i’m trying to make, its that, given we’re social animals who live in civilized societies, the word freedom refers to our collective rights and choices which society cannot constrain such that individuals still determine their own destinies, some individuals dont end up with power over others (no tyrannies), etc.

    Thats why the right to buy inefficient lightbulbs, using your own measurement system, drive with your feet instead of your hands or taking a shit on your neighbours’ lawns can and should be curtailed by society. As such, taking these rights away is not reducing freedom at all. In fact, if society doesn’t restrict these so-called freedoms, society itself would breakdown. Now your on the slippery slope to anarchy and freedom has no meaning there anyway.

    Obamacare doesnt reduce freedom but, at best, restricts the rights of a few rich assholes to collectively act like jackasses and “choose” not to buy insurance.

    Man, thank god the second period is about to start. GO NUCKS.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s