Freedom, Security And Freedom: Freedom And Security

Freedom and Security “Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.” This statement by Benjamin Franklin (1818), one of the founding fathers who drafted the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States, shows the sacred character of freedom which should not be altered for any reason. On the other hand, Rand Beers, the current Deputy Homeland Security Advisor of President Obama, thinks that the precondition to freedom is security. In a world where freedom has become the philosopher’s stone of terrorism by extending its deadly reach on countries worldwide, governments are often struggling to fight against terror without controlling individual privileges beyond necessity. Above all considerations, states must supervise and sometimes restrict freedoms without drifting into excess in order to fight against terrorism therefore guaranteeing collective security. If freedoms are weighing down nations in their worship of security, appropriate measures are unavoidable. However, governments should not overuse their prerogatives. Many philosophers consider freedom as a threat to security. In his book, Le tripot aux champs, Octave Mirabeau (1886) claims that liberty is the greatest disease of all democracies. Nowadays, terrorism has evolved from a global threat to a globalized security issue. Indeed, terrorists can circulate and operate everywhere, as they do not answer to one particular nationality or race. As a matter of fact, one of the terrorists who attacked Paris in November 2015 entered European soil as a Syrian refugee. In addition, the development of Information Communication Technologies (ICT) in modern countries has created major security issues. The internet has become the terrorists’ preferred channel of communication. Terrorists massively use social media such as Tweeter, Facebook, and Periscope as effective ways of recruiting. Freedom of speech also represents a serious security menace. In fact, laws and regulations in modern democracies contain enough loopholes to permit propaganda and apology of terrorism. By using freedoms to squeeze people into desperation, terrorists have forced governments to take measures in order to preserve security. According to British philosopher Thomas Hobbes (Leviathan. 1651), there is a social contract that binds the states with their people and allows necessary measures to be taken to safeguard security. Governments must take, when needed, unpleasant and sometimes extreme measures against individual freedoms to achieve homeland security. “State of Urgency” and constraining laws such as the “Patriot Act” must be called upon if deemed necessary to ensure collective security. Moreover, people must adapt their common behaviors and ways of life to the prevailing circumstances. Governments have to inform and educate their citizens on …show more content…
Indeed, freedom matters are sensitive and can nourish a sense of revolt within populations if they are not handled appropriately. Many governments have found themselves becoming the villains while restricting freedom for security reasons. Fights for freedom of speech have arisen in many countries such as Saudi Arabia, Mauritania, and Russia due to repressions of internet bloggers. Abuse of power also facilitates the development of terrorism as it can foster hatred and radicalization amongst the people. Finally, leaders may give into the temptation to utilize freedom restrictions for their own interests. In some countries, populations often accuse governments of raising the specter of terrorism in order to arrest political opponents and bloodily repress marches of