Safety or freedom?

Reading books like Brave New World and The Giver got me thinking...

What is better? To have freedom? Or to have a perfect society?

Let's start with freedom. With freedom, we get many things. The freedom to speak out against the government. The freedom to make art (music, painting, movies, etc.) as we feel like. To enjoy life to it's fullest.

Then there's the perfect society, which goes along with freedom. No prejudice, no poverty, every man and woman is equal in every single way. People in a perfect society don't commit crimes, they don't spread rumors. Everything is simply perfect (for the most part).

With these two also comes some downfalls. With freedom, there will always people trying to take advantage of these freedoms. They use the freedom to buy a gun to shoot up a school. They use freedom of speech to speak out against an entire race and cause an uproar.

As for the "perfect" society, you can't trust the government. They have most likely taken away things that will add ideas (Google Fahrenheit 451), at the same time, taking away your right to an opinion. Books, for example, may give you anti-Government ideas, and you will use these ideas to speak out against the government, which makes the entire society go against the Government. They can't have that, can they? For example, in The Giver, scientists take away people's ability to see color, probably to prevent prejudice.

What do you think is better? I won't state my opinion, I'll simply play Devil's Advocate.

Both of them are the same thing, humans are imperfect. But we have to look at the importance of each side, the people or the government?

I would say that having freedom is better, because from your point of view from a "perfect" society, this will lead to people wanting freedom.

Both of them are the same thing, humans are imperfect. But we have to look at the importance of each side, the people or the government?

I would say that having freedom is better, because from your point of view from a "perfect" society, this will lead to people wanting freedom.

Ah ha, but people won't know they're being lied to. The government I'm sure has lied to us in some cases in real life, but most of the time you can't be sure what they lie about.

I think the American concept of "freedom" differs from the rest of the world. I don't really understand it, to be honest, because America is no different from other countries in terms of what you can and cannot do.

For me, I would rather have security than total freedom. I don't believe it is possible to be completely free (and be happy) with the way the world is. If you are free and have no responsibilities or commitments, isn't it like "every man for himself"? It would be wild and chaotic.

Sometimes small sacrifices to our freedom can be a good thing. >.<

There is virtually no way to be a "freedom purist." Libertarians, who want a radically simplified government, are in fact reactionaries; America in 1776 was in many ways worse than it is now. Every time there have been national emergencies, (Civil War, Mexican War, WWI, WWII, Cold War, war on terror,) freedom was supposedly compromised in the interests of the nation. Because we have a strong democratic tradition, concerns were raised each time about this issue, but honestly, we've survived over 300 years and America is still doing pretty damn well. What we have right now is a recession, not the nation going down the toilet.

I think the American concept of "freedom" differs from the rest of the world. I don't really understand it, to be honest, because America is no different from other countries in terms of what you can and cannot do.

For me, I would rather have security than total freedom. I don't believe it is possible to be completely free (and be happy) with the way the world is. If you are free and have no responsibilities or commitments, isn't it like "every man for himself"? It would be wild and chaotic.

Sometimes small sacrifices to our freedom can be a good thing. >.<

Well of course you need some sort of laws...

Freedom through monotony and safety (or vice versa). Uniqueness is an illusion.

Freedom which stops as soon as it affects someone else's freedom more than yours. I don't know if that is the same thing as safety; you would still be allowed to do risky things that don't hurt anyone.

How about anarchy?
There is some freedom!
Worried about standard of living?
ANARCHO-CAPTIALISM!!!

Safety also means perfect society. No crime, no racism, etc. etc.

That's what I meant anyway.

After reading 1984 and Brave New World, I would definitely opt for freedom instead of safety/security/stability.

Freedom all the fucking way. Imperfections drive culture. Culture is fun.

The only thing the government should be in charge of is maintaining peace and controlling the economy to an extent. Maintaining peace includes a little of keeping dangerous people off the streets.

How about anarchy?
There is some freedom!
Worried about standard of living?
ANARCHO-CAPTIALISM!!!

This idea sounds rather interesting, I vote this way .