From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy –
Put in the simplest terms, one might say that a democratic society is a free society because it is a self-determined society, and that a member of that society is free to the extent that he or she participates in its democratic process. But there are also individualist applications of the concept of positive freedom. For example, it is sometimes said that a government should aim actively to create the conditions necessary for individuals to be self-sufficient or to achieve self-realization.
Liberty can be decanted into two distillations, positive liberty and negative liberty. These are philosophical positions. Positive liberty entails a sort of contractual arrangement between all parties whereby everyone is steaming along under their own power, laying their own tracks and fulfilling their own potential within the framework of a shared understanding of what one may or may not consider acceptable behavior
Rousseau’s usual solution to how the Lawgiver may be able to do this is cultural homogeneity on the one hand and physically small states on the other. These two themes recur within Rousseau’s works often with the view to homogenizing inharmonious particular wills.
Man was born free, and everywhere he is in chains.
“The problem is to find a form of association which will defend and protect with the whole common force the person and goods of each associate, and in which each, while uniting himself with all, may still obey himself alone, and remain as free as before”
Rousseau understood the heterogeneity of needs and liberties of what we commonly understand as the conflict of man vs. society. In our militarized, Westernized, competitive society, heterogeneity is often decanted into opposing forms in the hopes that energy expended in conflict result in the “winning out” of one side or the other. So, we have winners of liberty, and losers of liberty. This model is applied over and over again. We have nature vs. nurture. We have person vs. society, and person vs. self. The last category of manufactured conflict comes from the medieval concept of an internal struggle, an inner drama where different interpretations of this heterogeneity are positioned around personifications, characterizations of a larger moral character. Good vs. evil in the moral, and left vs. right in the political sphere. This is the weakness of living in a militarized community. Everything has hooks and barbs, everything is composed of a push/pull mentality. Drama is rich soil in this country, for we are often in our day-to-day given a framework in which to explore our liberties and our rights.
I had a college professor express the vicious cycle expressed in marital life thusly: “Why do women nag, why do men drink?” Liberty is an illusion, but a necessary one, for without the illusion of liberty, citizens would realize they were merely slaves with specific wide lanes of liberty to travel to a finite series of destinations, many with requisite precludes, or hierarchies of actions required to reach others, a power structure.
That is why desire is revolution. What one feels in one’s heart, once expressed to others, enters the narrative of the social contract. With force it can be altered or extinguished, but all ideas are like viruses, and many viruses are adapted to the behavior of the host, There is a virus that causes a rodent to lose its sense of fear and be attracted to a feline’s pheromone found in its waste, so that the prey literally walks into the mouth of the predator, where the virus is able to complete its life cycle, and be shat out by the cat to begin anew.
The movie alien depicts a creature that returns to its host in different forms to engage its physiology in its multi-stage transformation. In the life of a desire, it may enter the mind of an individual, be expressed through communication into the minds of others, be codified as law or an offense, bring people together in commiseration or warfare or symposium, and affect laws in the country, in international agreements, trade laws.