Freedom vs. Independence

Freedom vs. Independence

Declaration of Independence was among Thomas Jefferson’s greatest achievements. The declaration of independence was more than just a combination of political principles. Freedom consisted of personal liberties and was the constituent of the bill of rights of the new Constitution. It was through the declaration of independence that he endeared himself to become the achiever of liberty and equality. The achievements were what led to him promoting human freedom. Freedom was perceived in the aspects of speech, press, and conscience. Independence and freedom were two commonly used interchangeable words yet different in meaning. Freedom is an ability to think and also act as one sees best, whereas independence is complying with authority or making one’s works align to external demands.

The freedom connoted by Jefferson was not among the gifts that could be conferred by the governments.[1] Jefferson had a phobia of trusting the government in many ways, including the granting of freedom. He understood that freedom was the product of the independence of an individual. There was no freedom for an individual who could depend on their accomplices for a living. For instance, slaves could not be termed as being free in any way as they did not enjoy freedom or independence needed to sustain them. The same applies to independence, where the government would force the people to believe in them and act according to the stated rules. Both freedom and independence relate to the boundaries and struggles of an individual. Since freedom is not restricted in rules yet subjective, the government could not be trusted with its delivery.

Freedom could also be bought as evident from the actions of African Slaves, whereas independence could not be acquired with such ease.[2] It was easier to buy the power or right to act, think, or speak without restrictions. Besides, freedom could be acquired from both personal and political levels. Independence was a phenomenon that connoted things that were free from outside control. Independence could not be bought and cannot still be purchased unless one frees themselves from societal expectations of living in a kind of way. Independence can be related to the revolution in terms of outcomes. The fact that freedom could be bought made freedom a pertinent subject relative to the ideal of liberty contrary to independence that could only be acquired by freeing oneself from the authority of others.

According to Jefferson, freedom was an asset and property that ought to be protected by the government.[3] It was the role of the government to restrict the liberties of those who did not properly exhibit freedom. It was easy to take out an individual from their state of enjoying social, political, and civil liberties. It was the role of the government to ensure that its people were free from manacles and imprisonment. Even so, Jefferson’s mistrust developed as a result of the power it had to withdraw the ability of individuals to make choices and restrict them of certain actions through authority. Independence was not an asset as it could be easily attained by one’s decision not to depend on others. It could be perceived as some kind of self-determination; hence, it could not be considered an asset or property in any dimension.

Additionally, Jefferson termed freedom as being a persistent and consistently pivotal phenomenon that should not have always been successful.[4] The liberty of his followers was too specific on the freedom of the press. Any kind of limitation made unto freedom would only make the people lose it. Therefore, there was a need to be persistent. One had no need to be persistent in any aspect to attain independence as they would attain it freely and without time limitations. Besides, gaining independence was just as simple as acquiring it. However, losing freedom would create a complex period aimed at adjusting to the freedom strategically. Getting the choices that are open for an individual to choose from is the most difficult part towards attaining freedom as opposed to independence that involves only making the choices available to an individual.

Independence could also be granted by the government, just like individual rights in the law.[5] However, freedom could not be given by the government. The government had the ability to grant some independence to its people and also take it away at any time. Independence can be granted, but freedom is an individual choice. Besides, there are various levels of independence that make one have a range of choices they could make. There are no such levels in freedom as it is only divided into the dimensions of speech, press, and conscience. Therefore, it is an individual decision to be free, yet independence does not rely on a decision as it can be influenced by the authorities at any time.

While freedom and independence are used interchangeably, freedom is dependent on independence, as noted by Thomas Jefferson. Freedom could not be conferred by the government, whereas independence could be controlled by the government. Additionally, freedom could be bought as evident with African Slaves, whereas independence was an individual decision that was free to make. Therefore, freedom was an asset, and property and independence could not be associated with anything of value as it could be harnessed freely. Freedom was also persistent and pivotal, whereas independence need not be persistent as there were many choices available to choose from. Besides, independence could be granted by the government, whereas freedom could not be issued by any authorities.

[1] Edmund S. Morgan, “Slavery and Freedom: The American Paradox,” The Journal of American History 59, no. 1 (1972), 7. doi:10.2307/1888384.

[2] Edmund S. Morgan, “Slavery and Freedom: The American Paradox,” The Journal of American History 59, no. 1 (1972), 17. doi:10.2307/1888384.

[3] Ibid, 23.

[4] Edmund S. Morgan, “Slavery and Freedom: The American Paradox,” The Journal of American History 59, no. 1 (1972), 24. doi:10.2307/1888384.

[5] Ibid, 7.