Freedom as Freedom of the Human Being Not the Individual
Our survey above suggests that liberal tradition, in all its forms—classical, modern and neo-liberal, focuses on individual freedom either in terms of absence of external interference in the sphere of individual actions or removal of obstacles in the development of faculties of the individual. This view is based on the liberal assumption that the individual is sovereign over his/her actions and is the best judge of what to do. The only requirement is he/she should not be interfered with (negative liberty) or obstacles in self-realization should be removed (positive liberty). In fact, the libertarian philosophy advocates laissez-faire individualism and argues that freedom or liberty inheres in economic freedom, which can best be realized in a competitive capitalist economic system.
In Holy Family (1844) Marx and Engels opposed the self-centred, atomistic view of the individual and argued that like an atom being self-sufficient, unrelated individual cannot be a member of civil society. Men and women have to be human beings related to each other and not merely individuals, egoist, self-centred and unrelated. The Marxian perspective looks at human freedom in terms of both individual and classes. This is integral to the understanding of historical evolution of stages of production and realization of freedom in the arena of work that is integral to the Marxian concept of historical materialism. Marx maintains that work, i.e., production of good and services, is the primary activity of human beings. It is in the process of production that human beings produce, engage creatively, realize one’s self and achieve self-fulfilment. Human relations are rooted in the understanding of relations of production and class relations.
The Marxian perspective does not agree that plebeians and patricians, serfs and lords, bourgeoisie and proletariat are equally free. It maintains that principles such liberty, rights, fraternity or even equality have been invoked and asserted in specific historical contexts and are not universal. For example, equal rights of men in Greek city-states were not equal rights for slaves. Similarly, as Emile Burns says, principles of liberty, equality and fraternity advocated by the French Revolution meant ‘the liberty of the rising capitalist class to trade freely, the equality of this class with the lords, and the fraternity of this class with itself—the mutual aid against feudal oppression and restrictions.’49 It shows that liberty, like all other principles and values, has been evolved in terms of either the interest of the rising classes or to protect the interests of the entrenched classes.
The Marxian perspective talks about humanism and the inner essence of the human being. Freedom implies absence of alienation of the human being and not absence of external restraint or interference. Alienation presents a situation of domination of world of things over man. Due to factors beyond the control of human beings, other than those natural, one feels helpless and alienated. This results in engaging in production or profession in a non-creative manner. Marx, and many others who have followed this way of analysis, have located the main cause of alienation in class structure and domination over themselves of things created by human beings. Two significant facts about Marxian views on freedom may be stated here. Firstly, freedom is understood in terms of absence of alienation and false consciousness, and secondly, it looks at freedom in terms of the individual as well as classes.
Marx adopts a multidimensional conception of human freedom, which encompasses relation of the human being with the self, with each other, with nature, with classes and mode of production, i.e., society at large. Integral to Marxian understanding of freedom is the concept of the human being. In non-Marxian perspectives, concept of man, individual, person, etc. has been associated in various aspects such as anthropological (culturally determined person), biological (physiology and anatomy of man and woman), psychological (rational being, emotional and psychological aspects a la Freud, et al.), religious-spiritual (part of religious and spiritual community) and social (familial, group etc.). The concepts of man, person and individual are partial and unrelated to human relations in terms of the relation of production. Human relations must be understood in terms of the production process and social relationships arising out of class relations. Marx understands the human being in terms of human essence, i.e., human being in the social context. The Marxian position is that the human being cannot and should not be understood devoid of social context and relationships. It is the process of production that human beings produce, engage creatively, realize their self and achieve self-fulfilment. It is argued that Marx views the human being as a self-creating social being. Based on the mode of production, i.e., nature of ownership of means of productions (feudal, capitalist or socialist), the human being will attain self-creativity or get alienated. In general, the Marxian perspective holds that social ownership of production, absence of private property and classes are the context in which the human being will not be alienated. Marx terms ‘man as a species-being’50 to signify the social aspect of man. as a social being. His view of the human being as primarily a social being combined with the idea of realizing at work, signifies that the individual has to realize his/her creativity in the process of production and in cooperation with other fellow beings.
This view is primarily against the individualist view of human beings as atomist and self-interested. Atomistic, self-seeking and a self-centred human being is dehumanized and alienated. Humanity in man is primarily due to social relations. The idea is that whatever a human being makes out of himself/herself, is a product of social context. An atomist individual is not destined to be a human being but a competitive winner or loser. By conceiving freedom as part of social relations, the Marxian view refutes the very basis of liberal philosophy based on individuality. Secondly, freedom is not taken as something to be enjoyed due to non-interference of others or removal of obstacles, but primarily as a result of self-creative engagement in work and production. Only in socially owned means of production, an individual will enjoy freedom. This is because one is not subject of a production process that is geared for profit. In short, freedom is absence of alienation. Since alienation is due to private property, abolition of private property is integral to the Marxian conception of freedom. We can discuss different issues that are involved in the Marxian perspective on freedom in terms of dialectical materialism and objective laws that govern human lives, mode of production and class relations, private property, alienation, etc.
Leave a Reply