An AP article by Chase Squires came out this weekend, covering Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’ remarks at the Air Force Academy. During his speech, the Attorney General expressed his disagreement with the recent ruling against the Bush administration’s warrantless surveillance program. I was not able to find the entire text of his speech and can only refer to his remarks as presented by Mr. Squires.

Quoting from the article:

Gonzales, told about 400 cadets from the academy’s political science and law classes, that some see the program as on the verge of stifling freedom rather than protecting the country. “But this view is shortsighted,” he said. “its definition of freedom — one utterly divorced from civic responsibility — is superficial and is itself a grave threat to the liberty and security of the American people.”

I found myself wondering how Alberto Gonzales would define freedom as opposed to the definition of freedom held by those opposing warrentless surveillance. I wish that I could ask him to expand upon his remarks and tell me what freedom looks like in his world.

I am fond of dictionary entries, and so I turned to my 1989 World Book Dictionary for a concise definition of freedom. I liked what I found:

The state or condition of being free: In this then consists freedom…in our being able to act or not to act, according as we shall choose or will (John Locke). Not being under another’s control; power to do, say or think as one pleases; liberty…

Where does ‘civic responsibility’ come into play? Can we say that true freedom is the freedom to choose to ignore our civic responsibilities, to behave badly or indifferently? I’ve often heard it said that ‘with freedom comes responsibility’. Is that true? Perhaps we should say instead ‘with freedom comes risk’. What do you think freedom means? Is freedom even possible in our complicated and dangerous world? Is Alberto Gonzales right in saying that freedom divorced from civic responsibility is superficial and a grave threat to our liberty and security? Or is he twisting the meaning of freedom in some sort of 1984 doublespeak to fulfill some less than honorable goal of government?

This entry was posted on Monday, November 20th, 2006 at 7:30 pm and is filed under General Government. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.