Abstract: In this essay, I address the seeming tension between freedom and security, occasioned by a reflection of the events of September 11, and argue that on the contrary, security is obtained by intensifying freedom rather than giving it up. In doing so, I propose two ways by which freedom can be intensified: through the respect for human rights and the encouragement of democratic capitalism.

The events of the year past surrounding September 11 have spurred some questions concerning the value of freedom and the quest for security. Even Shell and the Economist are hosting their annual essay competition with the title, “How much freedom should we trade for our security?” It seems intuitive to think that somehow freedom and security are mutually exclusive and to obtain more of one we have to sacrifice some of the other. But having given this some thought, the matter as I see it need not be a dilemma between freedom and security. Rather, these go hand in hand.

Let me first start with the problem. An English thinker once said that without some big brother in charge the rest of the guys will go fighting amongst themselves. Of course, one reason this happens can be plain malice: there is no question evil exists, which drives persons to inflict harm on others. Other times, it could be greed: people overpower another to acquire objects they covet. Most of the time however, it is fear. Fear, whom Thomas Hobbes called his twin, is a major cause when the world or any situation is found to make life nasty, brutish and short. The mechanics of the game theory are such that for intelligent and calculative mankind the conclusion is inevitable: war.

War need not be so narrowly defined as actual physical engagement. It includes the times when there is desperate anxiety and preparation for the worst.  But we have not detailed the mechanics of our sad fate. What is it about fear that puts one another at odds? When ignorance bred by distance cannot grant us the safe assumption that the other is so kind as not to injure us, nor that the other is so strong as to be absolutely invincible, the least we can do in our worry is to take him down first at danger’s first signal.

This past year we witnessed the horrific events surrounding September 11—more likely in my estimation a preemptive assault on affluent society and its semblance of power but under the guise of pseudo-Islamic jihad rather than any kind of authentic religious war with real religious motivations, since nothing in Islam properly advocates such atrocity. One can only sympathize with the lamentation of the American people: it is just so wrong; it is plain evil. Evil or not, the real problem it seems to me is that unfortunately on the other side of the fence, they were afraid, and they continue to be afraid.

What shall one do? Should one install greater barriers? Shall one send troops to quash them? Perhaps if one showed them some might they would leave you alone to live life as you want to. One has a right to be free. Perhaps if one convinced them that they are damned to be losers you could be left alone to do as you want, pardon my French. Their sentiments exactly, quite unfortunately. And we are all believers, with God on each our sides, and God can work miracles. One need not therefore despair—because one can simply never lose. The point is, then, it will never end. Thus I think we have to try something else.