Damnable choice

[Supercharts]

Let's get very basic.
You are offered a choice between PEACE and FREEDOM. Which do you choose?
You cannot argue or equivocate. You Must make a choice. Think of this as a doorway. You must pass through one and only one. Peace or Freedom. By choosing one or the other that's what your Life will be until you die.
What is you basic value?
Peace or Freedom?
There's no "What do you mean by "Peace" or "Freedom".
You get to choose once and only once.
Which door do you choose?

[Jon_in_london]

Peace.

[Supercharts]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london
Peace.
Good choice Jon. Thank you for participating!

[crocodile deathroll]

Feel free to belt me over the head with a sledge hammer

[MRC_Hans]

I voted freedom, full well knowing that in real life, I would probably choose peace. But given the uneqivocal choice, with no opportunity to evaluate the quality of either option, I must choose freedom.

The only unequivocal form of peace I know of is death.

Hans

[JAR]

I chose peace. We have to have laws to keep people from disrupting peace.

[athon]

I think the notion of freedom is more subjective than peace. Freedom of what? Speech? Action? Opinion? Religion?

I would gladly sacrifice a part of my freedom for peace.

Athon

[MRC_Hans]

Originally posted by athon
*snip*

I would gladly sacrifice a part of my freedom for peace.

Athon So would I, but the initial question did not allow for partial sacrifices.

Hans

[Andonyx]

I'm sorry I have to go with Freedom, for the simple reason that someone else's idea of peace is not necessarily mine.

[Aquila_ka_Hecate]

Freedom.

Freedom without peace can be worked around, even born to a degree.

But peace without freedom sounds worse than death.
It sounds, in fact, like the sort of state many Americans are hurrying to lock themselves into.

[DragonLady]

Definetly freedom. Being free means I can create my own peace. And my idea of "peace" is a world in which everyone is free.

Chaotic it is...but I can find my own way, and whether 'my' road be lonely or crowded I will be at home on it. :)

[JAR]

I see there are a lot of anarchists and nihilists in this forum.

[fishbob]

Peace without freedom would just be orderliness, all neat and tidy, and easy to manage. You could be peaceful and never free.

Freedom without peace would be a lot of work, and maybe if you worked hard enough, it might be peaceful sometimes.

[Graham]

I voted 'peace' since that's something of a personal quest of mine.

It would be interesting to see a breakdown of the poll answers by age and country of voter. I wonder what trends would emerge, if any.

Graham

[LuxFerum]

Where is the PLANET X option????????:mad:

[Jon_in_london]

Obviously you need both.

Freedom to have people running around trying to shoot you and hit you in the face with an axe isnt much freedom at all. Peace without freedom? Why not just go to a nice quiet jail cell?

Obviously you cant have freedom without a bit of peace and peace without freedom isnt really worth that much either.

BUT:

Id personally rather live in a jail cell though, than have people trying to kill and maim me and my family and friends the whole time.

[BillyTK]

Complete freedom is only attainable in death or by isolating oneself from the rest of society, so I'm kind of willing to give up some freedom because I'm a sociable kinda guy who likes being with people. On the other hand, absolute peace is probably only attainable in death, but then imposing peace from without by use/threat of force would not be peace, so yeah, I'd go through the peace door.

[LW]

Originally posted by DragonLady
Being free means I can create my own peace.

No, you can't, the wording of the question prohibits it. You get either freedom or peace, not both.

[Kodiak]

Freedom.

If I have true freedom, I carry carry on the struggle for peace.


To paraphrase: "Anyone willing to sacrifice freedom for security (peace), deserves neither."

[Kodiak]

Originally posted by athon
I would gladly sacrifice a part of my freedom for peace.

Then it seems my post above should be especially poignant to you...

[BillyTK]

Originally posted by Kodiak
Freedom.

If I have true freedom, I carry carry on the struggle for peace.


To paraphrase: "Anyone willing to sacrifice freedom for security (peace), deserves neither."

I'm thinking of starting a collection of hybrid versions of this Benjamin Franklin quote, but anyway, does anyone know the exact wording and original context of what Franklin said?

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Kodiak
Freedom.

If I have true freedom, I carry carry on the struggle for peace.


To paraphrase: "Anyone willing to sacrifice freedom for security (peace), deserves neither."

If I have peace, I carry on the struggle for freedom.

You cannot have freedom without first having peace.

[Tricky]

A peaceful slave? No thank you. If someone tried to remove my freedom, I would fight for it. I wouldn't necessarily fight for someone else's freedom though.

[Kodiak]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


If I have peace, I carry on the struggle for freedom.

You cannot have freedom without first having peace.

Unfortunately for you, your version doesn't hold water.

Try struggling for freedom from within a prison cell - oh, you'll be peaceful enough... :rolleyes:

But don't worry, since you've already posted: "I'd personally rather live in a jail cell though..." :(

[LW]

Originally posted by Kodiak


If I have true freedom, I carry carry on the struggle for peace.

Here's a picture of a man (http://www.adlertag.de/asse/marseille1.gif). Try to guess his age. That's what living in a constant struggle does to people.

[Ladyhawk]

Freedom.

[Nie Trink Wasser]

I chose freedom.

If I walked through a door and had only 'peace' that could mean that someone could give me a lobotomy and keep me from fighting against what I consider unhealthy.

[Mike B.]

Originally posted by LW


Here's a picture of a man (http://www.adlertag.de/asse/marseille1.gif). Try to guess his age. That's what living in a constant struggle does to people.

Well LW who is the guy?
He is wearing an Iron Cross which should tell us something?

Is he in his early 40s?

[Kodiak]

Originally posted by LW


Here's a picture of a man (http://www.adlertag.de/asse/marseille1.gif). Try to guess his age. That's what living in a constant struggle does to people.

He must have freedom then...otherwise, he wouldn't be smiling. :)

[Ladyhawk]

Originally posted by JAR
I see there are a lot of anarchists and nihilists in this forum.

I don't think that people who value freedom over peace believe that "all values are worthless and that nothing that is knowable can be communicated" (Webster definition of nihilism ) or that "all governments are oppressive and undesirable and should be abolished " (Webster: anarchism ).

I mean, you have to admit, the question is somewhat constrictive. It's a choice of peace at any cost or freedom at any cost. There isn't any room for negotiation. So, I wouldn't assume that anyone who chose peace is automatically a tyrant or pacifist.

[Ladyhawk]

...even though a hypothetical, is this question valid? I mean, is it possible to have freedom without peace or vice-verse? Isn't the reason that we don't have peace today, due in part to each country's pursuit of their own freedom? And, doesn't the promise of peace automatically presume the sacrifice of some individual (or national) freedom?

...just wondering out loud.....:confused:

[LW]

Originally posted by Mike B.


Well LW who is the guy?

Hans-Joachim Marseille. Born 13 December 1919, died 30 September 1942, before his 23rd birthday. I don't know exactly when the picture was taken, sometime in 1942. [Edited to add: he was a Luftwaffe fighter pilot who flew 382 combat missions and participated in over 200 aerial combats, shooting down 158 aircraft.]

Steven LeBlanc writes in Constant battles about the tribes of highland Papua-New Guinea. Up until 1960s they were among the freest people in the world. They had no government at all. They also didn't have peace. Approximately 25% of men and 5% of women died in warfare. A man had to be on guard against an attack all times. They were glad to exchange part of their freedom for peace.

[RichardR]

It depends how much freedom I would have to give up to get peace. Assuming I would have to give up all freedom, I would choose freedom over peace.

[aggle_rithm]

Being locked in a box would be peaceful as hell. But I wouldn't go for it.

[DragonLady]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london
Obviously you need both.

Freedom to have people running around trying to shoot you and hit you in the face with an axe isnt much freedom at all. Peace without freedom? Why not just go to a nice quiet jail cell?

Obviously you cant have freedom without a bit of peace and peace without freedom isnt really worth that much either.

BUT:

Id personally rather live in a jail cell though, than have people trying to kill and maim me and my family and friends the whole time.

:confused: Is that what would do if you were completely free? Spend your time trying to kill & maim other people & their families? If not, why do you attribute that to others?

IMO, if you're completely free, you're free to defend yourself against the occasional whacko. And if everyone defends themselves, fewer and fewer whackos will be willing to risk their lives by trying to attack someone.


No, you can't, the wording of the question prohibits it. You get either freedom or peace, not both.

Why? With complete freedom of movement and total autonomy one can choose peace. "Freedom" isn't freedom if the ability to choose a peaceful & non-confrontive life isn't available. That's a restriction.

You're boxing it up with a false assumption -the assumption that there will always be someone trying to curtail another's freedom for gain or religious ideals or something. But in an absolutely free society there's no reason that should be.

Or, turn the question around; if one has absolute peace but no freedom, then anyone who disturbs the peace receives what? Loss of freedoms? There aren't any left to lose! So then what are the consequences to be risked? Death? For many of us, the loss of individuality required to live in absolute peace with everyone else -regardless of ideology or attitude- is worse than death anyway.

[Luciana]

Peace. Because this is the ultimate goal. Both in an individual and in a universal level.

[SRW]

I can think of no more peaceful places than a cemetery and a prison during lock down.


I'll take freedom.

[John Harrison]

Freedom here as well.