“Freedom is an intellectual achievement which requires disavowal of collectivism and embrace of individualism.”

That is a great start !

Did you hear this federal government?

Though the statement, on its face is absolutely correct, freedom is much more than just an intellectual achievement. For example, freedom is also a description of element expression. Freedom, from a lawful perspective is not so much free from but more, free to (freedom is also more than just a conjugation of free) An intellectual achievement would presuppose the whole of freedom is a philosophical exercise. Because there are no absolutes or finite descriptions in, of or to a concept in philosophy (freedom here being reduced to an abstract concept), no real conclusion can be drawn. A collectivist could agree or disagree with the statement - depending on the philosophy used.

Freedom is many things...enjoying the fruits of your own labor for example. But ultimately it means taking responsibility for your own choices...and that's why the Liberals hate it and are jealous of what free people have accomplished.

I like what you said, J Carlton.

This is a bunch of hooey!

Freedom is an individual intellectual aspiration that is impossible to achieve without the support of an open community!

Rich, thanks for proving my point. There are more than one aspect, element and understanding to freedom. The collectivist / progressive socialist will always find a philosophical reason to disagree (or agree).

Rich you almost had it right. If you had said an "open and free community" you would have been a lot closer. Being free doesn't require any community at all, but I prefer community. A "Free and Liberated Community of Individual Sovereigns "Freely" associating for the benefit of all.

'Freedom' is an irrelevant concept without community -- if there are no other people to be in relationship with, you are inherently 'free' anyway. The point being made is that we are inherently 'free' and thus inherently responsible. The issue is in relation to other people -- will you let them be 'free' and responsible and will they let you? In a free society the answer is always conditional upon one's actions -- do they violate anyone else's freedom or very specifically their property. Justice is always about the protection from THEFT -- whether it be theft of one's property, one's body, one's ideals, one's liberty, etc.. The price of the protection of the community is everyone's voluntary participation in it -- when serving one's fellow man is no longer voluntary but compulsory, the community becomes a collective under the thumb of a council backed by mob rule. Freedom is inherent -- it does not need the "support" of the community to be achieved because it is inherent, BUT it does need the 'respect' of the community to be enjoyed by all.