On Freedom
The author of “On Tyranny” articulates practices and attitudes related to the concept of freedom and the ways it can be misunderstood.
Stats for nerds
1recommend
8mentions
5people
2025–2026years
25% recommend75% neutral
Mentions per year
What Hacker News says
- Like a lot of things recently, it reminds me again of Timothy Snyder's book On Freedom. I think the world would be on a much better path if more people took its core message to heart: that your "freedom" in how to lead your life is not just an absence of oppression, but something made possible for you by an entire society collaborating on giving others these opportunities, by maintaining infrastructure, education, emergency services, etc. etc.
I like the thought experiment of considering how much of your current life's comforts and liberties you would still have if you lived as a hermit in the woods. Nobody tells you what to do there, but you'd quickly find out how much your luck depended on society.
Being able to buy my food at the supermarket instead of having to go hunt and forage for it every day gives me a lot of additional energy and time to exercise other freedoms.
- Timothy Snyder's book "On Freedom" might be a good read for you. It's about this common (but quite recent) fallacy that freedom means only freedom of government interference or oppression, rather than true personal freedom being something that needs to be built and maintained by society at large -- which would be the core role of government.
In simple terms: how free do you think you would truly be to lead life the way you want if there were no institutions that produce and distribute electricity, manage communications networks, research and produce medicine, provide emergency services, build transportation infrastructure... something to think about. Few modern westerners would equate the idea of "freedom" with that of fully self-sufficient, isolated hermit life with everything that entails.
A lot of people today probably simply forgot how much of their cushy lifestyle was made possible by government, because they never had to work or fight to build it.
- Two days ago, I purchased Timothy Snyder's two most recent books from a local bookstore for $40. (On Tyranny & On Freedom) What should be cheaper are school and textbooks. Those seem priced like a racket.
Boycott Amazon, Buycott Local and support your neighbors
- > People like you are the death of freedom.
Define "freedom". Freedom to or freedom from?
See Timothy Snyder's recent book On Freedom:
> Freedom is the great American commitment, but as Snyder argues, we have lost sight of what it means—and this is leading us into crisis. Too many of us look at freedom as the absence of state power: We think we’re free if we can do and say as we please, and protect ourselves from government overreach. But true freedom isn’t so much freedom from as freedom to—the freedom to thrive, to take risks for futures we choose by working together. Freedom is the value that makes all other values possible.
* https://timothysnyder.org/on-freedom
Snyder is an historian specializing in the history of Central and Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union, and the Holocaust, who previously wrote an award-wining book on that area during the 1930/40s:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodlands
Some other recent books of his:
- My experience/impression is social and as an outsider, so your information/experience is probably much better than mine, although mine is a bit later than yours, but also not current.
> I know, I lived it for a number of years, owned a business there, was deeply immersed in the goings on, and many frank discussions with our circle of well educated Chinese (many of whom were emigrating or at least getting their kids out of the country).
How predictable/arbitrary would you say the operating environment was?
Predictability suggests rule of law, while arbitrariness strongly suggests none. I'm not sure I would buy IP related examples as related to rule of law, and I would also likely try to distinguish between a hyper competitive environment between unequally resourced people and arbitrary executions of power, which I don't quite think are the same.
> faustian bargain
Timothy Snyder is my favorite political thinker, he recently wrote "On Freedom" and talks about "freedom from" vs "freedom to" at length. Money in many ways is freedom. If you don't have money you are not very free. So China getting richer, while in America Wages are stagnant and losing buying power year over year has implications for overall freedom. In many ways China is becoming more free and America less free if you think about "freedom to" and "freedom from" holistically rather than just "freedom from" which is a very American way of thinking about freedom. Chinese policy becomes a lot more defensible in terms of "freedom to" while it is completely indefensible in terms of "freedom from."
Where once I saw authoritarianism in China, now I ask how much of their behavior is actually an answer to the Paradox of Intolerance and how true the argument of the greater needs for ensuring order in a society at that scale (which from what I can tell is definitely propaganda used to sell it internally). Don't get me wrong, I completely see china as an authoritarian state rife with unchecked (and therefore arbitrary) power, but China is also functional in a way the US is very much not and that's become very interesting to think about, for me.
I'm interested in your analysis of China from a "freedom to" perspective.
> no opportunity to mount any resistance, and therefore "mei banfa"
Timothy Snyder calls this "the politics of eternity."
> middle class will support the government
Given what you've said so far, what does it mean for the middle class to not support the government? Consent is the core primitive of western political ideology and foundational idea of 'rule of law,' so the implication of withdrawing consent is certainly interesting.
- He has a new book On Freedom, too. I haven't read it yet, but I have watched him give excellent talks on youtube, which reference it.
I believe his core thesis in On Freedom is that America has focused on negative freedom, when what really matters is positive freedom.
"Negative freedom" is the idea that no government should interfere with your life. Authoritarian regimes arbitrarily exercise power, and that results in people being prevented from doing things or forced to do things. Maybe that's restrictions on speech or protest. Focusing on "negative freedom" turns people against their governments, which creates a sort of power vacuum anyone with resources is happy to fill. Negative freedom is good, nobody should want the government interfering with their lives, but focusing solely on negative freedom leads to authoritarianism. We can see this effect right now with "free speech absolutists" functionally becoming oligarchs.
He says what people should focus on instead is "positive freedom" -- The idea that you have the freedom to do what you want. If you don't have health, money, or education, you can't really be free. There is no freedom in a hospital bed. So healthcare creates positive freedom. Building housing lets you spend more money on things you want to do instead of rent, that's positive freedom. Without education, you are more easily victimized by those who wish to manipulate you and you are less capable of producing things of value. So education is freeing.
He also has two major series of talks.
One, I believe, touches on his book The Road to Unfreedom and is absolutely worth watching if you have any interest in politics.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ej_D0YkDjy8
The other is a reading of On Tyranny as well as discussion of each chapter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tocssf3w80&list=PLhZxrogyTo...
He also has a substack with quality information and analysis: https://snyder.substack.com/
He says from a historian's perspective what is happening is a coup and it is also very likely a decapitation strike, particularly if we imagine what is happening here were happening to a foreign country: https://archive.is/fNpSS https://archive.is/1xkxK
