It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Defining Freedom

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 05:52 PM
I once heard about a group of people who destroyed their passports and any other forms of ID and they set out on a mission to see how far around the world they could get living as human beings from planet Earth.

I never heard of how far they got or what became of them after the 'stunt'.

From what I remember they got quite far and were given passage into, through and out of several different countries.

Is this method of freedom a governments worst fear?
How does this affect individual countries laws if you were to be charged with anything?

If you declared yourself a Human being from planet Earth, you effectively denounce every country, government and law that there is.
The entire system is currently operating under a national identity scheme.

A lot of people prefer to be paid their wages in cash rather than it going straight to a bank via direct debit. There's no law that states we have to have a bank account, but getting a job today that pays cash is almost impossible.
You're literally forced into submission and getting a bank account.

But you don't have to. We all have the right to work and be paid for it.
We all have the right to travel this planet as we see fit. It is not the individuals fault as to where or when or to whom they were born.

National Identity is old hat and should be dealt with soon.

Can discarding your identity and claiming yourself to be a Human from Earth free everyone from this grip we are all currently under?
Would you be an illegal alien in the region of your birth?
Would you be kicked out of your birth place or imprisoned for not being patriotic?

If you found yourself shoved out, which part of the world could you go to?

In effect, you can go anywhere you please. You are no longer bound by the system. You do not have a country to which you could be deported back to. You might be imprisoned by any place you visit for trespass, but then that's against Human rights because, as a Human from Earth, there are no boundaries.

posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 06:25 PM
I've just seen a thread in the breaking news forum and i think it has high relevance to the point I'm making and gives further strength to the idea of breaking free of the control we are under.

here's the thread;

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 05:11 PM
Daniel was free in the lion's den. Oppositely, NWO is by its very name all about a "unified world".

S* & F~, though : first as total liberty of the body indeedly help freeing the mind(s) on a mass scale, second as a boundary-free world soon or late will be - without any neofascist übercentered Gov rulin'it.

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 07:30 PM
Good post Extralien you raise some interesting points.

You said it would be nice to have the freedom to be paid cash for working. That's fine, but shouldn't an employer also have the freedom to pay you in a method of his choice? After all, you can withdraw all your earnings in cash the minute you are paid? Unless..."ahaaa!" have debts and outgoings which are controlled by the establishments that are automatically taken at reguler intervals...mortgages, credit card payments, loans, bills etc. All of which were chosen by you at the time of buying your house, using the card or using a phone etc.

All those choices made by people come with responsibility, and banks must ensure those debts are paid BEFORE the money is spent, unless an overdraft is part of the plan. Without some kind of guarantee, they would be left with no money in their banks and untold amounts owing from people who are reluctant to pay up.

Now don't get me wrong...I think banks are parasites! but who else would offer people enough money to buy a house or a car etc, and I don't know many people who would save up enough in cash.

As far the freedom to travel, I wonder how the people you mentioned were actually travelling?

Is it not a freedom to be able to walk into an airport, present a passport, pay with money you don't immediately have to part with and go just about anywhere?

The freedoms you talk about don't seem realistic if applied to our modern world, if anyone could go anywhere and not be identified, would you accept strangers the way you do in everyday life today. Would you pay every bill on time and expect everyone else to so you keep your utilities?

Consider want to go on holiday to a foreign country:

Scenario a: you book online and print out the booking details, you drive to the airport and park in the long-stay car park, you check-in showing your passport and booking conformation details, get on the plane and fly to your destination.
You hire a car while you're there and book some day-trips. Your happy, brown, relaxed and have had a great holiday, you get back on a plane, get into your car and drive home. Ahhhh! that was nice. And you haven't even had the bills yet!

Scenario b: You cannot book online or at an agent because you cannot identify yourself, so you drive to the airport. You park in the long-stay car park but have to pay cash in advance. You find a flight for your destination and pay cash as you check-in your baggage. You are searched thoroughly because you could be anybody and are not trusted! You get on the plane which is flown and run by people who cannot be identified as qualified for the job. You arrive at your destination and wish to hire a car but there are none available due to the prohibative costs of insurance! Battered taxis take you everywhere. You book some day-trips again using cash. You finish your stay and return to the airport to pay for a return flight, once again being submitted to a search and get on the plane. You return home....Pwew, now you need a holiday! Luckily you weren't mugged by a complete stranger while you were away even though you were carrying shedloads of cash. Airports in particular would be heaven for theives as would all holiday destinations.
Was it all worth the "Freedom of non-identity"?

Better the devil you know I say. I know which scenario I'd choose. You've just got to make the right choices and use the systems to your advantage.

I like the idea, but it justs isn't practicle to say "all" forms of ID. Sometimes we NEED it, for ourselves and from others.

posted on May, 16 2008 @ 02:43 PM
And there lies the problem...

We are all taught these methods of control from an early age and so it becomes the norm.

Have you ever seen a Gypsy with a passport or driving license or a bank account? Incredibly, a vast majority of Romany people are still living as they did, but laws are constantly being passed to restrict them and confine them to the norms of everyone elses society.

the term "gypsy" in the United Kingdom has come to mean, in common culture, anyone who travels with no fixed abode (regardless of ethnic group). This use of the term is synonymous with "pikey", which is seen by many as a derogatory term.

3. gypsy One inclined to a nomadic, unconventional way of life.
4. A person who moves from place to place as required for employment

The European Roma Rights Centre educates Roma activists about what courses of action they themselves have open and can take. The ERRC is also training Roma rights activists, which will be a great help in furthering the fight against discrimination.

This next web site is quite surprising actually... what on Earth is the world bank doing? They have a map of Romany populations... Why?

If people are unable to earn enough to buy the things they need, then there really is something very wrong with the current system. Yes, getting into debt is a decision to be made, but to anyone who has no idea of what it really means will fall into the possible trap of lifetime debt. Always owing something of no value to someone else, having to work twice as hard to repay a worthless debt on top of feeding and supporting you and your family.

As you'll see here, these are some of the issues facing the romany people and their lifestyle,

* To be the political representation of all Roma in the world (Sinti, Lovari, Ashkali, Chorichani, Romungro, Vlax, Manush, etc.), and to act in the best interests of the Roma nation.

* To develop the cultural traditions, customs and language of the Roma.

* To cooperate in solving the economic, social, cultural, educational, and humanitarian problems of the Roma in each of the individual countries in which they live.

* To serve as a centre for observing the activities of individual countries in achieving these goals.

* To enforce and strengthen regard for human rights and fundamental liberties for all irrespective of race, sex, language or religion.

International Romany Union

A stateless person is someone with no citizenship or nationality. It may be because the state that gave their previous nationality has ceased to exist and there is no successor state, or their nationality has been repudiated by their own state, effectively making them refugees. People may also be stateless if they are members of a group which is denied citizen status in the country on whose territory they are born, if they are born in disputed territories, if they are born in an area ruled by an entity whose independence is not internationally recognized, or if they are born on territory over which no modern state claims sovereignty.

Individuals may also become stateless voluntarily, by formally renouncing their citizenship while on foreign soil; however, not all states recognize such renunciations on the part of their citizens.
Makes me wonder why certain countries wil not accept your declaration of statelessness... and it seems it's getting harder to do too...

Often, depending on the specific laws of the countries involved, one may not renounce a citizenship unless one is a dual citizen and can show citizenship in a country other than that of the undesired citizenship. Consulates do not want to deal with the complications associated with statelessness if they can avoid it. on September 20, 1954 the United Nations adopted the Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons: an active policy to prevent people becoming or remaining stateless.

Too much paperwork? is that the only real least you'l give them something to do..

So why the determination to stop people giving up or losing a national identity? Is it all purely for financial gain and stability of the markets? Is it designed to stabilise the banking systems which brings me on to another thought.

Identity theft has become a major issue over the last few years. Why? What is so important about your identity details that TPTB want you to be sure you don't reveal to anyone with criminal intent. Again, this can only be for financial profit and banking/market issues.

We all have placed our ID details with countless jobs, companies, online sites, application forms, and many other places. Who is to say that any of the emlpoyees of these companies, or the companies themselves will not use your details in the wrong manner?

The idea has been posed to us that loans or items can be obtained through the copying of our ID, to which, the individual would theoretically be responsible, until proven to be otherwise. If our ID was used in such a manner then it is not our fault. It is the way the system works that others have found loopholes to obtain what they want.

If I was stateless and took a TV, then that's theft. If I used someone elses ID to obtain the same TV then that is fraud and carries a much heavier penalty.
Very odd.

I've lost count of the amount of times and places that my ID has been sent to, placed in or recorded in some manner.
There is even an employment agency in the UK that equires you to register with them ONLINE... all your data typed out onto a web site and sent via the internet just so you can possibly obtain some temporary or full time work.

The systems potential financial losses can be the only real reason why we all need an ID. If someone used my ID to take everything out of my bank account then that is not my fault. If someone came along and robbed me of all my cash, then that's partly my fault and partly the thiefs fault.

My fault as I was carrying it, the thiefs fault because of the value the system has put onto money making it a needful thing

posted on May, 16 2008 @ 05:23 PM

Originally posted by Extralien
The systems potential financial losses can be the only real reason why we all need an ID.

I would have to disagree with you there BIG TIME.

Like I pointed out in my post, ID can be a useful thing too, not just for financial security but for the ability to use our present freedoms to their fullest. The less ID a person has, the harder some things would be and there must be a point where a lack of evidence to prove who you are would eventually make some things prohibitive...therefore, freedoms are lost.

Without an ID (passport, driving licence etc) how could I fly back to the UK to hire a car and visit my sister in hospital?

My passport will allow me to get on a plane which my credit card bought the ticket for. Hire the car which was also booked using my credit card and drive it using my driving licence. I will also need to prove I am an immediate family member to actually see my sister in hospital.

And just for something to consider....this is the first time I have used my one and only credit card in over a year. I've had it for 28 years and use it on average once a year. I also pay all balances when I recieve the statement. THATS how I use the system to MY advantage. A small price to pay for these freedoms wouldn't you agree?

Your ideas are interesting ones, but good only up to a point. And they must be applied to the real world today.

Too idealistic in my opinion. I think your point of view is more about some peoples wish for a lack of responsibility for their actions. While it would gain personal freedom for the individual, it would acheive the opposite for everyone else!

Would you still have the same trust for people in the world if everyone was a "gypsy"? I know I wouldn't.

You are trying to endorse chaos. Sorry
If you don't want "big brother" to know you, simplify your identity records....say no to storecards, one credit card used only when necessary, sign only what you have to, don't register so much stuff on the internet, don't take out loans, pay cash for bills, have one bank account etc, etc, etc. If a person cannot do these kind of things...They must ACCEPT the responsibilities that come with their "wants" of "convenience" and "stuff".
As for a passport or driving licence...I want an airline to offer me a safe flight, and I want to know the drivers sharing the road I'm on are capable and responsible for using their car. Do I not have those kind of freedoms now and ONLY because we can be identified.

Basically, how can you have total freedom yourself when everyone else has it? Paradoxical and impossible.

The world is what you make it,.....for information and a comparison of freedom across the world, the "Quality of Life Index" Here will shed some light.

You really need to consider the bigger picture.

You talk white for freedom, I talk black for responsibility but only because I see the gray in between, and I'm happy with a little gray........

posted on May, 16 2008 @ 05:36 PM
we are free to make the decision of the options that are brought apon us. we are also free to dis-regard them, but as to how far we will go like that is the question....

we are controlled by Money an the people who have so much of it that they control others by just that very fact. Which imo is a totally flawed system,

Ever wonder How life would be like if we actually worked for what we needed.... not work for money but work for things we need or want.

I betcha many wouldnt be in the sorry state they are in.... It is from the way we conduct everyday life now that we have lost so many important people in various subjects. For they are forced to struggle with the everyday needs an work for them by any means they can, Yes they can goto college an pursue the carrer of their choce but not if they have a family to feed, or a huge debt that came from medical or a bad marriage.

I mean we are forced to stay where we are in many aspects just becuz to get to where we wanna be in life we need to work work save work pay bills work save pay bills with our savings an so forth an by the time you have whatcha need, your 80 years old, an thats why you see so many oldies with Brand new convertibles. If we were able to work for what we needed we all would be doing the things we wanted which in return would yeild greater discoveries an inventions.....

Money an the people who control the vast sums of it are the reason Me you an pretty much everyone you know are living from Paycheck to paycheck.

" I have a dream, that someday we wont be so focused on money becuz it wont be as important as it is now"

People die becuz they dont have enuff money an In the total scheme of things, thats 100% wrong. We werent born with hundreds of dollars an told Hey you have all the money you will need to buy the things you need. We are born without money, an told we have to get it or else we will starve an be homeless.

[edit on 16-5-2008 by Trance Optic]

posted on May, 16 2008 @ 08:08 PM

Originally posted by Trance Optic
" I have a dream, that someday we wont be so focused on money becuz it wont be as important as it is now"

Only if people can learn to accept and make better choices

Ever wonder How life would be like if we actually worked for what we needed.... not work for money but work for things we need or want.

And therein lies the problem...needs and wants are two very different things and a lot of people don't and/or can't distinguish between the two.

Why does everybody think they NEED so much "Stuff"?

On a basic level... Air to breathe, water to drink, food to eat, a bit of space and some human contact. Most other things are optional and from choice.

You complain about the people who control the money yet you have allowed them to do so and now you wish to bite the hand that feeds you.

Don't just take what you are offered because you can, choose for yourself and then offering what nobody wants becomes pointless.

People die becuz they dont have enuff money an In the total scheme of things, thats 100% wrong. We werent born with hundreds of dollars an told Hey you have all the money you will need to buy the things you need. We are born without money, an told we have to get it or else we will starve an be homeless.

Rubbish! You are using a computer right now that you chose to own. Would you rather go hungry so you can still use it....NO! and your parents probably had money when you were born, you did not have to work the second you "popped out".

The phrase "keeping up with the Jones's" ring a bell?

posted on May, 19 2008 @ 04:16 AM
This is one of the big problems of defining freedom.

If you were all alone on a planet you would only be free of the planet you were previously from.

On this new planet you will have to learn what to eat, what not to eat, the best materials for making shelter etc.. so you'll be bound by the laws of that planets available resources... And you may hate the very taste of every single bit of available are you free?

What choices could you really make to change the things that restrict you here on Earth? What do you feel you could do without to make you have the sense of freedom, or gain a freedom you never had before?

Would grabbing the idea of all cows to be holy and not to be harmed or eaten make you more free?...would adding to that the two hour lunch breaks the French get add to your freedom? Would a working week of less hours free you up to be with your family or do the things you wanted? Would another countries laws on human rights that actually benefit humans rather than the coffers of some greedy council help you be more free in your daily choices and decisions?

I wonder just how many really good laws and social practices there are in the world that, if combined, would make a society of freedom that everyone would deeply enjoy and benefit from.

posted on May, 19 2008 @ 10:15 PM

Originally posted by Extralien
This is one of the big problems of defining freedom.

I think the preverbial nail has been hit on it's head there mate

If we all thought as 1, things would be easier all round eh.....but very boring

Let's give up trying to define things like freedom and god and 670 billion different realities and just enjoy what we can individually and keep standing for the freedoms we all want in our own lives, the ones that matter.

And for anyone wanting to dispense with things like passports and licences etc.....good luck, you're gonna need it in a world of insecure melomaniacs!

posted on May, 20 2008 @ 01:10 AM

Originally posted by nerbot

Originally posted by Extralien
This is one of the big problems of defining freedom.

If we all thought as 1, things would be easier all round eh.....but very boring

Maybe, but i don't think it would be boring. If we all thought as 1, then at least we would all achieve the goals we set for ourselves.

If we all though that a new idea should be investigated and worked on or if a new mode of transports should be built, then they are a collective thought and you would be able to organise the workforce to achieve those goals for all.

You'd still have the diversity of free thought, yet it would be shared in such a manner as to mimic an ant colony.

I think this would make the place a lot more interesting and things would get done faster and better and we'd achieve much more as a race.

posted on May, 20 2008 @ 04:35 PM

Originally posted by Extralien
If we all thought as 1, then at least we would all achieve the goals we set for ourselves.

But "we" would become "I", and there would be no "ourselves", just "ourself.

Who would we talk to...ourself?

You'd still have the diversity of free thought, yet it would be shared in such a manner as to mimic an ant colony.

Ants are individuals true, but unlike us, they work for a COMMON goal. I don't think humans could agree on a wallpaper type together, let alone anything important. And ants don't do much but survive and reproduce etc....ants don't paint or sing or wear lipstick and they actually serve the "queen" at the end of the day don't they.

And as for "free thought" can that exist if there is one true collective? One "being" would only think what every other was thinking.
I'd say it's our individuality and differences that inspire free thought, not the other way round. (remember the "borg?).

I think this would make the place a lot more interesting and things would get done faster and better and we'd achieve much more as a race.

Could you be happy thinking like a computer attached to a massive network, only having the opportunity to "think" about what is programmed....or, like me, would be happier having the freedom to think about absolutely anything I like without boundries or restrictions, thus contributing a different point of view for each individual to the "collective"?

Our individuality is the one true freedom we have, whether exersised alone or with others, it's what makes us who we are now....I can't see a "oneness" doing anything but taking away the infinate colours that make us a "race" and turning it to gray

[edit on 20/5/2008 by nerbot]

posted on May, 20 2008 @ 04:46 PM
To help define freedom....

from .. unabridged definition:

free-dom .. –noun
1. the state of being free or at liberty rather than in confinement or under physical restraint: He won his freedom after a retrial.
2. exemption from external control, interference, regulation, etc.
3. the power to determine action without restraint.
4. political or national independence.
5. personal liberty, as opposed to bondage or slavery: a slave who bought his freedom.
6. exemption from the presence of anything specified (usually fol. by from): freedom from fear.
7. the absence of or release from ties, obligations, etc.
8. ease or facility of movement or action: to enjoy the freedom of living in the country.
9. frankness of manner or speech.
10. general exemption or immunity: freedom from taxation.
11. the absence of ceremony or reserve.
12. a liberty taken.
13. a particular immunity or privilege enjoyed, as by a city or corporation: freedom to levy taxes.
14. civil liberty, as opposed to subjection to an arbitrary or despotic government.
15. the right to enjoy all the privileges or special rights of citizenship, membership, etc., in a community or the like.
16. the right to frequent, enjoy, or use at will: to have the freedom of a friend's library.
17. Philosophy. the power to exercise choice and make decisions without constraint from within or without; autonomy; self-determination. Compare necessity (def. 7).

I'd particularly like to see: autonomy, enjoy, liberty and choice left there!

top topics


log in