A Quote from Cooper
From the latest Commentaries:
We emphasize again that freedom and liberty are not interchangeable ideas. Freedom basically denotes the elimination of restraint – the breaking of shackles. It was used as a conspicuously successful morale builder for galley slaves, among others. It was promised to the slaves on the Christian side at the critical battle of Lapanto, 1574. They were told they would be freed if their side won. Since the existence of a galley slave is about the closest approximation of hell that humanity can devise, freedom from it was an unequaled objective. Liberty, on the other hand, is a political idea denoting the right of an individual to do whatever does not interfere with the activities of his neighbor. Men also fight very well for liberty, but that objective is less well understood and may not even be prized by persons lacking the spirit for it. Most of today’s governments are socialist in which liberty is mostly lacking, and the people in those states do not seem to mind. Thus it is somewhat annoying to hear exhortations which do not differentiate between those two words.
March 25th, 2004 at 12:59 pm
Yawn. Dictionary definitions of both terms make it very clear that the words freedom and liberty are synonymous. What is Cooper going to argue next? That all Romance cultures understand understand the concept of “liberty” but not “freedom?” Or that Anglos are the only Germanic culture that understands “liberty,” and that only because of the Norman invasion?
Xrlq Cooper should stick to what he knows best, guns. This pseudo-linguistic navel-gazing is embarassing.
P.S. Speaking of embarassments, my first attempt to post this message bounced because MT-Blacklist thinks all links to dictionary dot reference to com are “questionable content.” I removed the “reference” part, but the links should still work.
March 25th, 2004 at 1:23 pm
Umm….ok.
March 25th, 2004 at 2:00 pm
Love Cooper, but he sometimes says assinine things.
A long time ago I remember him berating some police chief over the department’s policy of making all of their revolvers double action only. Some cop had cocked the hammer to intimidate a suspect and accidentally blew the guy’s head off because of the super-light trigger pull.
Cooper objected, saying that the correct remedy was training to make sure the cops didn’t cock guns in those circumstances. That’s pretty assinine. If I was managing a ton of cops and had a hundred other training agendas to pursue I’d have modified the guns, too.
On the one hand you have a management method – training – may or may not result in compliance. On the other you have a technique – weapons modification – that guarantees 100% compliance even in an emergency. That’s an easy choice for any manager to make.