 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freedom
vs. Security (OPINION)
|
|
by
Stephen R. Melvin, PE CSP
In 1991, in a speech to
the Los Angeles World Affairs Council, Margaret Thatcher reiterated
an old truism: “If you wish for peace, you must be prepared for
war.” In any given situation, there seems to be a natural law of
balance. Good and Evil, Peace and Destruction, Black and White, Male
and Female – these things are all balanced. Sometimes, that balance
point is near the middle, and sometimes, there will be a balance
closer to one end or the other. Sometimes, things are balanced among
more than two points, as in several coalition governments throughout
the world or in a three part harmony. Most of the time however, we
see a duality. In a completely anarchic society for example, the
balance is closer to freedom than to security. In a totalitarian
environment, security takes precedence over freedom.
First, let me state that I
am not a sociologist, nor have I made an extensive study of the
governments and societies of the world. I have however, through
personal and professional studies come into contact with a number of
historical and modern societies and governments, and I have never
once come across a single instance of an open society with closed
opportunities, or a closed society with open opportunities. We have a
tremendous challenge ahead of us in the modern world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ©
2006 SRM Associates |
|
|
