Philosophical Friday: Radical Freedom

We live in a world that dictates how we should be in countless ways. There is a prescribed way of life, a prescribed belief system, a prescribed moral ideology, and a prescribed idea of right and wrong. We believe in order, protection, and control because, whether we admit it or not, we assume people are inherently bad and that these rules are necessary to protect ourselves and others from perceived harm.

Radical freedom means allowing people to live as they see fit. It means relinquishing control and protectionism. It means no longer imposing moral belief systems, ways of life, or ideas of right and wrong. True peaceful coexistence can only happen when we stop forcing these rules on people.

This doesn’t mean anarchy or lawlessness. Radical freedom requires a fundamental restructuring of how we view society. It wouldn’t work within the current system—it would create chaos. But when combined with systemic change, it offers the potential for peaceful coexistence.

If we enforce laws, human rights, inclusion, diversity, regulated capitalism, and ecological responsibility, true peaceful coexistence remains impossible. To achieve it, every single person affected by those rules must agree to them and be willing to abide by them. As long as even one person is unhappy with a rule, true peace doesn’t exist. This is why radical freedom is necessary.

Imagine a spectrum: on one side, rules; on the other, peaceful coexistence. They are opposites. The middle ground is filled with the number of rules required to maintain the illusion of peace. For the past 50 years or more, we’ve only had the perception of peaceful coexistence because there has always been a portion of the population unhappy with one or more of the rules. Hidden or unacknowledged unhappiness is still unhappiness, and it will surface eventually.

How do we create radical freedom without descending into anarchy?

Step 1: Remove Survival from the Equation

Ensure free access to food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, and education. We don’t have a supply problem. Stop defending capitalism and the current monetary system as immutable. These systems are human-made and can be dismantled without taking anything away from anyone. There’s no need to borrow from Peter to pay Paul—just pay Paul.

When survival is no longer a concern, people won’t feel compelled to engage in anarchy just to exist. They won’t have to move for work, stay in jobs they hate, or live in fear. They can reimagine their lives and create something meaningful.

How Would Resources Be Distributed?

Instead of income tax, companies would allocate up to 25% of their profit in at-cost goods and services to the communities they serve. Walmart, Amazon, grocery stores, and clothing retailers would distribute a percentage of their profits in free essentials.

A universal database would track individual entitlements to food, clothing, and hygiene items. Customers would simply provide their phone number at checkout, and eligible items would be free. Anything not covered could be purchased with employment income or universal basic income (UBI). This system would be accessible to everyone, regardless of income.

Free tiny homes for families and bachelor apartments for individuals would be available without income restrictions, ending homelessness instantly. With UBI and access to free essential goods, no one would be left without basic needs. The system would ensure rent, utilities, and public transportation are covered.

Would Walmart struggle to find employees? Probably. Low-paying jobs would need to offer better incentives, shifting employment from survival to thriving.

Step 2: Change Our Assumptions About People

People are not inherently bad or lazy. They’ve been in survival mode their entire lives. Society has turned us into adrenaline junkies, but not in a good way. Why does everyone dream of sitting on a beach doing nothing? Because they’re exhausted, overworked, overwhelmed, and overstimulated. The system we defend is unhealthy and failing everyone. Once people are out of survival mode, they will naturally seek purpose and productivity.

Step 3: Give People True Free Will

Stop regulating individuals. Let people make their own choices without judgment.

What happens when conflicting ideas collide?

A common argument is about whose rights matter more. The short answer: they are equal. Peaceful coexistence requires us to learn how to navigate disagreements without relying on rules, laws, or external enforcement.

Think of bubbles floating in the air. When they bump into each other, they don’t get mad, sue each other, or demand legislation to protect themselves. They simply move on. That’s what we must learn to do.

How? Through respect. Learning basic human respect—without needing laws, rules, or external intervention—is how we create peaceful coexistence.

If you believe in land ownership and someone else believes land cannot be owned, your job is to respect each other without trying to change minds. Cooperate. Be decent human beings.

If conflict escalates? Cause and effect takes over. If you hit me, I hit you back. That’s natural. The belief that people must be protected from one another is what fuels overregulation. But when survival is guaranteed, the need for theft, manipulation, and exploitation decreases. No one will rob a grocery store if they know where their next meal is coming from. No one will get arrested just to receive three meals a day in jail. Over time, natural balance will emerge.

We are so consumed by rules and laws that we’ve forgotten how to respect one another without demanding conformity.

The Problems We Created

Our societal issues are self-created. They don’t stem from rule-breakers—they stem from our insistence on forcing compliance. The real conflict arises when we try to impose rules on those who reject them, then act surprised when they push back.

Trump is both a product of and an exploiter of a system built on control. The same structure that demands order and regulation ironically enables figures like him to rise. He didn’t break the system; he used it exactly as designed—to consolidate power. The issue isn’t Trump himself, but that the system allows, incentivizes, and even rewards people like him.

The U.S. presidency relies on the elected official respecting the system. Trump doesn’t respect it; he weaponizes it. He doesn’t care if you like it. And he’s not giving you radical freedom—he’s stripping away whatever freedom you thought you had. He is constructing a fascist dictatorship and setting the stage for World War III simply because he can. The system grants him the ability.

This isn’t what you wanted, is it?

You wanted regulation for “them,” the ones doing something you disliked. But regulation is a double-edged sword. When you cast a wide net, don’t be surprised when you get caught in it too.

You can’t have it both ways. If you support mass control, expect to be controlled. If you value true freedom, you must extend that freedom to everyone—even those you disagree with.

Decentralized Power

Politics as we see it now would have to end to decentralize power. City and state or provincial governments would become resource managers, with no one person holding centralized power. The more decentralized power is, the less we end up fighting for control.

Think about social media. Facebook (Meta) has centralized control—Mark Zuckerberg decides what you can and cannot say based on the algorithm he creates. Centralized power enables control. Mastodon, however, is decentralized, with individual servers each setting their own rules. No single person can dictate the platform.

Local governments would function as resource managers, ensuring fair distribution and respecting cultural differences. A single global organization—similar to the World Health Organization—would monitor equal distribution worldwide. Federal governments would focus on national resource management and corporate accountability.

No more politics. No debates, no elected officials needed. Just peaceful coexistence. Elected officials would simply be paid employees ensuring smooth distribution of goods and services.

Conclusion

Radical freedom relieves the tension and stops the pain. It’s not something we can do today, but it’s something we must work toward. If we don’t, we will destroy ourselves. Control is being vacuumed up by a select few. Soon, everyone except those few will lose the freedom they thought they had.

Love to all.

Della