freedom from the state

freedom (2)

Or it could simply be freedom people are worried about. As there is no right dependent on labor and efforts of others there is no right to healthcare. 

As we live in an increasingly internationalised world, many countries share similar outlooks on freedom. Freedom of speech, freedom of movement, freedom of expression. Most of us agree our freedom doesn’t extend to allowing us to harm each other, and we are protected by civil laws in this respect: other people cannot legally harm our bodies, discriminate against us or tamper with our property.

However, there’s a big split in understanding of freedom that runs down the Atlantic Ocean and cuts along all the borders of the United States. In every developed country in the world, barring the USA, people have the freedom to receive universal health care. That means we have the freedom to seek treatment, regardless of our circumstances, when we have any health concern. That means we have the freedom to avoid seeing our fellow countrymen suffer and die of curable diseases, or go bankrupt trying to find the cheapest alternative, before they suffer and die anyway.

Some people in the USA like to think that freedom from the state means standing on your own two feet like an unprepared toddler. Staggering around determined you can cope on your own, and rewarding the toddlers with all the advantages of preparation that being born into the right family can give, while leaving those with less of a good start in life to take their chances and potentially fall.

We’re all responsible for our own lives! Yes, but we also naturally take responsibility for those round about us, and don’t assume that just because we personally could make it, we should leave those who are struggling, for whatever reason, to place their hopes in any sub-standard alternative they can scrape together.

A lack of universal healthcare isn’t freedom from the state. It’s a death sentence for many that should be on everyone’s conscience.

Advertisements