Dying for freedom

A poster called peppery posed this question on the urban 75 boards where much passionate discussion continues about recent events.

'Would you be willing to live with a greater chance of being killed by a terrorist if it meant your liberties were untouched?'

I posted this in reply.

'Oh God. This is the question I've been thinking about non stop.My life feels 'free' to me if lived without fear. At the moment, I and many other people feel fearful, which is a (self) limiting way of being. But that fear can be mastered and my reactions can be controlled. I can feel the fear but do it anyway: get dressed, get on the tube, go to work, go to the pub...despite the fear.

My sickening fear at the moment is like an injury; I know in time it will heal, it will fade but it is somewhat incapacitating right now. I am aware of that and I can keep a careful, compassionate watch on my reactions to events/other people because I know I am suffering from fear, like suffering from flu and my judgement is therefore impaired.

I can also make small but necessary changes where necessary to try to protect myself and minimise danger. And I can try not to fly off the handle, because that is dangerous and destabilising for myself and others.

I believe that this line of reasoning applies not just to me in microcosm but to everybody, citizens, politicians, police. It's what we said to each other in the bombed train. Keep calm. Hold hands. Don't panic. We will get out of this darkness. And we did. Nobody panicked or stampeded, people helped each other. In a dangerous, crisis situation, the will to help each other and protect each other, not just the selfish urge to survive, was stronger than the fear.

There's a jump from there to 'Would you die for freedom?'. I don't know how my death would further the cause of freedom. I would rather think about ways of living for freedom . Living freely. Living collectively, sociably, compassionately, responsibly. Calmly. Trying not to live as if maddened and ill with the sickness of fear. Of terror. Because that's no way to live. If you live like that, you are not free. The terrorists and all of those who feed on the fear have won.

Terrorists are not the only ones who feed on fear; many rulers, many politicians do. In fact, anyone who wants to have power over other humans, to feed their ego by feeling powerful themselves, will try actively to encourage fear or to exploit it once it takes hold.

But balanced against that, the desire for freedom is so strong that people still say they are willing to die for it. And many do die. I suppose the suicide bombers convinced themselves they died for it.

Yet I know, I have seen, I have experienced that the desire to look after each other is stronger than the selfish desire to fight for individual survival and to stampede off the bombed train first.

I hold onto that. I would die, I think to protect that, if my death would do anything to aid it. But I don't see how any death does much, if someone cares so passionately for freedom that they are willing to die for it, then I'd rather that person lived and used that passion in their life: I work on the assumption that we only have one and that all lives are precious.

I would rather live as if what I just said is true: that the darkness and the fear can be beaten. That there is always hope. That collectively we are sane and civilised.

So.

Would you be willing to live with a greater chance of being killed by a terrorist if it meant your liberties were untouched?

Yes. And by living this way, by as many as possible of us living this way, I believe that we are actively helping to reduce the chance of being killed by a terrorist. Actively choose to live as if you are not terrorised. Use your liberties to live freely. Then you've won. Then we've all won.'