Liberty vs Freedom
These words are often used interchangeably as if they mean the same thing and to many they do. The actual definitions of these words are not universally agreed upon.
The Oxford English dictionary has these definitions for liberty.
1) The condition of being free from confinement, servitude, or forced labor.
2) The condition of being free from oppressive restriction or control by a government or other power.
3) A right to engage in certain actions without control or interference by a government or other power.
4) The right or power to act as one chooses.
And these for Freedom
1) The condition of not being in prison or captivity
2) The condition of being free of restraints, especially the ability to act without control or interference by another or by circumstance
3) The condition of not being constrained or restricted in a specific aspect of life by a government or other power
4) The condition of not being bound by established conventions or rules
6) The capacity to act by choice rather than by determination, as from fate or a deity
As you can see, based on this dictionary, the definitions are remarkably similar and overlap in many respects.
However, I believe that Brian Miller of the Liberty Beacon provides a better and perhaps more nuanced explanation of the differences.
““Freedom” is predominantly an internal construct. Viktor Frankl, the legendary Holocaust survivor who wrote Man’s Search For Meaning, said it well: “Everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms – to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way (in how he approaches his circumstances).”
In other words, to be free is to take ownership of what goes on between your ears, to be autonomous in thoughts first and actions second. Your freedom to act a certain way can be taken away from you – but your attitude about your circumstances cannot – making one’s freedom predominantly an internal construct.
On the other hand, “liberty” is predominantly an external construct. It’s the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views. The ancient Stoics knew this. So did the Founding Fathers, who wisely noted the distinction between negative and positive liberties and codified that difference in the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.” –https://www.thelibertybeacon.com/freedom-vs-liberty-how-subtle-differences-between-these-two-big-ideas-changed-our-world/
It is evident through history that many people are deceived into believing that freedom and liberty are something else altogether.
“We and all others who believe in freedom as deeply as we do, would rather die on our feet than live on our knees.” Franklin Roosevelt
While we may agree with Roosevelt on this, anyone who has read history would have to agree that he did not define this as we do.
To summarize, freedom is mostly a function of our mind, emotions, and will. It is a function of thinking, choosing, and even willing ourselves. Liberty is largely an external condition or experience. Forces outside ourselves may exert power over us, coercing and limiting. Liberty is the absence of such coercion or limitations.
Nevertheless, restrictions in external liberty can and very often do influence our mind, emotions and will, our soul. The poem on the foundation of the Statue of Liberty, noted in the introduction to this book, “The New Colossus” by Emma Lazarus, describes a people “yearning to breathe free”. This is an internal drive influenced by external restrictions in their home of origin leading to the external actions of seeking a different home with fewer external limitations. Early American settlers and pioneers continually moved west seeking this liberty from authoritarians seeking to control their lives. This drive, this desire to breathe free is the desire for liberty. Contrary to some political ideologies not everyone has this desire. Even fewer are willing to risk the actions to seek it. For those that do and find it, there is nothing greater for the human life.
Liberty is the greatest good. We know this because we bestow our greatest honors on those who give their lives for it and more. Even the signers of the American Declaration of Independence in 1776 declared in defense of liberty:
And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.
Sovereignty
Central to any understanding of liberty is the application of sovereignty. Sovereignty comes from the French word suzerain or souverain meaning highest, supreme, chief. This sovereign has the highest authority over something or someone. We often associate this with a king or emperor whose authority is ultimate and unquestionable.
“Through the Earth, and all inferior creatures, be common to all men, yet every man has a property in his own person. This, nobody has any right to but himself. The labor of his body and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his. “
-John Locke
Body
Each of us is born with a body and for a time our parents have the highest authority over us. At some point, usually approaching adulthood, liberty demands that we assume sovereignty over our own bodies. This sovereignty allows us and requires us to make our own choices as to what we put into our bodies, what activities we engage in with our bodies, how we care and maintain our bodies, and how we may terminate our bodies. (Christians, this sovereignty over our bodies comes from God. See chapter “Liberty and Faith”).
Understand, this does not support abortion or killing of babies. The baby is another, human life, deserving of the same right to life as its mother. The collective must have authority to defend one person’s liberty from harm by another, including the unborn life carried by a Mother.
Labor
As sovereign over our bodies, we choose if we will labor or starve, what kind of labor we may engage in, and under what conditions. If the opportunities for our conditions and the type of labor we desire are not available we still must choose if we will change our conditions or type of labor or starve. Our sovereignty remains but we may need to negotiate with the sovereignty of others seeking to contract our labor.
Liberty demands that we set the boundaries of our labor. No other sovereignty has any rightful authority over the boundaries of our labor except for that which interferes in the sovereignty of another.
Earnings
The earnings arising from our labor exist under our sovereignty and our liberty determines how the earnings are spent or distributed. Any attempts by any other authority to limit or confiscate those earnings without each individual’s consent is theft and hostile to liberty. It matters not if a majority of a society decides to delegate authority to a sovereignty other than the individual to regulate or confiscate these earnings. Any actions by any individual or collective to override consent is theft and assault.
Property
Finally, all purchases from our earnings originate from sovereignty over our bodies, and our body’s labor, and the resulting earnings as the fruit of our labor. All individuals with their own sovereign property are free to offer it to anyone else for sale or exchange who is willing to pay from their own earnings.
Liberty demands no interference in the free exchange between individuals. Any coercive exchange by the buyer or seller is theft and assault. This is the only foundation for the society to interfere. Liberty demands sovereignty over the exchange by those willing and able to consent.
All forms of government taxation and regulation of private property are forced confiscation of that property and demonstrates that they own all property. The individual does not. This is immoral This is a violation of our natural God-given rights.
Negative vs positive rights
There are two kinds of rights found in liberty. Negative rights mean freedom from interference. This is also known as the right to be left alone, to exist, to think, to say, to work, to create, to buy and sell. For example, suppose you decide to put a pool in your backyard, a property that you own. You have a negative right or liberty from your neighbor’s interference. Negative rights also mean that your neighbor cannot be forced to help you with the pool. This can also be found in a right to free speech. You are free to speak as you wish. However, no one can be forced to provide a platform for you to speak nor can they be forced to listen to you. Negative rights are found in both the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights. “…certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”. The Bill of Rights itemizes, through the amendments, negative rights as in “the government shall make no law abridging” the freedom of speech, religion, assembly, ownership of guns, etc. Citizens are to be free from illegal searches and seizures, from testifying against themselves, from housing soldiers in their home.
Positive rights, in contrast, entitle one to certain items or benefits. This is where authoritarians and progressives go wild. They will tell you that healthcare is a human right, as is a minimum or living wage, and education and should be provided free of charge to the receiver. This would be similar to forcing someone to help build a platform for you to speak. However, how is it possible that someone can have a positive right to something that requires or forces someone else to provide it? In fact, if someone has a positive right to a good or service then by definition someone else has a positive responsibility to deliver it even if without compensation. The negative rights of one person are violated in the force of providing a positive right to someone else. The Bill of Rights actually does have a few instances of positive rights. A Right to a speedy, jury trial (6th amendment), to be confronted by witnesses, and to be provided with an attorney. These cost the taxpayers to provide and so a coercive measure is applied force compliance. This becomes the open door for progressives to add on many other so-called rights that are paid for by the coercive power of the government.