,
5 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
Hong Kong is a good example of the absolute lie that is the liberal claim of 'freedom'. Do you find some kind of thriving pluralism of innovative worldviews in Hong Kong thanks to the supposed freedoms they enjoy? No, you find people with imported Western views of the PRC.
Liberal 'freedom of speech' designates the Western liberal media and its traditional outlook. Liberal 'academic freedom' designates the Western liberal academic canon. Liberal 'freedom of assembly' and 'civil society' designate a specific set of liberal institutions and policies.
None of these things - 'freedom of speech', 'academic freedom', 'freedom of assembly', etc - name real freedoms (as if the alternative is to be 'oppressed'), they're just the names we give our own peculiar practices and institutions, which we force the rest of the world to adopt.
Many of the traditions, institutions, and practices of the West may well be worth adopting, they may lead to various advantages, but they do not make you 'free' and do not operate on a principle of 'freedom' (their advantages do not come from 'freeing' people).
Note that the work that the concept of 'freedom' does within liberalism is precisely to transform institutions and practices that could be adopted by others because they see them as advantageous and useful into institutions and practices that should be forced upon them.
