The majority of governments around the world are striving to ensure that they guarantee public safety for their citizens against continually emerging threats. Some threats are unpredictable because data sources and the means used in gathering information may be less effective. Consequently, under such circumstances, the government is not able to employ preventive measures earlier on to stop the occurrences of such events; therefore, when they happen, the government is then required to take drastic measures to stop further worsening of the situations at hand. Often, such extreme measures may ultimately interfere with the citizens’ liberties, hindering them from undertaking their daily activities, thereby raising the question of whether security is more valuable than freedom. However, does it also mean that the government should allow life-threatening situations to compromise the safety and lives of its citizens so as to avoid interfering with their freedom? Therefore, establishing a balance between security and freedom is essential because it would allow people to enjoy their liberties while maintaining public safety.
A balance between freedom and security increases the chances of human beings flourishing in their own spaces as they find inspiration from the surrounding environment. Human beings are creative, and their creativity is enhanced by exploration and interactions with different settings, among them work and school settings. Some level of freedom is sometimes limited in certain professions because it is by doing so that confidential information regarding specific activities remains so. Therefore, people working in such professions are used to having certain limitations on their freedom. However, some people are used to working under no restrictions, and when their freedom is traded off for security, then their way of living is also interfered with. Cheek et al. (2022) argue that individuals who are forced to give up a freedom they had previously treasured are prone to feel as though the freedom–security trade-off is unfair, hence interfering with their ability to flourish in their daily activities. Non-extreme freedom restrictions for all citizens while keeping them safe would help citizens value both freedom and security equally.
Security and freedom at equal measure are all critical social issues that influence the functionality of a community. Neither security nor freedom should be over-emphasized over the other because then one social issue would be disregarded. Although difficult times call for drastic measures to keep the citizens safe and ensure security for everybody there should be proper communication on the government’s part to the citizens to enlighten them on their reasons for taking up these measures. The government, however, bears the obligation of striking a balance between security and liberty by developing policies aimed at enhancing freedom just like it does safety, as opposed to developing centralized obstacles which hinder the states’ involvement in promoting freedom for respective citizens (Komaitis, 2021). Citizens also have an obligation to their nation and governments, and it should not solely lie on the government to ensure that citizens abide by the laid out rules as they attempt to keep the people safe. Therefore, people should also be trusting and understanding with their government, especially in specific scenarios (Hitlin & Shutava, 2022).
It is of great importance to establish practical approaches to dealing with negative implications brought about by choices made to promote security and freedom. The majority of governments prioritize their citizens’ safety more than they do their liberties, which is understandable in cases of imminent threats. Nevertheless, they lack approaches to dealing with the negative implications brought about by the limitations of freedom. According to Cheek et al. (2022), strict measures applied by the government to keep their citizens safe often result in mental health issues for some of the affected individuals. For instance, the Covid 19 measures of ensuring that people remain indoors caused psychological issues for some individuals. Most people are appreciative of the protective actions governments employ to keep them safe. However, unfortunately, the government often fails to have approaches to deal with the aftermath, such as the psychological issues people suffered from after the Covid 19. Consequently, people should also be prepared to deal with negative security implications that are brought about by too much freedom. Most people tend to blame the government whenever it places strict measures on some social media platforms because it interferes with their freedom of speech; however, some never find solutions to cyber security dangers.
Integrity and discipline are two core values that inform my perspectives on freedom and security. In its actions to ensure security for all its citizens is the government honest in its actions. People are appreciative of the government’s actions to keep them safe when the protective actions are done with the purest of intentions. For instance, inspection at borders by government institutions and the banning of some social media platforms should be done with utmost honesty, and this also builds trust between the government and its people. Discipline, on the other hand, informs my perspective in regard to people being disciplined in their actions. In cases of imminent threats, people should not feel offended to compromise their freedom for their safety. In fact, if people remain disciplined and obliged with the requests made by the government, then the government, in some cases, may not be required to take extreme measures.
In summary, security and freedom are core issues in society that ensure people exercise all their rights with minimal infringement and security is provided to all, hence the need for striking a balance between the two. While security will always be necessary for the people, so will their freedom, and to have productive citizens, the government needs to provide security while allowing people to exercise their freedom. Citizens should be more appreciative and trusting of the government’s intentions in providing security. The government should also be considerate of the people without being dictatorial on matters of security. All stakeholders involved in security and freedom issues, particularly the government and its citizens, ought to be prepared to handle the adverse outcomes that come with prioritizing one aspect over another. This is because unavoidable circumstances will always be there, and in such cases, one aspect will always be prioritized over the other. Discipline and integrity are essential in building trust and enhancing safety while still valuing freedom.
References
Chapman, G. D. (2020, April 26). The differences between freedom and security: How to stay within the line. Women in Technology International. https://witi.com/articles/1714/The-Differences-Between-Freedom-And-Security:-How-Not-To-Step-Over-The-Line/
Cheek, N. N., Reutskaja, E., & Schwartz, B. (2022). Balancing the freedom–security trade-off during crises and disasters. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 17(4), 1024-1049.
Hitlin, P., & Shutava, N. (2022). Trust in government—partnership for Public Service and Freedman Consulting.
Komaitis, K. (2021, November 9). Internet safety is the new Internet freedom. Slate. https://slate.com/technology/2021/11/internet-safety-vs-internet-freedom.html
write