Until a few weeks ago, the issue of freedom of individuals in a democratic society of equal individuals seemed to me to be a more of a theoretical issue that should legal professionals, particularly constitutional lawyers, be dealing with. Then the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic convinced me that was not the case. In response to the sharp rise in the pandemic, the Slovenian government has done what any democratic government should. In order to protect public health, it has adopted much-needed measures to restrict the movement and socializing of the population of the Republic of Slovenia. By doing so, it has, of course, restricted the freedom of individuals, but with the clear aim of maintaining the equality of all citizens. However, these much-needed measures were met with misunderstanding and rejection in the left part of the Slovenian political spectrum, mainly by the mainstream media and Friday’s dissidents. This points to their harmful politicking or to a complete misunderstanding of the freedom of individuals in a modern society, or a combination of both. Due to this, I came to the conclusion that in the Slovenian public the very subtle relationship between human rights and freedoms on the one hand and the self-evident equality of all citizens on the other hand is poorly or completely misunderstood. Thus I dedicated this column to this relationship.
Historically, from the very beginning of the formation of larger social units, people were aware that the freedom of an individual is necessarily limited in order for these social units to even exist. In order for readers to understand this necessity, I will bring the situation to absurdity. Two people meet and the first one does not like the other’s face. Thus, invoking his freedom, he kills him. This, of course, violated the human rights and freedoms of the latter. Already on the basis of this example, we can conclude that the complete freedom of one automatically violates the human rights of the other. Chaos, therefore, is not freedom, it is survival of the stronger, and it is contrary to the principle of equality. Thus, the behaviour of Friday’s political cyclists obviously violates the principle of equality and the right of others to a healthy life. It is therefore not in line with the basic norms of a democratic society. This movement is dominated by elements of chaos that run counter to the equality and freedom of others.
From the very beginning of the existence of human society, rules and regulations have emerged regulating the behaviour of individuals – ensuring it was socially acceptable – and restricting individual’s freedom. The first known written code in this sense was the Hammurabi Code. It originated in Mesopotamia more than five thousand years ago. A big step towards modern concepts was made with the Bible. On the one hand, we are told that God created man in his own image and gave him free will. It therefore gave him the ability to understand as well as freedom. However, God also gave man the Ten Commandments of God, by which God reasonably restricted man’s freedom. Thus, in the Bible, therefore, at least as far as I know, the concept of a free individual whose freedom is reasonably restricted appears so that there can be a society of equal individuals. This basic message has not been fully understood for a long time and has only fully come to life through efforts of establishing a modern democratic society. One of the bearers of efforts for a society of free and equal individuals, the European People’s Party has written in its basic program that it stands for the freedom of the individual, which is limited only by the equal freedom of someone else. And I also wholeheartedly support this concept of the modern human society.
Unfortunately, this just mentioned basic achievement of human civilization, is not supported by everyone. The center and center-right parties, that build on the individual, support it, but both extremes – left and right – oppose it. They do not build their policies on a free individual but on certain groups – classes, the drowning of individuals in these groups and the confrontation between groups and the ultimate domination of one over the other – the dictatorship of the proletariat for the Communists and of the superior nation for the extreme rightist. They aspire to revolution and believe that they will be on the winning side and will enjoy all the privileges that revolutionary action is supposed to bring them. Past experience teaches them that revolution is much easier or even the only thing that can be carried out in chaos. Therefore, they want to create chaos in society in the first phase. And what worries me the most is that I notice this tendency towards chaos both in the debates and voting of some left-wing Slovenian Parliament members and in the case of political cyclists.
Let me conclude by arguing that during extraordinary situations such as during the current pandemic, further restrictions on the freedom of individuals are necessary to maintain a functioning democracy. The absence of much-needed restrictive measures would lead to chaos and open up possibilities for the successful functioning of individual revolutionary groups and, ultimately, for the revolutionary takeover of power of one of them. Slovenians have already experienced this once. If we want to maintain a democratic society of equal individuals, we must temporarily sacrifice some of our freedoms in the face of this pandemic. In this way, we are preserving our young democracy and not destroying it, as the Slovenian left wants to convince us.
—————————–