Do you give up your freedom to save your security?

News from the island

• Mai lost the vote of the bricast .. What is next?
• Rise in the death toll of the "youth" attack on the complex in Nairobi
• Elmondo: The scenarios awaiting Britain after the rejection of the bricast
• After the rejection of the bricast plan .. The Sterling Resists
• Bloomberg: Fears in UAE banks

We are not going to dwell on a stereotypical view of the relationship of security with freedom, as much as we can not overlook the eternal dialectic and even the eternity between security and freedom. Human thought is usually confined to presenting arguments and compelling proofs only to expand its moral authority or geographic boundaries at the expense of the other. There are many contradictions in this area, such as privacy versus wiretapping and freedom of expression in exchange for repression, where various and different opinions tend to regard armies, armies and weapons as a door to protecting the basic gains of peoples' renaissance, foremost of which is freedom.

To illustrate the matter to the public, freedom can be said to be a human value with a broad and extended interpretive space that varies from culture to culture and from practice to practice. However, all customs may agree that they are defined as the possibility of an individual without any reparation, Several possibilities exist and different. Freedom is the liberation from the constraints that impede and produce human capacities, whether physical or moral, to include in many aspects the element of the elimination of slavery to a person or group or the same, and then in the final phase to eliminate the pressure on someone to carry out a purpose, where not A field of coercion and imposition.

In its legal sense, persons are able to carry out their activities without coercion, but subject to the laws governing society. Public freedom has been known for many of the ideas and doctrines related to it, the most important of which is the individual doctrine, which emphasizes individual freedom, the individual is considered the regime's target, and the ruling power is only a means of achieving security. It is also impossible to ignore the fact that freedom is a principle that gives life to the human meaning and value required, where God Almighty distinguished man from angels and animals in freedom of choice, enabling him to the idea of ​​ascension to the rank of angels and make him also descends to the lowest rank where the animal.

The security is the feeling of the individual or group reassuring, and the spread of confidence and love among them, not to betray each other's individuals and eliminate corruption, remove everything that threatens their stability and life, and meet their physical and psychological requirements; to ensure their ability to continue to live in peace and security. So the question that comes to mind directly is that freedom could threaten the security of a country or a nation? Perhaps the answer to this problem will take a serious dimension only when we reviewed in our analysis of the relationship of Arab peoples or other peoples that fall under the yoke of tyranny and dictatorships to the dialectic of security and freedom, which is usually the view of the security services surrounded by a veil of fear and apprehension because of the excessive rulers of those The people are obsessive and wiretapping the citizen if he is considered a citizen with the conditions of citizenship agreed upon, and this is why we are the most popular people in this stream, such as "walls have ears" or "walk under the wall" and many more.

Unlike the countries controlled by dictatorships, the countries that have fallen into democracy and the empowerment of the citizens of a certain degree of freedom, we note that this empowerment contributed significantly to the citizen's sense of security, where he can express his opinion without fear for his life to assess and evaluate the crooked mechanisms of governance and control , And that the difference of opinion, which is a prominent title for the exercise of freedom can not in any way become a positive issue that drives the mixing of ideas for an optimal decision that benefits everyone without exception.

In view of the above, we can draw a clear rule that security can only be the actual product of the exercise of freedom in the sense that there is no security without real freedom. Therefore, the countries of Northern Europe or the so-called Scandinavian countries, such as Norway, Finland and Sweden, In security and tranquility, despite the fact that they are following the countries of the world in militarization, armament and other tools of war.

These states have achieved the element of freedom in the first stage because the free man in his will feel more secure than the person who is restricted to it and answer the question whether you accept to give up your freedom in order to provide your security becomes futile and useless or meaning and no use in putting it originally only if the end From launching the establishment of a new dictatorship in the country and paving it in ways twisted and encapsulated by the use of a simple man arrogant willing to acknowledge under the awe and alarm that freedom is a kind of luxury and luxury does not match the practice of feeling safe and secure. Freedom and security .. two parallel equations .. can not be separated in any way .. There is no security without freedom .. In return there is freedom until security is restored.