[MD] individual, freedom, and order

[Ham Priday]

SA --



> For about 5-6 months, I was doing much of the
> work for I was in training mode. ... I had to wait
> for [the staff] to catch on without ...making the
> residential unit inhospitable.  How I did this was
> by setting limits.  I kept the social structure of the unit
> intact to the best of my ability.
> Some of the new staff would give choices to the
> residents.  ...Certain staff didn't allow for all these
> choices, and the dominant residents would fight back
>  at these staff.
> Eventually, the residents became confused as to what
> they wanted to do, they couldn't agree, and the
> routine, well, wasn't a free choice, it was chaos. ...
> Staff have slowly begun to reestablish the social
> structure. ... This was put into practice by setting
> limits and expectations.  Choices remain intact.  The
> residents can follow the expected routine or be placed
> out-of-routine as a consequence. ...
>     The same goes for the staff.  They have a job to
> perform. ... They are expected to follow a
> certain order outlined in their job description, but
> each staff has a certain style in how this is
> accomplished.
> I'm learning that a good goal seems to be keep a
> unit orderly, while at the same time allow staff to
> make their own decisions in how this will be
> accomplished.
> Pure freedom is only chaos and not generative to
> any static latches of good quality.
>
> thoughts?

As group leader, your experience demonstrates that individual freedom in a 
social system is not  achieved without certain responsibilities to the 
society.  I don't know if your staff is paid, or under what conditions the 
residents have access to your facility, but law and order is prerequisite 
for any collective effort.  Whether it's the family structure, the work 
environment, or a sovereign state, freedom isn't the right to have every 
want satisfied and every wish fulfilled.  Apparently, you have won the 
struggle and established a workable "social democracy" of cooperative "happy 
campers".  Congratulations, SA!

I don't recall anyone using the term "pure freedom" in these discussions, 
nor have I used it.

In my thesis, I point out that the freedom of a society or nation doesn't 
come freely.  It's paid for by the struggle of enlightened individuals who 
know its value and are willing to make sacrifices to preserve it.   Freedom 
can flourish only in a civilized society where the self-control necessary 
for developing individual responsibility can be fully exercised.

The Islamic culture is in turmoil today because its people have been 
subservient to external authority and the "law of Allah" for so many 
centuries that they don't realize their innate freedom and are taught to 
look upon those who enjoy it as infidels who must be eliminated.  No 
occupying nation, military power, or international sanction can resolve the 
Islamic problem.  A solution to the terrorism that now threatens the free 
world will come only when the Muslim people take the responsibility upon 
themselves to eradicate jihadism and everything it stands for from their 
culture.

When I speak of Freedom here, it's generality within a philosophical 
context.  Unless I'm otherwise informed, I assume as a "given" that the 
reader will be a citizen of a civilized country that recognizes the value of 
individual freedom and has come to grips with the problems of social 
responsibility.  I also assume the person I'm talking to respects the 
man-made laws of his or her nation, as well as the right of fellow citizens 
to practice the religion their choice and freely pursue their life goals, so 
long as such behavior does not infringe on the rights of others.  Do you 
think I've assumed too much?

--Ham