There is nothing rational about freedom. With the freedom to choose by vote or by feet comes the need for great responsibility, in every age everywhere
One of the major justifications for democracy is that political freedom is a fundamental human right. And so democracy claims to be based on the premise that everyone must be free to choose their Government — there have been wars waged for this cause of political freedom around many parts of the world and in India as well.
Almost 2.4 billion of the world’s approximately 7 billion people still live in countries that are not politically free at all, according to a survey by Freedom House. Another 1.6 billion live in partially free countries that have some semblance of democracy but curb freedom of speech or the right to form political parties. Of course these people could work to democratise their country, but it is likely that their efforts would have them killed by their repressive Governments or it would take them time to successfully establish a functional democracy. Their societies would lack the economic or cultural preconditions for the establishment of democratic institutions, and it will not be easy to build this.
And so for those living in countries in crisis, voting by the feet is often the only feasible way of exercising any political choice at all. Moving out to live in another country is a practical way for them to exercise political freedom in the sense of the ability to choose the Government policies they live under. If the logic of political freedom as a fundamental human right justifies the right to vote at the ballot box, must it not also imply the right for people to vote with their feet to live under the Government of their choiceIJ
Placed on the other end of the spectrum, the European Union has been a trailblazer in this regard. According to The Economist, citizens of the European Union have consistently indicated in surveys that their freedom of movement within the European Union was their most prized gift granted to them by the European Union membership.
Starting in 1957 as a work-permit regime among the European Union’s six founding members, the European Union gradually allowed Europeans to work, study and retire anywhere across the European Union and a few more countries, without any further permit or visa. Visitors too can freely travel within the 28 countries of the European Union. Europeans have relished this freedom and accepted it with responsibility, even if their American counterparts were actually three times as likely to move states in search of work, according to the World Bank. Freedom of movement of people within the European Union complemented their freedom to exchange goods, services and capital within the region.
Thanks to this unique system, last weekend my partner Chirag and I were able to drive across the borders of France and Italy several times to participate in the wedding of an old friend who is living in Europe. We suffered only one passport check by immigration police on the way.
We also noticed during conversations with locals that the European Union’s most prized gift to them has become their greatest challenge. Millions of Europeans are filling labour needs in a European country other than their own and also improving their own wages. Some counter-argued that immigration weakens the political freedom of citizens of the receiving countries, as their political vote is diluted with the influx of immigrants and their demands.
There was worry that refugees from Syria are roaming in European countries that were not the first port of their landing, and are not even yet contributing to the economy of the country they currently live in.
And mostly they feared that terror networks can find their way across borders within the European Union, making any place there equally unsafe these days.
The ongoing refugee crisis and frequent terror attacks in the European Union I felt had jaded the sentiment towards upholding free migration of people within the European Union, even if it had not destroyed it. Freedom of movement has had its benefits in Europe — for instance, according to The Economist the extension of free movement rights to east Europe after two enlargements in 2004 and 2007 has boosted the overall GDP of the European Union by €40 billion.
Indeed one of the greatest migrations in human history took place just after the British finally left the Indian subcontinent on 15 August 1947, after three hundred years of colonial rule. The subcontinent had gained freedom on this day but it was partitioned into a Hindu-majority India and Muslim-majority Pakistan.
Millions of Hindus and Sikhs headed from Pakistan to India, while Muslims in India moved to Pakistan. Many never made it as they died on the way.
Communities that had coexisted for centuries attacked each other in unprecedented sectarian massacres, arson, forced conversions, and sexual violence. Around 75,000 women were raped.
In total, the freedom of movement entitled by India’s independence took the lives of about two million people.
The current situation in Europe and that of India 70 years ago can not be entirely surprising because freedom is inherently messy. It relies on feelings, intuitions, biases, longings, predispositions, societal traits and bonding, which are all abstractions. Its course and final outcome are unpredictable. We are inspired by history to fight for our freedom, but often when freedom is granted one does not know what to do with it. The freedom to exercise political choice by vote or by feet, are both driven by emotions. And our emotions…we are taught all our lives to least talk about these.
This is why there is nothing rational about freedom. With the freedom to choose by vote or by feet comes the need for great responsibility, in every age everywhere.
The writer is Chief Sustainability Officer for the group of companies, Jindal Steel and Power ltd. She is a Global leadership Alumna of the World Economic Forum. miniya.chatterji@jindalsteel.com