Liberty Discussion is a program designed to engage and inform the core members on the ideas of market economy and classical liberal ideas. Discussions are made on the contemporary issues (local or national) through open market perspective. Article is selected and shared within the members to prepare oneself for the program. The program is organized at the venue of Bikalpa – an Alternative on every alternative Saturday (twice a month).
On, Saturday, September 01, 2018 regular participants gathered on the Bikalpa office for the regular formal Liberty Discussion. The discussion was titled in Article “Why Freedom Matters.”
The discussion was engaging, critical and fun. The participants have diverse thoughts so that encourages to have healthy debating discussion. Irrespective of their political positions, the participant shared a lot of commonalities. Discussion revolved around the political and economic freedom. Participant discussed, we need to have freedom for everyone to have the equal right to do whatever they want to without harming other rights. I think we still lack the freedom to make free choices. We must also not be disillusioned by the fact that the freedom of the nation is the same as the freedom of an individual. Citizens should be free to criticize question the system, and status quo in society. One of the participants said.
While arguing on Freedom some of the participant put on the question to ponder on what freedom had given till date. We need to compare the freedom of past and present. Does, our democracy had delivered the freedom we needed. On that, some other participants shared while Freedom is not permanent its theories changes with the time. The priorities of freedom from history to present are different. We are freer than we were before. It also depends upon the nature of a society where we live in. Socio-cultural norms also affect the society. Although we had earned our political freedom we had not achieved economic freedom. It is important for us to focus on economic freedom for the prosperity of the individual in society. Rather than having an emotional appeal the argument relied on logically. There we 13 participants in the discussion.