Nice grey life

Culture as a positive freedom

---

Please note: This review is not meant to be part of my usual contributions to ACM's «Computing Reviews». I do want, though, to share it with people that follow my general interests and such stuff.

This article was published almost a year ago, and I read it just after relocating from Argentina back to Mexico. I came from a country starting to realize the shock it meant to be ruled by an autocratic, extreme right-wing president willing to overrun its Legislative and bent on destroying the State itself — not too different from what we are now witnessing on a global level.

I have been a strong proponent and defender of Free Software and of Free Culture throughout my adult life. And I have been a Socialist since my early teenage years. I cannot say there is a strict correlation between them, but there is a big intersection of people and organizations who aligns to both sides — And Ártica (and Mariana Fossatti) are clearly among them.

Freedom is a word that has brought us many misunderstanding throughout the past many decades. We will say that Freedom can only be brought hand-by-hand with Equality, Fairness and Tolerance. But the extreme-right wing (is it still bordering Fascism, or has it finally embraced it as its true self?) that has grown so much in many countries over the last years also seems to have appropriated the term, even taking it as their definition. In English (particularly, in USA English), liberty is a more patriotic term, and freedom is more personal (although the term used for the market is free market); in Spanish, we conflate them both under libre.

Mariana refers to a third blog, by Rolando Astarita, where the author introduces the concepts positive and negative freedom/liberties. Astarita characterizes negative freedom as an individual’s possibility to act without interferences or coertion, and is limited by other people’s freedom, while positive freedom is the real capacity to exercise one’s autonomy and achieve self-realization; this does not depend on a person on its own, but on different social conditions; Astarita understands the Marxist tradition to emphasize on the positive freedom.

Mariana brings this definition to our usual discussion on licensing: If we follow negative freedom, we will understand free licenses as the idea of access without interference to cultural or information goods, as long as it’s legal (in order not to infringe other’s property rights). Licensing is seen as a private content, and each individual can grant access and use to their works at will.

The previous definition might be enough for many, but she says, is missing something important. The practical effect of many individuals renouncing a bit of control over their property rights produce, collectively, the common goods. They constitute a pool of knowledge or culture that are no longer an individual, contractual issue, but grow and become social, collective. Negative freedom does not go further, but positive liberty allows broadening the horizon, and takes us to a notion of free culture that, by strengthening the commons, widens social rights.

She closes the article by stating (and I’ll happily sign as if they were my own words) that we are Free Culture militants «not only because it affirms the individual sovereignty to deliver and receive cultural resources, in an intellectual property framework guaranteed by the state. Our militancy is of widening the cultural enjoying and participation to the collective through the defense of common cultural goods» (…) «We want to build Free Culture for a Free Society. But a Free Society is not a society of free owners, but a society emancipated from the structures of economic power and social privilege that block this potential collective».

---