Hegel said, “freedom is the appreciation of necessity”, but whose necessity are we looking at, is it the necessity for socialism or the necessity for capitalism?
Libertarianism is the philosophy that upholds bourgeois right, monopoly right and “freedom of choice”. In the discussions with the Chinese President Xi Jinping, it is only to the extent of “opening up” as they call it. The same kind of “opening up” demanded of the former Soviet Union and still today with Putin’s Russia. The same applies to Cuba and the DPRK.
What do they mean when they talk about opening up or relaxation of the state both in Britain and abroad? It means the free market and neo-liberalism being free to enter in so that labour can be freely exploited.
Choosing whether to live better at the expense of others is not a “choice” we should relish. Doing “whatever I want” is the type of individual choice that can be detrimental to others. There has to be restrictions and the right to exploit is based upon class privilege.This cannot be considered as a human right if the majority of humanity is excluded.
Socialists, on the other hand, seek to abolish capitalism and private ownership of the means of production. This kind of freedom and liberty is the antithesis of freedom to exploit. This kind of freedom liberates the working class and poor and creates the proper conditions for the producers to meet their material and cultural needs.
There is no real criticism of Chinese human rights by our Government, this is false criticism, there is only criticism of restrictions on capitalist rights. Whatever preferences they have for the different social systems it is only over the extent that monopolies are restricted or not. There is no proper criticism otherwise there would be a real concern over human rights of workers and it might achieve freedom against exploitation. A thing, or a necessity, totally against their interests.
Rtuc's Blog 