International

Today, on Liberation Day, the anniversary of the end of the Nazi occupation of World War Two, the Netherlands is celebrating freedom. That’s important, but it strikes me that freedom is being interpreted in a quite restrictive way. No violence, no oppression, those are the key words. But are we truly free, if we look at the economy? How democratic is that, in reality? Banks that we really must help, even if they have long been guilty of irresponsible speculation; small businesses driven from the market by multinationals; workers who have little say over how their firm is run, even if they’ve worked there for years; and tenants who have to deal with commercial housing corporations. Is that freedom? Fortunately the discussion within the SP regarding the democratisation of the economy is well under way, because without democratisation there is no real freedom. Let’s pause to consider this. It’s a good day for such contemplation.

Freedom is more than the absence of war. Freedom is also the feeling that one is safe, that you won’t constantly be coming up against petty rules and first and foremost the feeling that you have some control over your own environment. On all of these points freedom has, during the last sixty-eight years, diminished rather than increased. There are nearly twice as many of us in the Netherlands as there were in 1945 and that demands more organisation and regulation to keep the place liveable. These rules do mean less freedom. I can remember that at one time you could drive down quiet roads and park where you liked, which isn’t the case any longer, and in any case environmental considerations make it undesirable. The same goes for what you can and can’t do on the street, where you can smoke, where you can hang around, and where you can sleep on a bench.

There are good reasons for these sorts of rules. They’re unavoidable, and yet they do restrict your freedom.

In addition our economy has changed drastically. From a country with many small, independent businesses, small schools, hospitals and village councils, we have become a country characterised by the large-scale. Where indeed does one still have any influence? Isn’t it just the banks and major corporations who determine what we can do? Or how much the government must cut from its spending? Or how much further they can go with social rights and social provision?

Rules to make our society work, especially with double the number of inhabitants as there were in 1945, are unavoidable. That’s a pity, but it can’t be helped. Large-scale networks which run our lives in ways which are often undemocratic we can, however, address. The economy, globalisation and European integration are not so great that they are beyond influence. We have the choice: we can let these powerful networks dictate what is good for us, or we can take back our freedom and stand up for the small-scale. This is the essential choice in the politics of today: do we agree to a world that we cannot get to grips with, a world in which free trade and the free market have become unassailable principles? Or do we take back our control in the knowledge that the economy is there to serve us, and for no other reason? For me, the choice is most emphatically for the latter. That is the democratisation of the economy and that, in the end, is freedom.