The American and French Revolutions occurred within decades of each other, influenced by similar changes taking place in European society. Concepts of freedom and liberty therefore evolved concurrently within these two societies, in part due to the vibrant interchange of ideas and philosophies. French philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville epitomized the bilateral ideological communications that flowed between France and the United States. In a general sense, French and American concepts of freedom and liberty are similar, deriving from Enlightenment humanism and the concept of a universal moral order divorced from overarching church authority. Concepts like freedom of speech and religion are embedded into the constitutions of these two countries and cultures. French and American republican values also influenced how these two nations would structure their governments in the era of the modern nation-state. As their nations evolved throughout the modern era, though, it became apparent that France and the United States had vastly different ideas of how freedom and liberty would actually play out in daily life, the law, and foreign policy. Both France and the United States have dichotomous and sometimes paradoxical notions of freedom and liberty, evident in their respective domestic and foreign policies. Similarly, both nations also struggle to balance the demands of sensible national governance and national security with the need to preserve fundamental freedoms and liberties. ““Liberty! Equality! Fraternity!” The calling card of the French Revolution could also have encapsulated the American call for independence from the British Brown (“Ideas of the French Revolution” 1). In the eighteenth century, both American and French concepts of freedom and liberty mainly focused on the relationship between the citizen and the state. Whereas individuals did not enjoy freedoms and liberties under monarchic rule, a new model of democratic government was born during the Enlightenment. Enlightenment humanism, and the philosophical legacies of Locke, Hobbes, and Hume, infiltrated the consciousness of nation-builders on both sides of the Atlantic. As the old models of governance and social control moved way for democratic leadership and self-empowerment, both France and the United States pursued their own paths toward freedom and liberty. Both nations also experienced major historical hiccups in the pursuit of a more ideal nation. The Reign of Terror as well as the institution of slavery in the United States showed how each of these two nations struggled with how to practically resolve their dueling desires for freedom on the one hand, and political expediency on the other. Gender parity has been another issue impeding freedom in both France and the United States. Until recently, women did not enjoy the powers and privileges afforded to male citizens, and could not be considered free or liberated. France did not practice slavery like the United States, though, which tried to reconcile the distorted concept of “freedom” espoused by racist Southerners with the concept of universal human rights.

When de Toqueville visited the young United States in the early nineteenth century, he provided posterity with the first major cross-cultural analysis of the differences between America and France in terms of their political philosophies. De Toqueville was struck by the contrasts in American society between “defiant individualism” and “sleepless communitarianism,” and warned Americans and French readers alike of the dangers of “stifling conformism, the tyranny of the majority, the soft despotism of modern equality,” (Wood 1). American anti-federalists eschewed any centralized government for fear of falling backwards into absolutism, and it would seem that the Reign of Terror in France proved their point. At the same time, American mistrust of government has repeatedly led to problems like the perpetuation of slavery, and the...

Americans have perpetually struggled to reconcile the desire for good government and strong national security with the desire for unfettered freedom. Whereas the French have acknowledged the necessity to restrict some types of freedoms for the common good, the concept of common good often seems lost upon Americans. De Tocqueville had noted that Americans seemed overly religious, something that has led to an overt attempt to restrict the freedoms of others (Wood 1). Religious Americans are hell-bent on restricting the freedoms and liberties of other Americans in a supreme display of frustrating hypocrisy. Freedom of religion means that the government has no right to impose a state religion on the people, and yet conservative Americans want to hijack the state by presuming moral control over women’s bodies. The French have zero tolerance for such shenanigans, and more firmly avows the separation of Church and State. France also views reproductive freedoms as being inherent to promoting universal rights.
At the same time, the French have also had a recent history of unnecessarily impinging on freedoms—the most notable example being the anti-burqa laws. Anti-burqa laws and other Islamophobic tendencies in French society may be related more to the fact that France is only now contending with how to reconcile French nationalism with multiculturalism. The United States and France both occasionally struggle with how to ensure freedom of speech without condoning hate speech. Naylor also notes that since September 11, the American government “has created a plethora of new laws and institutions severely restricting our freedom and civil liberties while pretending to protect us from Islamic terrorists,” (1). Those laws include the Patriot Act, which had curtailed some freedoms and liberties in the nation in the name of national security. The United States has no anti-burqa laws but like France, does restrict freedom and liberties in significant ways. France has also reacted to terrorism by restricting freedoms, using similar measures like increasing surveillance and monitoring immigrant populations, and fomenting anti-immigrant sentiments (Freedom House 1). Therefore, the concepts of freedom and liberty are viewed as relative in both countries. It is impossible to truly have freedom without also enjoying national security, in the same way both countries use rule of law to mitigate criminality.

The French have historically supported labor rights and social justice more comprehensively than the Americans, who somehow fail to understand how wealth and power disparities limit freedoms rather than represent them. American lack of support for labor movements extends from its anti-communist ideology. Whereas France has welcome several socialist policies and programs as a matter of course, Americans are much slower to embrace government spending on social services. The backlash against Obamacare, which is actually a compromised half measure and not fully universalized healthcare, proves how Americans do not trust the government to manage healthcare. Americans view government interventions into healthcare and other decision-making processes as being infringements on personal liberties. The French do not view social services as infringements on personal liberties. In fact, the French hold the opposite view, believing that social services enhance personal liberties by improving overall quality of life. Universal healthcare can be construed as promoting personal liberty in the sense that it extends affordable and accessible healthcare to all citizens.

France has had its own issues, though, particularly as it struggles to create a new national identity in a multicultural era. The United States has been…