Freedom and Liberty: France vs. the United States Compared

Introduction: Shared Origins of Freedom and Liberty

The American and French Revolutions occurred within decades of each other, influenced by similar transformations 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 in the constitutions of both 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, however, 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 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 gave way to 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 setbacks in that pursuit. The Reign of Terror as well as the institution of slavery in the United States showed how each country struggled to resolve its 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 truly free or liberated. France did not practice slavery as the United States did, which tried to reconcile the distorted concept of "freedom" espoused by racist Southerners with the concept of universal human rights.

De Tocqueville and the Divergence of Political Philosophy

When de Tocqueville 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 Tocqueville 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 back into absolutism, and it would seem that the Reign of Terror in France proved their point. At the same time, American mistrust of government repeatedly led to problems such as the perpetuation of slavery and the tyranny of a majority ill-equipped to conceptualize good governance.

One major point of divergence between French and American concepts of freedom has therefore been the role and function of government. 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 of restricting some freedoms for the common good, that concept of common good often seems lost on Americans.

Government, Religion, and the Limits of Liberty

De Tocqueville noted that Americans seemed overly religious, something that has led to overt attempts to restrict the freedoms of others (Wood 1). Religious Americans have at times sought to restrict the freedoms and liberties of fellow citizens — a striking display of hypocrisy. Freedom of religion means that the government has no right to impose a state religion on the people, and yet some conservative Americans seek to exert moral control over women's bodies through the machinery of the state. France has zero tolerance for such encroachments and more firmly upholds the separation of Church and State. France also views reproductive freedoms as inherent to promoting universal rights.

At the same time, France has also had a recent history of unnecessarily impinging on freedoms — the most notable example being the anti-burqa laws. Anti-burqa legislation and other Islamophobic tendencies in French society may be related to France's ongoing struggle to reconcile French nationalism with multiculturalism. Both the United States and France occasionally wrestle 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 curtailed certain freedoms and liberties in the name of national security. The United States has no anti-burqa laws, but like France, it restricts freedoms and liberties in significant ways. France has also reacted to terrorism by restricting freedoms, using similar measures such as increasing surveillance, monitoring immigrant populations, and fomenting anti-immigrant sentiment (Freedom House 1). Therefore, the concepts of freedom and liberty are treated as relative in both countries. It is impossible to truly have freedom without national security, in the same way both countries use the rule of law to mitigate criminality.

One of the most interesting differences between France and the United States concerns freedom of religion specifically. Just as de Tocqueville observed, Americans are profoundly religious, and this religiosity does seem to conflict with the notion of freedom overall. France has taken the opposite path, becoming nearly secular in its government policies. As Freedom House points out, France has laws banning "ostentatious" religious symbols in schools — the same legal framework that enables its anti-burqa policies. Religious freedom is held dear in the United States, and anti-discrimination policies would generally preclude the banning of religious attire. American history explains why religious freedoms are viewed as especially important: the American mythos centers on the notion that the pilgrims sought freedom from religious persecution. In practice, however, the Puritans were religious fundamentalists who sought the right to freely reject broader norms of tolerance. France takes a more decisive stance against institutional religion because it recognizes how overbearing religious authority can restrict the rights and freedoms of citizens. In France, religious freedom means freedom from having religion imposed upon the public. In the United States, religious freedom has sometimes been interpreted as the right of dominant religious groups to impose their beliefs on others, so long as the government itself is not directly doing the imposing.

Social Welfare, Labor Rights, and Personal Freedom

The French have historically supported labor rights and social justice more comprehensively than Americans, who have often failed to recognize how wealth and power disparities limit freedoms rather than represent them. American resistance to labor movements extends from its deeply rooted anti-communist ideology. Whereas France has welcomed several socialist policies and programs as a matter of course, Americans are far slower to embrace government spending on social services. The backlash against the Affordable Care Act — which is itself a compromised half-measure and not fully universalized healthcare — illustrates how Americans distrust the government to manage healthcare. Americans tend to view government interventions into healthcare and other decision-making processes as infringements on personal liberties. The French do not view social services in this way. 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 care to all citizens.

In fact, there are numerous ways in which many Americans have fewer practical freedoms and liberties in their daily lives compared with the French. American anti-government sentiment has led to problems like the perpetuation of pernicious racism and ignorance, which naturally restrict freedom. Furthermore, that sentiment has eroded fundamental rights that French citizens routinely enjoy, including universal healthcare, government-subsidized childcare, and robust protections for workers. Employees have very few rights and freedoms in America compared with their counterparts in France (Eskow 1). Americans effectively surrender freedoms and liberties when they enable neoliberal policies to deregulate businesses. Instead of ensuring universal norms of equality through government institutions, Americans have transferred enormous power to profit-driven corporate interests. To some degree, France has also embraced the neoliberal tendencies that have dominated global governance, but the divergence remains substantial.

The primary point of divergence between the United States and France regarding freedom and liberty therefore relates to the role and function of government. The French mentality views government as an institution in the service of the public, with a strict responsibility to promote public welfare and the common good. Americans favor a rigid, rugged individualism and tend to believe that freedom and government are antagonistic forces, whereas the French view government as the preserver of freedoms. The French view occasionally restricts certain freedoms that Americans take for granted, while making other freedoms — notably reproductive rights — sacrosanct.

Conclusion: A Conflicted but Common Commitment to Liberty

Both America and France have a conflicted relationship with freedom and liberty. The French mindset is more willing to surrender specific freedoms in order to promote the common good or to conform to a universal norm. Americans are also willing to surrender freedoms and liberties, but often out of fear of big government rather than in pursuit of collective welfare. In fact, the organization Freedom House ranks France and the United States almost equally on various measures, including political rights and civil liberties, personal autonomy and individual rights, and associational and organizational rights. These similarities do not erase the cultural differences that lead to distinct domestic and foreign policies, but they do hearken back to the common origins of both nations' political philosophies.

Although there are significant weaknesses in how freedoms and liberties are protected in both France and the United States, these are two countries that share a deep belief in the value of freedom and liberty. France gave the Statue of Liberty to the United States — a telling symbol of these two nations' mutual commitment to preserving rights, freedoms, and liberties through their domestic policies.

Works Cited

Eskow, Richard. "Ten Ways Americans Have Lost Their Freedom." Salon. 2012. https://www.salon.com/2012/08/31/ten_ways_americans_have_lost_their_freedom/

Foner, Eric. "The Contested History of American Freedom." Historical Society of Pennsylvania. https://digitalhistory.hsp.org/pafrm/essay/contested-history-american-freedom

Freedom House.

Goldhammer, Arthur. "What Would Alexis de Tocqueville Have Made of the 2016 US Presidential Election?" The Nation. 28 Sept. 2016.

Haefeli, Evan. "Liberty, Diversity, and Slavery: The Beginnings of American Freedom." Historical Society of Pennsylvania. https://digitalhistory.hsp.org/pafrm/essay/liberty-diversity-and-slavery-beginnings-american-freedom

"The Ideas of the French Revolution." Alpha History. http://alphahistory.com/frenchrevolution/revolutionary-ideas/

Naylor, Thomas N. "Freedom, Equality, Justice, and Liberty Forever." Second Vermont Republic. http://vermontrepublic.org/freedom-equality-justice-and-liberty-forever/

Williamson, Lucy. "What Do Liberty, Equality, Fraternity Mean to France Now?" BBC. 14 July 2016. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36775634

Wood, James. "Tocqueville in America." The New Yorker. 17 May 2010. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/05/17/tocqueville-in-america