Why Most People Do Not Actually Want Freedom
Freedom Demands Responsibility, Ownership, and Consequences. Comfort Asks for None of Them.
Recently, a teammate came to me with a well laid out list of things he believed needed to be corrected inside our organization.
It was impressive! He had documented everything in an organized and straightforward manner. He had done the background work. He communicated it clearly via email and then followed up in person. It was thoughtful. Professional. Direct.
We sat down and walked through it point by point.
When we finished, I said thank you and stood up to leave.
He seemed irritated.
I asked why.
He responded, “Well, what do you want me to do?”
I said, “I want you to do what you recommended we should do.”
He looked confused.
“I didn’t recommend anything.”
“Exactly,” I said. “So we will not be doing anything.”
There is a question I am known for at CatchMark. When a teammate brings me a problem framed in a way that subtly asks me to solve it, I respond with a simple question.
“What do you think we should do?”
Ask anyone in our organization. They can recite it instantly.
It is simple. But it is powerful.
Because that question transfers ownership.
And that is where many people get uncomfortable.
My teammate did excellent analysis. He identified issues clearly. But he stopped short of recommendation. He wanted the correction. He wanted the improvement. He wanted the outcome.
He just did not want to carry the weight of proposing the solution.
That moment highlights a broader cultural trend.
People say they want ownership.
They say they want empowerment.
They say they want freedom.
But when responsibility introduces risk, many quietly step back and look for someone else to carry it.
And that is not just a workplace dynamic.
It is a societal one.
The Freedom We Say We Want
Freedom sounds beautiful in theory.
We chant it. We campaign on it. We teach our children to value it. We frame entire political movements around protecting it.
But if we are honest, most people do not actually want freedom.
They want the benefits of freedom.
They want the prosperity, the innovation, the opportunity, the upward mobility.
They just do not want the responsibility that comes with it.
They want upside without risk.
Choice without consequence.
Autonomy without ownership.
That is not freedom.
That is entitlement.
Freedom Is Heavy
I have long believed that freedom sits above nearly every other political and cultural value. Not because it is easy. But because it places dignity and responsibility where they belong, on the individual.
Freedom means you get to choose.
It also means you own the result.
If you start a business, you own the risk and the reward.
If you spend recklessly, you own the debt.
If you neglect your health, you own the consequences.
If you speak freely, you own the response.
Freedom is not just permission. It is accountability.
At work, that means you do not just identify problems. You recommend solutions and stand behind them.
In society, it means you do not just demand change. You accept the consequences of the systems you advocate for.
Yet many people want the rewards of a free system without carrying the weight that makes those rewards possible.
The Quiet Contradiction
We want a free market when it benefits us.
We want protection when it does not.
We want competition when we are winning.
We want regulation when we are losing.
We want freedom of speech.
We want insulation from speech we dislike.
We want ownership when it produces gain.
We want redistribution when it produces loss.
We want empowerment.
But we resist accountability.
In other words, we want freedom selectively.
But freedom does not function selectively.
You cannot sustainably keep the benefits while outsourcing the burden.
The Trade We Quietly Make
Throughout history, societies have made a predictable trade.
We trade autonomy for guarantees.
We trade responsibility for security.
We trade risk for regulation.
It rarely happens dramatically. It happens incrementally.
A new protection here. A new guarantee there. A new safety net expanded just a bit further.
Each step is defensible in isolation.
But every guarantee requires control.
If someone else is responsible for your outcomes, they must also have authority over your decisions.
If an institution absorbs your risk, it must manage your behavior.
If the system guarantees your security, it must limit your autonomy.
You may retain the language of freedom. But the substance begins to erode.
The Psychological Escape Hatch
When something goes wrong in a free system, there are fewer places to hide.
You cannot blame every outcome on “the system.”
You cannot outsource every mistake.
You cannot demand rescue from every poor decision.
That level of ownership is psychologically demanding.
It is far easier to prefer a framework where responsibility is diffused. Where failure is socialized. Where outcomes are collective. Where there is always an external explanation.
In that environment, you may lose autonomy. But you gain an escape hatch.
It is always someone else’s fault.
And that is deeply appealing.
Freedom Does Not Exist Without Responsibility
Here is the tricky part.
Freedom does not exist without responsibility.
The two are inseparable.
You cannot have empowerment without ownership.
You cannot have autonomy without consequence.
You cannot have liberty without accountability.
When I ask, “What do you think we should do?” I am not being difficult. I am reinforcing a principle.
If you want the authority to shape outcomes, you must be willing to own the risk of being wrong.
The same is true in society.
If we want the prosperity, innovation, and opportunity that freedom can produce, we must be willing to accept volatility, inequality of outcomes, and personal responsibility.
Most people say they want freedom.
But what many truly want is the fruit without the labor.
The benefits without the burden.
The rights without the weight.
Freedom is not just a right to be protected.
It is a responsibility to be carried.
And only a mature culture is willing to carry it.