Liberty, Equality and Fraternity – The Concepts West Cannot Harmonize!

The guillotine, hailed as the symbol of ultimate equality in death, was to Burke a monstrous contraption that consumed lives with a voracious appetite. He mourned to the loss of chivalry and tradition, swept away by the relentless tide of radical change. “The age of chivalry is gone,” he declared, “that of sophisters, economists, and calculators has succeeded.” The Reign of Terror, in Burke’s eyes, was the inevitable outcome of the revolution’s unchecked fervour. And why won’t he criticize the French Revolution? He saw it as a grim testament to the dangers of absolute power, even when wielded by those who once cried out against it. “In their fanaticism for liberty,” he warned, “they have lost their humanity.” Thus, through Burke’s critique, the French Revolution transforms from a beacon of enlightenment into a cautionary tale of unchecked idealism and the loss of societal balance. It serves as a stark reminder that the road to hell is often paved with good intentions.

But, the obsession of the west, being proud of the concepts as they think gave to the world, ‘Liberty, Equality and Fraternity’ still continues. Today, the same France faces and suffers to the unhinged atrocities of ‘too-much’ liberty that it was proud about. With such analysis of historical evolution of thoughts and ideas, and believing like the west in the French Revolution of 1789 as a watershed moment in its history, and giving rise to the slogan "Liberté, égalité, fraternité" needs a revisiting.

This visitation re-evaluation is necessary because the revolutionary mantra encapsulates the aspirations of a society seeking to overthrow entrenched hierarchies and establish a more just and equitable social order being true, still hides the extremism through which it opens the pandora box of modern sophisticated issues. It is also necessary to re-evaluate because as western ideas are grappling and engrossing ideas and thoughts on non-western world, this will boomerang to the new world.

This essay explores the historical roots of liberty, equality, and fraternity, examines the tensions and challenges associated with harmonizing these principles, and reflects on the ongoing struggles to integrate them within contemporary Western societies. Furthermore, in part two of this essay, it is also discussed how from Indic perspective, this harmonization is possible.

Understanding the triads:

The consequential events and rise of the ‘what ifs’ of the triads. What if – this liberty starts questioning the liberty itself? The freed starts to bound the freedom? What if – the equality blurs the line between right and wrong and becomes the beacon of equality even among the unequal? What if, correct and incorrect and appropriate and inappropriate become twisted, falling into cognitive trenches of fallacies, to be proven the same under the flagship of ‘political correctness’? What if – fraternity finds herd-ism, mob-ism and group-ism against the opposition of universalism and all-accepting ideas? And many ‘what ifs’ of this pandora box.

The triad of ‘Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity’ represents foundational principles to the west which have profoundly influenced their political thoughts and practices in their world and the world they ruled. The practicality and natural understanding of these ideals fails to conceive as guiding pillars for a social order. Therefore, the profound impact on shaping modern democracies, the Western world has still grappled with the question of reconciling these concepts.

Liberty, the believed epitome of individual's right to freedom and autonomy, encompasses civil liberties such as freedom of speech, religion, and the press, as well as the freedom from oppressive governmental control. The idea, despite liberating and fascinating and deeply influenced by Enlightenment thinkers like John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, championed in the notion that individuals possess inherent rights that should be protected by law for his/her and even Ze/they/it (if you believe this!) rights and the law should not become a tool of anyone to limit those rights. But, the extremities of this is in the failure of west to make people understand the basis on which those rights are demanded.

Equality, another pole of the triad, is an action-based principle, proposes for equal status and opportunities of all individuals. This challenges societal hierarchies and aims to dismantle the privileges enjoyed by the few at the expense of the many. This is actually a call for equal treatment under the law, equal access to opportunities, and the eradication of social and economic inequalities. But with the extremities of equality, the line blurs to balance out between equality and equity and balance out between merit and reservation and treating equally equal and unequally unequal.

Fraternity, a sense of solidarity and mutual support among individuals, emphasizes the importance of community and collective well-being, advocating for social bonds that transcends individualistic pursuits and foster a sense of shared responsibility while understanding the core beliefs of any religious groups. The concept despite revolutionary and aspirational, the question of inclusivity and exclusivism has proven its implementation more complex and contentious. The western world based upon the strict adherence to religion calling for ‘exclusivism’ through conversion, disables them within core to accept ‘others’.

The Tensions between the triads:

One of the primary challenges before west is in reconciling these principles. The west with the burst of liberty and values attached to it, often emphasizes on individual freedom and the right to pursue personal goals. The race has no breaks which causes individualism overshadowing the social needs. Therefore, the western concept of liberty often conflicts with the aim of achieving equality. West cannot stand on two opposing positions. For instance, the protection of individual property and rights attached to it, a key component of liberty, leads to disparities in wealth and economic inequality and only performs well when state involves in this complexity. Without state or forced religion as Christianity and Islam, individual from west have no incentive to provide or give back to the society or harmony even in limited to the specific religion. Even modern taxes have been exposed as chains increasing individual exclusion from society is criticised by libertarians.

Conversely, efforts to promote equality, such as progressive taxation or social welfare programs, is perceived as encroachments on individual liberty. Critics argue that redistributive policies restrict personal freedom by limiting individuals' ability to freely use their resources. Again, the west fails to make their public understand wealth as a social outcome rather than individual pursuit.

In a capitalist system, where individual success and wealth accumulation are encouraged, the resulting economic disparities undermine the pursuit of equality. Those with greater resources have more opportunities to influence political and economic systems, leading to a concentration of power and wealth that easily perpetuate inequality. Calling this action as natural also seems ‘right’ from one perspective. It is also been affirmed when examples are shown of how despite having equal opportunities, many fails to achieve the better of the situation. At such crossroads, the society needs the understanding of inclusivity and all-accepting nature.

Fraternity, or social solidarity, the word for commune for common goal, introduces another layer of complexity. While fraternity emphasizes community and mutual support, it can conflict with the principles of individual liberty and autonomy. The challenge is to foster a sense of collective responsibility without compromising personal freedoms as individual needs a space of change in social commune structure. In contemporary Western societies, the concept of fraternity is often manifested through social safety nets and community-oriented programs. However, these measures can sometimes be met with resistance from individuals who prioritize personal autonomy over collective responsibilities and even on other hand, many religious institutions have built an over-binding regulation over individuals giving zero level of space of liberty example being rules laid on women. Balancing the needs of the community with allowing the rights of individuals remains a persistent challenge. Because, in the name of fraternity and social solidarity, the extended version of ‘liberalism’ has crossed the boundaries of all basic social setups.

Harmonizing challenge:

The difficulty in harmonizing these principles is evident in various historical and contemporary contexts. For instance, the American Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s sought to address issues of racial inequality and discrimination, reflecting the struggle to achieve equality while respecting individual liberties. The movement highlighted the need for legal and social reforms to ensure that the ideals of liberty and equality were more realized. But, even after the realization of the liberty and equality at institutional level, on ground there is different picture. On the contrary, the mob has stretched it to the extremities in the name of ‘woke-ism’ while there is a rise of discrimination even among the same people who were once discriminated.

In Europe too, the rise of populist movements has exposed tensions between liberty, equality, and fraternity. Populist leaders often frame their platforms around protecting national identity and cultural homogeneity, which clashes with the principles of equality and fraternity in multicultural societies. And recently, the debate over immigration and social integration demonstrates the complexities to reconcile those values in a globalized western world.

The most antithetical condition is of the west Asian migration into France and other European countries. The followers of ‘exclusivists-non-liberal’ ideas as immigrants are demanding from ‘liberal constitution’ for liberal rights to allow them to follow their ‘unliberal views’ and actions. In first place, they were removed from the same ‘unliberal comraderies’ they choose to elect and support.

This problem has risen because of the overall setting of the social structure in the western world. There is a lack of social setup of the west society which lacks inheritance of morality. Also, the ills of Abrahamic traits of ‘exclusivism’; the dark history of crusades and slavery; and the rise of the ‘brotherhood’ being exclusive and expecting inclusivity from others is another problem that west face today to harmonize liberty, equality and fraternity.

The way forward:

West has always faced criticism from various ideological perspectives. From economic side, the Libertarians argues that too much emphasis on equality has undermined individual freedoms and economic incentives. Conversely, the socialists criticize liberal democracies for failing to adequately address systemic inequalities and promote genuine social solidarity even raising the question of how to accommodate the ‘exclusive’ believing ideologies. Moreover, the concept of fraternity has been challenged by critics who argue that it can sometimes lead to exclusionary practices. In attempting to foster solidarity, societies may inadvertently marginalize those who do not conform to prevailing norms or values.

The challenge of harmonizing these principles is a persistent and evolving issue because of the dark history of social tensions and community-based atrocities. Thus, if west has to solve those problems they have to come out of the complexities of the triad where the Western political thought and the political thinkers has confined their thought process. They failed to understand the need for cultural and spiritual alignment of the society (may learn from Bharat!).

The Western approach in harmonising liberty, equality, and fraternity is also not possible unless ‘constitutionalism with secularist State’ do take stringent interference in the society and not allow religion to interfere in individual’s public sphere. Or else, west need to inculcate aspirations among the citizens for a just and equitable society where individuals truly believe in the good of the society and make that their priorities. The tensions between individual freedoms and collective responsibilities, as well as the complexities of achieving true social nature still continues and become a major issue of discussion.

It is necessary to discuss this as there is already a beginning of the spread of western ideologies into India. This has already started increasing social tensions among the people with different social issues. This is because of the western influence and the narratives making people and society to forget their cultural-civilizational ethos and its high time to understand the civilizational ethos of the land which helped to harmonize the triads.

(To be continued...)

• 63 min read
• 10
• 0