Towards a Worldwide Index of Human Freedom

50 • Towards a Worldwide Index of Human Freedom
Such unofficial limits on freedom would cover a broad spectrum,
from active government involvement to backroom sanctioning. Where
on this spectrum would the line be drawn between “official” freedom
limits and “unofficial” ones? This demarcation would be particularly
difficult for limits on the freedom of women and minorities. Recall
that most nations now have laws that officially support freedom and
equality even if the government unofficially suppresses women and/
or minorities.
My sense is that governments are more open about official restrictions
on economic freedom than non-economic freedom, making it easier
to use official measures for restrictions on economic freedom than for
restrictions on non-economic freedoms. Socialism and publicly acknowledged
limits on economic freedom remain fashionable, at least in some
quarters. On the other hand, non-economic freedoms are “officially”
supported across a broad spectrum, even in nations actively involved in
“unofficially” suppressing such freedom.
For example, could female literacy serve as one indication of whether
freedom extends equally to females? Proxy measures will pick up both
official and unofficial limits on freedom, and problematically, given the
above, societal restrictions on freedom.
In fact, if appropriate proxy measures could be found, then, despite the
recommendation above, a measure of freedom could incorporate societal
restrictions on freedom, though this would raise some difficult conceptual
issues: i.e., the idea, only briefly explored above, that societal pressures
cannot really be considered limits on freedom.
Possible proxy measures: law and responsibility
Hayek argues that “general and equal laws” are a necessary and, he seems
to indicate, a sufficient condition for freedom. His comments speak for
themselves: “It is often not recognized that general and equal laws provide
the most effective protection against the infringement of liberty…”
(1960/1978: 210). “The conception of freedom under the law… rests on
the contention that when we obey laws, in the sense of general abstract
rules laid down irrespective their application to us, we are not subject
to another man’s will and are therefore free…. This, however, is only
true if by ‘law’ we mean the general rules that apply equally to everybody”
(1960/1978: 153). “Under a reign of freedom the free sphere of
any individual includes all actions not explicitly restricted by general law”
(1960/1978: 216).
This, of course, does not equate “general and equal laws” with freedom,
but it suggests a possible source of proxy measures.
Hayek also argues that freedom is impossible without responsibility.
This is in some ways related to the law, which forces people to take
Fraser Institute ©2012 • www.fraserinstitute.org • www.freetheworld.com