There are two extremes: Laissez faire and absolute fascism.
Middle ground between these is where many people reside, however most can be
boiled down to favoring one or the other. People can support having some
aspects fasciszing and others be more siding towards freedom. Everything
affects everyone- In some minute way or another, all actions have a connection
with all other actions. Now, Fascism doesn’t work unless it’s absolute fascism-
The fascism of the Leviathan. The Leviathan’s control dictates everything as
according to one ruler, which has nothing to do with the freedom of others.
However, with absolute freedom, one being’s freedom is curtailed and infringed
upon by another’s freedom. For example, if I had the freedom to cage a man, my
action would take the freedom of that man away. All actions, in some form or
another, require some investment of a force or tangible object, and either this
investment or the results of the action itself have echoing repercussions upon
all other actions. The concept of true freedom is impossible unless there is a
single being in a vacuum, and even then the limitations of said vacuum would
prevent absolute freedom. If true freedom is an impossibility, then we must
look at absolute fascism. Absolute fascism is just as much of a fantasy as
absolute freedom is- by the definitions of fascism you must have the Leviathan
to control others- And then the Leviathan isn’t affected by fasciszing, and
instead has absolute freedom. It’s the paradoxical relationship between freedom
and fascism that makes the plurality so intriguing. You can’t have either in
absolutes, and each only holds meaning when compared to the other.
