From the freedom from tyranny, and poverty to the right to free speech, we assume that freedom is always desirable. But critics argue that the consequences of freedom are less obviously desirable than we imagine and frequently unknown. Kafka wrote "It is often better to be in chains than to be free” and Sartre, that "we're condemned to be free" since we are responsible for everything we do. And in wealthier countries where citizens are freer from the hunt for basic necessities like food, water, and housing, studies show depression and anxiety to be more prevalent, not less.
Should we recognise that far from being a universal good, freedom is a double edged sword? Is the goal or being ultimately free impossible since there are always constraints to our actions and our beliefs are constrained by experience, culture and language? Or is the pursuit of freedom essential, and should we see attacks on freedom as the first step toward tyranny?