Is “four Freedom” actually needed?

Yes talking about the four freedom of Democracy doctrine, do you think they are necessary condition for life and living? There was a time when I myself preached many on these freedoms maybe necessary but its unlimited nature should not be compulsory. I told it to others in my own understanding that if these were unlimited then if anyone scold my friend  in front of me unethically then I can’t protest him as that person has the unlimited right to express his speech, there should have been a guide line on how should one behave. Question is, who will set it up? The social consensus? I don’t put trust on social consensus as it varies from society to society and is never fixed to a certain guideline. Then Who will set it up? No answer to this question what so ever I have found, therefore accepting limitation to these limitless four freedom were justified in that point of time. I wish to explain now why my understanding became different then before.

In Today’s reality,

I find that, if the limit becomes sharp, and if it puts me into narrow space then who will rescue me from its pressure? say for example, I am owner of two five storied buildings in the city where many are simply trying to buy lands let alone build a building over it, my property was earned not by my hard labor but I achieved it successively from my parents, public opinion may shift on saying, why he doing nothing own so much and the government may apply policy on those who successively or doing nothing have earned so much should abandon certain amount of property to the poor, in other words to those in need and in other words to them. It is I who know how my Parents spent their entire life sacrificing pleasure of living to build the homes and acquire wealth for safe keeping of their next generations. Now by making a  policy some people willing to take it over? is that justified? In my understanding that is a cruel act.

What would then be the exact criteria for limiting these limitless freedoms? 

Human nature is such and so that being neutral is never possible, unbiased judgment is almost impossible for human mind. Say for example when I look towards my one and only son, and when I look to a stranger’s son, the judgment changes completely. Therefore if we are to judge neutrally then I see there is simply no entity that can be put to charge. Time is coming when artificial intelligence (AI) based Robots shall evolve, maybe they can give unbiased judgment, I simply don’t know what I may say in that time, as it for now not yet a reality, lets avoid the fact for a while.

People around me are pious and they will talk about divine laws and to obey that without question. As per their say, the Law being divine  has no doubt that it shall be impartial. Lets consider that the people who are in charge are modern day secular, how would they react to this situation? they say they believe in God but they don’t let His laws enter into their daily business. In such situation a simple person like me will be extremely cornered, this consensus will snatch my entire willingness and freedom of ownership. I don’t think I have to give evidence from past, history talks itself. It is only two freedom proposition I have discussed above, the freedom of speech and the freedom of ownership.

What about the other two limit free propositions?

Personal freedom and the freedom of belief, are they necessary? Say for example I believe in the God of Ibrahim and you believe in being a Brahman, Now at a point of time I become convinced with your understanding of life here and hereafter, Can I do that? (my God) I am afraid, even typing the question I am feeling fear inside. Will the society let me do so? I think in the modern day city life these questions have been solved, they will say, why not, believe whatever you wish, that is called pure secularism and I am not talking about that at all, in a country where, if you change your belief, you are about to loose your entire friend circle, your family, let alone society you are affiliated with and even in your job it might put a black mark. Mahattama Gundhi taught his followers about extreme secularism, as far as I have read about him, he use to say, not only accept other religious opinions but even embrace them and obey all Gods as they do, that is the level of freedom he thought was possible. Ask me if I can do so!! I have thought over it over again and concluded that it is impossible for me. 

Its not only accepting another’s belief, the critical collision comes from the rituals, one sacrifices chicken, the other thinks the chicken is their God. Each and every religious fundamentalist will claim that they are walking in the right path while others will deny saying they are completely wrong. And I don’t think that religion should be bought like buying cloths in a super market. 

I think being a free born, I have some birthrights, I have the right to breath air, have the right to speak out or even shout anytime I want. With my power and strength I have the right to preserve and protect my wealth, no matter how much that is, I have the right to possess as much as my ability can capture, and if I believe something you should honor me with my belief. I think all four freedom are basically personal freedom and there should not be an authority to put a limit over it. I don’t know what you people will say, but what ever you say, I will accept it as your freedom to speak out and will not try to stop you.