Once upon a time there rose an idea, an interesting goal.
The idea that rose was an idea that we should understand better nowadays, an idea we should feel stronger connected with than we do.
It was the idea of freedom. But not just freedom. It was the idea of freedom in responsibility.
Too often nowadays freedom is used as a shield to hide behind. Not from what it was supposed to protect us from. No, it is used as a shield against the very sword we should use to defend freedom. For the fight for freedom is just.
The fight we are fighting now, however, is not. The sword that we should use, but cast away instead (only to have our dear shield of Freedom be raised and dented when it comes back to us), is the sword of Responsibility.
Freedom is misunderstood. It is not the allowance of being able to do what you want, of saying what ever you want. It is the possibility to grow and develop yourself. You might want to say something and freedom allows you to do so. But you can only grow and make the world a better place if you use responsibility as well, if you think about what you are about to say and the consequences it may have.
Then, when you have considered this, and only then, and you decide to act to the best of your conscience, you may say that you have used freedom in its true purpose.
I didn't find the structure of the prose to be very compelling and poor word choice offset me quickly (using 'rose' repeatedly in close proximity). I can respect that this is your philosophy on the subject of freedom but it didn't seem to me to introduce any new, interesting or creative concepts or imagery.
I have not considered that for this piece, the contrast of consciences, it wasn't in the message I was trying to get across. I didn't have justice in mind in this case. What I had in mind was that there are many people who, under the claim of freedom of speech, say things without thinking about the consequences. They hurt people, offend people and then say that those people were wrong for being offended, even if what was said in the first place was very rude.
To tell you the truth, I'll have to think a bit more on that, the difference between consciences. I guess that's what I get for answering this at 8 in the morning during the week of my exams. But you have my word that I'll think about it and be critical with myself
I'll see if I can do something about the word choice. English is my second language, so my vocabulary is very poor. Unfortunately I don't know any Dutch sites that give such a wide range of different people to come in contact with. Therefore I have no choice but to write in English if I want to share and improve. I see how the repeating of 'rose' could be a nuisance to you, though I think I might have done that in purpose in the first place. But if a rhetoric device has not the effect you want it to have, you better leave it out, right?
I was never meaning to introduce a new concept. I was trying to give a counterweight to the, in my perception more present, idea that you should be able to say whatever you like. I am sure that this opinion is not new, but I do believe that it is not heard enough.
But to be fair: I never expected that I would make it to the third round of the tournament it was written for with this piece.
Thank you for taking the time to read my piece and respond to it, I appreciate it