On 4 February 2025, the Rafael del Pino Foundation organised the Master Lecture ".On freedom"which was given by Timothy Snyder on the occasion of the publication of his latest book of the same title published by Galaxia Gutenberg.
Timothy Snyder holds the Housum Chair of History at Yale University and is fellow He is a permanent fellow at the Institute of Human Sciences in Vienna. He holds a doctorate from Oxford and has been a research fellow at the universities of Paris, Vienna, Warsaw and Harvard. His previous books have received distinguished awards. He is the author of Lands of blood. Europe between Hitler and Stalin (Galaxia Gutenberg, 2011), translated into thirteen languages, which received twelve awards, including the Hannah Arendt Prize for Political Thought, the Leipzig Prize for European Understanding and the Emerson Humanities Prize of the American Academy of Arts and Letters. He helped Tony Judt write a thematic history of political ideas and intellectuals in politics, Thinking the 20th century (2012). His academic articles have appeared in journals such as Past and Present y Journal of Cold War StudiesHe has also written in The New York Review of Books, Foreign Affairs, The Times Literary Supplement, The Nation y The New Republic as well as in The New York Times, The International Herald Tribune, The Wall Street Journal, in other newspapers. He is a member of the Committee of Conscience of the United States Holocaust Memorial and the Advisory Board of the Yivo Institute for Jewish Research. His books The Red Prince. The Secret Lives of a Habsburg Archduke (2014), Black Earth. The Holocaust as history and as a warning. (2015); On tyranny (2017) y The road to non-freedom (2018) have also been published by Galaxia Gutenberg.
Summary:
Historian Timothy Snyder gave a keynote lecture in Madrid on the occasion of the publication of his book On freedom (Galaxia Gutenberg). In his speech, he offered a profound reflection on the concept of freedom and the dangers of its limited interpretation. His main argument revolved around the difference between negative freedom y positive freedomThe former, based on the absence of external interference, is insufficient and can lead to the concentration of power in the hands of a few. In contrast, positive freedom is based on the creation of conditions that allow people to develop their autonomy and live in dignity.
Freedom is not a natural state, but a collective project.
Snyder began by challenging the idea that individuals are inherently born free. According to him, no one is free in and of themselves, but rather freedom is a process that requires education, opportunities and security. The simplistic view of freedom as a struggle against external constraints ignores the fact that, in order to exercise it, people need an environment that makes it possible.
He exemplified this with childhood: a baby is not born free, but dependent on others. His or her ability to become an autonomous individual depends on the society in which he or she grows up, on access to resources such as education and health. If freedom were simply the absence of restrictions, a child raised without support would be free, but in reality would be condemned to helplessness.
The danger of "negative freedom" and unchecked power
One of the central themes of the conference was the criticism of the negative freedomwhich understands freedom only as the absence of government intervention. Snyder warned that this view, predominant in the Anglo-Saxon world, has been used to justify the weakening of the state and the accumulation of power in the hands of large fortunes and corporations.
As an example, he mentioned the current situation in the United States, where a group of people close to Elon Musk has managed to infiltrate the governmental system and manipulate key aspects of the country's functioning. According to Snyder, these individuals have not been democratically elected, but have the ability to disrupt government payments and undermine the authority of Congress. This concentration of power, he said, is the direct result of an ideology that promotes absolute deregulation under the guise of freedom.
Another example of this problem is the elimination of the system that allowed US citizens to pay their taxes directly to the government. Musk called it a case of "unnecessary state intervention", when in fact it was a service that made life easier for taxpayers. For Snyder, this demonstrates how the rhetoric of negative freedom used to dismantle essential services and favour private interests.
True freedom requires conditions for living in dignity
In contrast, Snyder advocated the positive freedomwhich implies not only the absence of oppression, but also the existence of conditions that allow citizens to exercise their autonomy effectively. To illustrate this, he used historical and contemporary examples:
Nazi concentration campsAfter the Second World War, there was talk of the "liberation" of the camps, but in reality, the victims were not automatically free. Without medical care, food and psychological support, many died soon after being rescued. Freedom from oppression is not enough; freedom must be accompanied by real opportunities to live in dignity.
The war in UkraineSnyder explained that Ukrainians differentiate between "de-occupation" (expelling the invaders) and "liberation" (rebuilding schools, roads and hospitals). It is not enough to remove the military threat; conditions for normal life must be restored. A war-torn village cannot be considered free until its inhabitants have access to basic services.
Everyday lifeCan a person who cannot get around because there is no public transport, or a child without access to quality education, really be free? For Mr Snyder, the answer is no.
The role of government: enemy or guarantor of freedom?
One of Snyder's most provocative assertions was that the government is not an enemy of freedombut, on many occasions, is its main advocate. In his opinion, an extreme view of negative liberty has led to the demonisation of any government action, even those that guarantee basic rights.
He pointed out that, paradoxically, European countries, which offer universal health care and education, have higher levels of freedom than the United States according to the own measurements of agencies such as Freedom House. This shows that active government need not be synonymous with oppression, but can be an enabler of freedom.
The extreme right's capture of the concept of freedom
Snyder warned that the extreme right has monopolised the discourse on freedom, redefining it in a way that benefits the most powerful. A clear example of this is the misrepresentation of the concept of freedom of expressionIn the United States, the idea has taken hold that freedom of expression is about allowing billionaire elites to broadcast their messages without restriction, rather than ensuring that less powerful citizens can express themselves without fear of reprisal.
In his view, true freedom of expression is not only about the absence of government censorship, but about protecting vulnerable people so that they can speak out without being silenced by more powerful interests.
Freedom is a collective effort, not an individual privilege.
In conclusion, Snyder insisted that freedom is neither an automatic right nor a privilege that one obtains just by existing. It is a collective project that requires effort, cooperation and social structures to make it possible..
He also called for the word "freedom" not to be monopolised by the radical right. He explained that, although in Europe there are more guarantees for real freedom than in the USA, it is less talked about in public discourse. According to him, it is essential to reclaim the concept of freedom from progressive positions, to prevent it from continuing to be used as an excuse for deregulation and the accumulation of power in the hands of a few.
Timothy Snyder's lecture was a defence of the positive freedom as the only way to guarantee a truly free society. He criticised the individualistic view of freedom, which has allowed the weakening of the state and the concentration of power in private hands. Instead, he proposed a notion of freedom that requires a suitable social environment, where people have rights, opportunities and security to develop fully.
For Snyder, the great struggle of our time is to recover the true meaning of freedom and prevent it from becoming an excuse for inequality and authoritarianism.
The Rafael del Pino Foundation is not responsible for the comments, opinions or statements made by the people who participate in its activities and which are expressed as a result of their inalienable right to freedom of expression and under their sole responsibility. The contents included in the summary of this conference are the result of the debates held at the meeting held for this purpose at the Foundation and are the responsibility of their authors.
The Rafael del Pino Foundation is not responsible for any comments, opinions or statements made by third parties. In this respect, the FRP is not obliged to monitor the views expressed by such third parties who participate in its activities and which are expressed as a result of their inalienable right to freedom of expression and under their own responsibility. The contents included in the summary of this conference are the result of the discussions that took place during the conference organised for this purpose at the Foundation and are the sole responsibility of its authors.
