When “Freedom” Means Government Control
American conservatives claim to champion freedom. Small government. Individual liberty. Free markets. Get government out of our lives. Don’t tread on me.
But look at what’s actually happening in Republican-controlled states:
Governments telling businesses who they can hire and how they can operate. Governments dictating what teachers can teach and what books students can read. Governments giving police unlimited power while eliminating accountability. Governments restricting what companies can say, what doctors can discuss, and what individuals can do with their own bodies.
This isn’t freedom. This is government control. And it’s happening under the banner of defending liberty.
Let’s look at three areas where the rhetoric of freedom masks an expansion of government power: crime and policing, corporate regulation, and education. In each case, the pattern is the same: claim to defend freedom while using government force to impose control.
Crime and Policing: “Back the Blue” Means No Accountability
The slogan is “Back the Blue.” The message is law and order. The claim is that criticism of police and criminal justice reform threaten public safety. But what does “backing the blue” actually mean in practice?
The “Defund” backlash: After George Floyd’s murder in 2020, protesters called for police accountability and reforms to address systemic problems in policing. The slogan “Defund the Police” emerged—terrible messaging that obscured legitimate concerns about how we allocate resources for public safety.
Conservatives responded with “Back the Blue,” positioning any criticism of police as anti-law-enforcement. But “backing the blue” in practice has meant:
• Protecting qualified immunity (shields police from civil liability even for constitutional violations)
• Blocking body camera requirements
• Opposing independent oversight
• Preventing release of misconduct records
• Limiting use-of-force restrictions
• Increasing military equipment transfers to police
This isn’t about supporting good policing. It’s about preventing accountability for bad policing.
The crime narrative vs. reality: The claim is that “blue cities” run by Democrats are crime-ridden hellscapes while red states are safe. The data shows otherwise:
In 2020, the murder rate in the 25 states that voted for Trump was 40% higher than in the 25 states that voted for Biden. Eight of the ten states with the highest murder rates voted for Trump. The state with the highest murder rate? Mississippi. The lowest? Massachusetts and New Hampshire (tie).
Yes, some cities have high crime rates. But when you compare red states to blue states overall, red states have higher rates of violent crime. This doesn’t fit the narrative, so it gets ignored.
What actually reduces crime: Here’s what the evidence shows actually reduces crime:
• Economic opportunity and employment
• Education and youth programs
• Mental health and addiction treatment
• Community investment and social services
• De-escalation training for police
• Addressing root causes like poverty and trauma
None of these fit the “law and order” narrative. They require investment in communities, not just punishment. They require treating crime as a social problem, not just an enforcement problem.
What doesn’t reduce crime long-term: The “law and order” approach focuses on:
• Longer sentences (U.S. has highest incarceration rate in the world, doesn’t have lowest crime)
• More aggressive policing (increases arrests but not safety)
• Militarized police equipment (doesn’t reduce crime, increases violence)
• Three-strikes laws and mandatory minimums (creates overcrowding, doesn’t deter)
The United States incarcerates more people per capita than any other country—2.3 million people in prison or jail. We spend $182 billion per year on policing and incarceration. If punishment deterred crime, we’d be the safest country on Earth. We’re not.
The freedom fraud: Here’s the pattern: claim to defend “law and order” and “freedom from crime,” but oppose the policies that actually reduce crime because they require collective investment. Support unlimited police power while blocking accountability. Use crime as a culture war wedge (particularly around race) while ignoring that red states have higher murder rates.
If this were really about public safety, we’d invest in what works. Instead, it’s about giving government agents unlimited power while eliminating oversight—the opposite of the limited government conservatives claim to support.
Corporations: When “Free Markets” Mean Government Dictating Business
Conservatives claim to support free market capitalism. Businesses should operate without government interference. The market should decide. Regulations are tyranny.
But when businesses do things conservatives don’t like, suddenly government interference is not only acceptable—it’s mandatory.
Disney vs. DeSantis: In 2022, Florida passed the “Don’t Say Gay” bill restricting classroom discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity. Disney, Florida’s largest employer, criticized the law.
Governor Ron DeSantis responded by having the Florida legislature strip Disney of its self-governing status in the Reedy Creek Improvement District—a status Disney had held since 1967. This was explicit government retaliation against a company for political speech.
DeSantis said: “If Disney wants to pick a fight, they chose the wrong guy.” He signed the bill dissolving Disney’s district while literally standing in front of a “Don’t Tread on Me” flag.
This is government using its power to punish a company for speech. It’s not free markets. It’s not limited government. It’s authoritarianism.
Bud Light and the “anti-woke” crusade: In 2023, Bud Light sent a commemorative can to trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney. Conservative activists organized a boycott. Sales dropped 25%. Two executives were placed on leave. The company apologized.
A boycott is market forces—that’s fine. But here’s what happened next: Republican state treasurers and attorneys general sent letters threatening to divest state funds from Anheuser-Busch and other companies that engaged in “ESG” (Environmental, Social, and Governance) initiatives or diversity programs.
This is government officials using state power to threaten businesses for their internal policies. It’s not free markets. It’s government coercion.
Anti-ESG and anti-DEI legislation: Multiple Republican-controlled states have passed or proposed laws restricting corporate ESG policies, diversity initiatives, and LGBTQ+-inclusive practices. These laws:
• Ban state pension funds from investing based on ESG criteria
• Prohibit government contracts with companies that have diversity policies
• Require companies to disclose diversity initiatives to qualify for contracts
• Penalize banks that consider climate risk in lending
Texas passed a law requiring state agencies to create lists of financial companies that “boycott” fossil fuels. The state then prohibited those companies from state contracts and divested from them. This is government dictating investment decisions to private companies.
West Virginia, Louisiana, Arkansas, and other states have similar laws. This is government telling businesses how to operate, what to consider in their decisions, and punishing them for policies the government doesn’t like.
The freedom fraud: The claim: businesses should be free from government interference. Regulations are tyranny. Let the market decide.
The reality: businesses must operate according to government-mandated conservative values. Companies that acknowledge climate change, promote diversity, or support LGBTQ+ rights face government punishment. State officials use government power to coerce business behavior.
This isn’t free market capitalism. It’s government-enforced ideological conformity. It’s the opposite of everything conservatives claim to support—unless you understand that the goal isn’t actually freedom. The goal is control.
Education: “Parental Rights” Means Government Censorship
The slogan is “parental rights.” The claim is that parents should control their children’s education and that government shouldn’t impose values. But look at what’s actually happening.
Teacher gag orders: Between 2021 and 2023, Republican-controlled states passed laws restricting what teachers can teach about race, gender, and American history. These laws:
• Ban teaching that racism is systemic
• Prohibit discussions that might make students feel “discomfort” about their race
• Restrict lessons on gender identity and sexual orientation
• Require teaching that slavery provided “personal benefit” to enslaved people
• Mandate “patriotic education”
Florida rejected an AP African American Studies course, claiming it lacked educational value. The state required changes to AP Psychology to remove content on sexual orientation and gender identity. This is government dictating curriculum based on political ideology.
Teachers have been fired or disciplined for:
• Having diverse books in classroom libraries
• Teaching about systemic racism
• Acknowledging their own sexual orientation
• Discussing current events related to race or gender
This is government telling teachers what they can and cannot say. It’s censorship.
Book bans: Between 2021 and 2023, over 3,300 books were banned or challenged in U.S. schools and libraries. Banned books include:
• The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood
• The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison
• Gender Queer by Maia Kobabe
• All Boys Aren’t Blue by George M. Johnson
• Books about Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr.
• Books about the Holocaust
The American Library Association found that 40% of challenges came from organized groups rather than individual parents. Many challenges use identical language, revealing coordinated campaigns.
States have passed laws making it easier to challenge books and creating criminal penalties for librarians who refuse to remove challenged materials. In some cases, librarians have been threatened with prosecution.
This is government censorship. It’s not parents making individual choices for their own children—it’s organized campaigns using government power to remove books from all children.
School choice and vouchers: School choice and voucher programs are promoted as giving parents freedom to choose their children’s education. But look at how they actually work:
• Public funding is diverted to private and religious schools that:
• Can refuse to admit students based on religion, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity
• Are not required to follow the same academic standards
• Don’t have to hire certified teachers
• Can teach creationism as science
• Face minimal accountability for results
Meanwhile, public schools lose funding, leading to larger class sizes, fewer resources, and worse outcomes for students who remain—disproportionately low-income students and students with disabilities who private schools won’t accept.
In Arizona, the state passed universal vouchers allowing any family to use public money for private school. The cost exploded to over $900 million annually—money diverted from public schools. Studies show vouchers don’t improve academic outcomes and often make them worse.
This isn’t about parental choice. Wealthy families already had choice—they could afford private school. This is about using public money to fund religious education and defunding public schools that serve everyone.
The freedom fraud: The claim: parents should control their children’s education. Government shouldn’t impose values. Freedom of choice.
The reality: government dictates what teachers can teach, what books students can read, what history can be discussed. Government bans topics, removes books, fires teachers, and enforces ideological conformity. And the “parental rights” being defended are only for parents who agree with conservative ideology.
A parent who wants their child to learn accurate history? No rights. A parent who wants diverse books available? No rights. A parent who wants their LGBTQ+ child to see themselves in curriculum? No rights.
But a parent who wants to ban books for everyone? Government will help. A parent who wants to prevent teaching about racism? Government will enforce it.
“Parental rights” means government censorship enforcing conservative ideology. It’s the opposite of freedom.
The Pattern: Freedom for Me, Control for You
Look at the pattern across these three areas:
• Claim to support freedom from government control
• Use government power to enforce ideological conformity
• Benefit specific interest groups (police unions, private schools, conservative donors)
• Punish dissent and eliminate accountability
• Wrap it all in the language of liberty
This isn’t limited government. This isn’t individual freedom. This is using government power to impose control while claiming to defend liberty.
How the language works: The rhetorical trick is defining freedom as “freedom from things I don’t like” rather than actual liberty:
• Freedom from accountability for police = “law and order”
• Freedom from diverse perspectives = “parental rights”
• Freedom from criticism = “anti-woke”
• Freedom from inconvenient history = “patriotic education”
Meanwhile, actual freedoms are restricted:
• Freedom of speech (teachers censored, books banned)
• Freedom of contract (businesses coerced by government)
• Freedom from government intrusion (police power unlimited)
• Freedom to make business decisions (ESG policies banned)
What Gets Ignored While We Fight About This
While we argue about whether police should be “backed,” whether corporations are too “woke,” and whether schools are pushing an “agenda,” here’s what gets less attention:
• Red states have higher murder rates than blue states, but we keep hearing about crime in “blue cities”
• Police budgets keep increasing while evidence shows it doesn’t reduce crime
• Private schools taking public money can discriminate and face no accountability
• Public schools are being systematically defunded
• Government is using power to coerce businesses while claiming to support free markets
• Actual censorship (book bans, teacher gag orders) gets less coverage than Twitter controversies
The culture war framing works because it keeps the focus on symbolic battles while actual policy happens in the background. We argue about slogans while governments expand power, reduce accountability, and enforce ideological conformity.
The Bottom Line
The rhetoric is freedom, limited government, individual liberty, free markets, and parental rights. The reality is government censorship, corporate coercion, unlimited police power, and ideological enforcement.
This pattern holds across issues:
• Claim to oppose government overreach while expanding government power
• Claim to support free markets while using government to punish businesses
• Claim to defend freedom while restricting speech, banning books, and firing teachers
• Claim to support accountability while eliminating oversight of police
• Claim to defend parental rights while imposing government-mandated ideology
The goal isn’t freedom. The goal is control—control over what can be taught, what can be read, what companies can say, who police can harm without consequences. The language of liberty is used to justify expanding government power.
If you actually support limited government, free markets, and individual liberty, look at what’s being done in the name of those principles. Government officials using state power to punish companies for Pride Month marketing isn’t free market capitalism. Legislatures banning books isn’t limited government. Eliminating accountability for police while giving them military equipment isn’t liberty.
This is the freedom fraud: using the language of liberty to justify government control. And it’s working exactly as intended.
Even that's Odd 
Leave a comment