It means having the space to do as one wishes as well as to express oneself — both without running afoul of law and governance — providing one isn’t limiting others’ ability to be free.

It fascinates me how freedom is interpreted. First, many seem to think freedom is a state of comfort. It’s not. It’s not because if a society is truly free, others will have the room to make decisions that are outside your, personal, comfort zone. If your “free world” feels comfortable to you, it’s probably just a personal brand of authoritarianism.

Second, many people seem to think that being free means they can do or say as they wish without experiencing consequences. Of course, that would make that individual free, but their critic would be unfree.

I don’t think being free means any given individual or group will have a comfortable life devoid of consequences for actions and statements, but they will have maximum allowable capacity to make those decisions and statements. In short, freedom is not for the weak.