The argumt for freedom is not & never has been, that people are all good & smart & make the right choices & stuff. The argumt for freedom is & always has been that OTHERS are not presumptively better, smarter, or more capable of making the right choices for MY life.

Note the word "presumptively." The argument for freedom acknowledges that there are special circumstances where others ARE better able to make the right choices for my life. For example, when I was six, my parents were certainly better able to make the right choices for me.

But the argument for freedom says: We do not always remain children. We have an obligation to be responsible--which logically means we must be FREE to discharge that obligation--which means, to enjoy the rewards of doing so well, & suffer the costs of doing so badly.

The argument for freedom does NOT depend on some rosy estimate of human nature. Quite the contrary: it says that our political rulers are ALSO human, so if we can't be trusted to run our lives well, we SURE AS HELL can't be trusted to run OTHER people's lives well.

The argument for freedom does NOT say freedom cures all our ills. It says that we should be free to figure out how to cure our ills.

(The arguments AGAINST freedom, of course, always promise that the rulers will cure our ills, and this is always a lie.)

The argument for freedom does NOT depend on the belief that ordinary people always make wise decisions. It depends on the belief that THIS guy and others like him can’t be trusted to make wise decisions FOR YOUR life.