Seite - 65 - in Limina - Grazer theologische Perspektiven, Band 2:2

66 | www.limina-graz.eu Isabella Guanzini | Ideas of Freedom teeing the rights of man and a private sphere protected from state power. Such margin of negotiation between the individual and the state changes according to each thinker, in relation to the more or less positive picture they attribute to public power and the human being – their substantial (un)sociability, their egoistic tendencies, their tolerance of frustrations, their desire for security, their fear of death. In any case, all liberal think- ers endorse the principle of the protection of a minimal space of individual freedom, with the intent to prevent the degradation or violation of human nature as such. Hence, this space of non-interference constitutes the ob- ject of a complex and open debate, which delineates the different positions within the tradition of modern political liberalism. The radical transformation of the very idea and practice of liberty in the modern world, Constant clarifies, undoubtedly has historical explanations that concern the different extension of social bodies, the general improve- ment of customs and the desire for a peaceful life facilitated by the develop- ment of commerce, which in the modern epoch becomes “the normal state of things, the only aim, the universal tendency, the true life of nations” (Constant 1988, 314), progressively replacing the art of war as the means of interaction with and conquest of other territories. The relative internal stability of the states, together with the progressive abolition of slavery, allows an ever-increasing number of persons to dedicate their lives to work and commercial activities, developing their intellectual capacities, their creativity and entrepreneurial potentiality. These radical changes in the existing mentality, customs, and institutions have deeply altered the conception of liberty and the vision of modern man’s life, so that the an- cient ideal appears as irrevocably overcome, though not without a sense of remorse for something great that has been lost: “It follows from what I have just indicated that we can no longer enjoy the liberty of the ancients, which consisted in an active and constant partici- pation in collective power. Our freedom must consist of peaceful enjoy- ment and private independence. The share which in antiquity everyone held in national sovereignty was by no means an abstract presumption as it is in our own day. The will of each individual had real influence: the exercise of this will was a vivid and repeated pleasure. Consequently the ancients were ready to make many a sacrifice to preserve their political rights and their share in the administration of the state. Everybody, feel- ing with pride all that his suffrage was worth, found in this awareness of his personal importance a great compensation. This compensation no longer exists for us today. Lost in the multitude, the individual can almost