Enslavement by "Consent"

No man is good enough to govern another man without that other’s consent.” This sentence spoken by Abraham Lincoln, brings before us the question of “consent.” In a society committed to freedom, the principle of consent is conceded. But there may be many ways of winning “consent” and sometimes the person who gives consent doesn’t see the position in which he is placing himself; he doesn’t see the end from the beginning. And the things to which people sometimes give their consent, against their own ultimate interest, can therefore be a matter of serious concern. There is cause for much concern when people lose their freedom by force, when people fight for freedom and lose their fight, when people are forcibly enslaved. But, pathetic as their plight may be, there is this in their favor: at least they are alert to their situation (which isn’t so with those who are shackled while they are asleep). In a sense, Samson consented to his own enslavement. He had powers against which no man prevailed by force. But he betrayed himself for false and subtle favors and was stripped of his strength in slumbering submission. Men are sometimes willing slaves at first, until the full effect of their position becomes apparent. They sometimes willingly succumb to enslaving habits, and there isn’t much at the moment that one can do for a man who willingly becomes a slave, except to try to wake him to the facts and full effects before it is too late. Again, let it be said: The things men find themselves fighting against ma be a matter of serious concern, by the things to which they complacently give consent may be a matter of much more serious concern. No man in his right senses will give up his right to consent or not to consent, and no society of men in their right senses will allow themselves, like Samson, to enjoy the sweet slumber that is followed by a shocked awakening and a painful repentance.