In practice

In practice, however, the type system constrains the programmer in many ways that are unacceptable to Lisp programmers: data cannot be interpreted as programs, lists must be homogeneous, and functions are not easily redefned without recompiling other dependent functions.

Of course "freedom to" also allows "freedom from", like ideal democracy allows to vote for communist government, but not other way around: commies wont allow you to vote for any other government.

It’s a mistake to assume freedom means ‘do as you please’. Freedom always comes with restrictions if it is just and equal, because your freedom to do something often implies a restriction or cost for me. This assertion leads to the question, "whose freedom becomes more important?"

>>42
bullshit.

FREE AS IN FREEDOM

Negative liberty is the absence of obstacles, barriers or constraints. One has negative liberty to the extent that actions are available to one in this negative sense. Positive liberty is the possibility of acting — or the fact of acting — in such a way as to take control of one's life and realize one's fundamental purposes. While negative liberty is usually attributed to individual agents, positive liberty is sometimes attributed to collectivities, or to individuals considered primarily as members of given collectivities.

As Berlin showed, negative and positive liberty are not merely two distinct kinds of liberty; they can be seen as rival, incompatible interpretations of a single political ideal. Since few people claim to be against liberty, the way this term is interpreted and defined can have important political implications. Political liberalism  tends to presuppose a negative definition of liberty: liberals generally claim that if one favors individual liberty one should place strong limitations on the activities of the state. Critics of liberalism often contest this implication by contesting the negative definition of liberty: they argue that the pursuit of liberty understood as self-realization or as self-determination (whether of the individual or of the collectivity) can require state intervention of a kind not normally allowed by liberals.

Many authors prefer to talk of positive and negative freedom. This is only a difference of style, and the terms ‘liberty’ and ‘freedom’ can be used interchangeably. Although some attempts have been made to distinguish between liberty and freedom, these have not caught on. Neither can they be translated into other European languages, which contain only the one term, of either Latin or Germanic origin (e.g. liberté, Freiheit), where English contains both.

One might say that while on the first view liberty is simply about how many doors are open to the agent, on the second view it is more about going through the right doors for the right reasons.

>>48
>on the second view it is more about going through the right doors for the right reasons.
Exactly the philosophy of static typing.