M.A. (Politics). / This is a study in political philosophy. It defends the following thesis: where there is poverty there is a lack of power and thus a lack of freedom. It does not follow from this that a life of wealth is a life of freedom and a life of poverty is a life of complete unfreedom. This is because full freedom also involves other components such as political freedom, economic freedom and so on. The thesis defended here is simply the negative one that humans remain unfree as long as they live in conditions of poverty. Thus poverty should be construed as lack of freedom in the sense of constraints or fetters it casts upon people collectively. For example, the harsh effects of segregation in the United States and apartheid in South Africa are that people continue to live in separate communities somewhat along the colour line. The worse effect of this is that those who live in poorly resourced communities are Black. They in this manner remain without freedom here construed as power to tum their situation around. This thesis criticises the liberal account of Berlin and others of similar persuasions and offer a distinct account of freedom that locates it in an individual's capacity to carry out desired actions. It will then argue that poverty constrains freedom in this sense. Thus if you are poor, you are unfree and without power to generate the requisite necessaries of life. This thesis also aims to show how the two concepts of liberty or the liberal perspective of freedom as such do not take into account the important social problems confronting us in the world today, for example poverty which in this project is taken as an exemplar of lack of freedom. Poverty is characterized best as being without the necessities to meet basic human needs such as shelter, food and recreation. More importantly, any alternative to address poverty must take into account the fundamental significance of participation in politics.

This dissertation argues that we need to reconceive our notions of economic freedom to be bothmore inclusive and worker-centric. The status quo of economic freedom is dominated by the libertarian perspective, which envisions economic freedom as a matter of individuals being unrestricted in the exercise of their sovereign capacities, especially with regards to the state. Such a view of economic freedom does not account for how individual capacities are made possible, neglecting that in modern economic life, it is only through non-sovereign dependencies on others that makes individual economic capacities substantive. Additionally, outcry against injustices in American economic life is primarily framed through the lens of inequality, which too quickly concedes freedom to the libertarian perspective. Chapter one articulates a critique of three libertarian perspectives, arguing that each in its own way is too closely tied to a sovereigntist view of individual capacity, and as such is incapable of offering a more inclusive conception of economic freedom. Chapter two examines the recent neo-republican resurgence, arguing that Philip Pettit’s revival of freedom as non-domination neglects to account for its own logical and practical assumption on a polity that is bounded and stable, making it less credible as a politics of inclusion. The chapter also extends this critique to Alex Gourevitch’s labor republicanism, arguing that casting freedom as non-domination in a more working class mold is insufficient to eliminate its reliance on exclusionary boundaries. Chapter three draws from recent care theory to argue that we should conceive of economic freedom as the enabling conditions of economic agency, which are made possible only through dependencies on others. But even if such dependencies are universally necessary, they are not experienced in an equitable way. The more privileged tend to be in a position to enjoy access to such enabling conditions, which the work of the less privileged makes possible. Transforming economic freedom into a more inclusive value means properly recognizing such contributions. Chapter four examines two case studies from American labor history: garment workers in the early twentieth century, and the more contemporary Los Deliveristas Unidos, who represent delivery cyclists in New York City.