The concept of freedom can quickly become confusing, but I think the accepted terminology is that "freedom from" is negative freedom as in protections like universal healthcare. While "freedom to" is positive freedom as in expressions like absolute[-1] freedom of speech [0]. Where negative freedom is more left and positive freedom more right. You of course also have to account for the political y-axis (or similar concept [1]) i.e. the level of authoritarianism.
I think it's interesting that many of the concepts that the US prides itself on originally included negative freedom in a more prominent way than you see today [2][3][4].
[-1] Non-absolute freedom of speech can probably also be seen as a negative freedom.
I think it's interesting that many of the concepts that the US prides itself on originally included negative freedom in a more prominent way than you see today [2][3][4].
[-1] Non-absolute freedom of speech can probably also be seen as a negative freedom.
[0] http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberty-positive-negative/...
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrum#Other_multi-...
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Truslow_Adams#American_Dr...
[3] http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/jun/29/comment
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Freedoms