For me, Kant's theory toward freedom is kinda a contradiction to my image to be free. Because autonomy means self-discipline, obviously discipline is a contrast to "freedom" which used to be my thought. I am going to simply the philosophy of Kant's "Freedom as Autonomy". For Kant, who is kind of optimist toward human reason,  true freedom is based on one's own will. In other words, only when a person has clear consciousness toward what he or she does, this person starts to have freedom. And the consciousness mentioned above needs to be separated from one's desires because if one is controlled by his or her yearning, the decision one makes is not according to his or her will, or reason. For instance, I was seduced by the smell of homemade cookies, so I spent NT$200 on them and devoured this plenty of calories at once. I felt satisfied at that moment, but the pang of guilt slammed on my face after this satisfaction. I would need to exercise a lot to get rid of these calories and go on a strict diet afterward, which means I have to live a healthy and miserable life for a month. If I can control my surplus of snack purchases, I can live with my normal lifestyle- eat what I want to eat without calculating calories. So, do I really "want to" swallow those biscuits? If my reason had been hindered by the lust of sweets, in Kant's thought, I don't want to eat those biscuits in my mind, because I am not willing to deal with that redundant fat in the future. However, I am not a reasonable person, because I surrender to my desire and be jailed in a sense of guilt. In conclusion, I don't have true freedom due to my "free" willingness of having guilty cookies.