Posted on 06/16/2013 6:54:20 AM PDT by newheart
Protection of natural rights is a duty of a rational and just government.But when spying is involved,there is a trade off between protection of natural rights and privacy. When safety is increased by spying, privacy is decreased and vice versa.It is hard to find the right balance.
2. What is the problem with the "I have nothing to hide, who cares?" argument?
It is about the use of force, secrecy,the growth of big intrusive government, and the assault on the universal principle of right to privacy that is important,and not whether or not one personally does not have anything to hide.Even if one does not have anything to hide, excessive spying is destructive to the country as a whole in the long run.It is not in the true interests of the country.
Drives me crazy. In the aisle in the grocery store I encounter someone YELLING INTO THEIR CELL PHONE, "YEAH, I GOT THE SPAGHETTI SAUCE, THE LETTUCE AND THE ONIONS. WHAT ELSE DO YOU NEED?" etc.
I am tackling #2 first: I think this quote explains very clearly why the argument for #2 is literally a false argument.
” According to Silverglate, the average busy professional commits three felonies every day—any of which an ambitious and creative prosecutor could turn into an indictment. Seemingly innocuous activities like using the telephone or e-mail at work, or posting information on Web sites could potentially lead to a federal offense if your tone strikes someone as threatening.” http://www.thecrimereport.org/archive/how-many-laws-did-you-break-today/
Now for our lovely Christian FReepers this should feel oddly reminiscent to ...’cast the first stone’ teaching. None are innocent and the Bible tells us so...
Now ...why is spying bad? In the case of our government spying on us , using vague laws as noted in the link above, it makes them able to persecute...oooppsss... I mean able to prosecute you or anyone for just about anything. And as we are vaguely witnessing now...gives them the power to black mail you for your entire lifetime. Whether it is you broke some arbitrary law and they intend to cash-in on your guilt or your Ipad caught you masturbating in the kitchen with a cantaloupe...spying if the first step too being able to control you against your will.
Beginning on page 411 of the 35th Anniversary Edition of Atlas Shrugged:
Dr. Ferris smiled. . . . . .”We’ve waited a long time to get something on you. You honest men are such a problem and such a headache. But we knew you’d slip sooner or later - and this is just what we wanted.”
“You seem to be pleased about it.”
“Don’t I have good reason to be?”
“But, after all, I did break one of your laws.”
“Well, what do you think they’re for?”
Dr. Ferris did not notice the sudden look on Rearden’s face, the look of a man hit by the first vision of that which he had sought to see. Dr. Ferris was past the stage of seeing; he was intent upon delivering the last blows to an animal caught in a trap.
“Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?” said Dr. Ferris. “We want them broken. You’d better get it straight that it’s not a bunch of boy scouts you’re up against - then you’ll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We’re after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you’d better get wise to it. There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now, that’s the system, Mr. Rearden, that’s the game, and once you understand it, you’ll be much easier to deal with.”
Watching Dr. Ferris watch him, Rearden saw the sudden twitch of anxiety, the look that precedes panic, as if a clean card had fallen on the table from a deck Dr. Ferris had never seen before.
What Dr. Ferris was seeing in Rearden’s face was the look of luminous serenity that comes from the sudden answer to an old, dark problem, a look of relaxation and eagerness together; there was a youthful clarity in Rearden’s eyes and the faintest touch of contempt in the line of his mouth. Whatever this meant - and Dr. Ferris could not decipher it - he was certain of one thing: the face held no sign of guilt.
“There’s a flaw in your system, Dr. Ferris,” Rearden said quietly, almost lightly, “a practical flaw which you will discover when you put me on trial for selling four thousand tons of Rearden Metal to Ken Danagger.”
It took twenty seconds - Rearden could feel them moving past slowly - at the end of which Dr. Ferris became convinced that he had heard Rearden’s final decision.
“Do you think we’re bluffing?” snapped Dr. Ferris; his voice suddenly had the quality of the animals he had spent so much time studying: it sounded as if he were baring his teeth.
“I don’t know,” said Rearden. “I don’t care, one way or the other.”
“Are you going to be as impractical as that?”
“The evaluation of an action as ‘practical’, Dr. Ferris, depends on what it is that one wishes to practice.”
“Haven’t you always placed your self-interest above all else?”
If you think we’ll let you get away with a-”
“You will now please get out of here.”
“Whom do you think you’re fooling?” Dr. Ferris’ voice had risen close to the edge of a scream. “The day of the barons of industry is done! You’ve got the goods, but we’ve got the good on you, and you’re going to play it our way or you’ll-”
Rearden had pressed a button; Miss Ives entered the office.
“Dr. Ferris has become confused and lost his way, Miss Ives,” said Rearden. “Will you escort him out please?” He turned to Ferris. “Miss Ives is a woman, she weighs about a hundred pounds, and she has no practical qualifications at all, only a superlative intellectual efficiency. She would never do for a bouncer in a saloon, only in an impractical place, such as a factory.
Miss Ives looked as if she was performing a duty of no greater emotional significance than taking dictation about a list of shipping invoices. Standing straight in a disciplined manner of icy formality, she held the door open, let Dr. Ferris cross the room, then walked out first; Dr. Ferris followed.
She came back a few minutes later, laughing in uncontrollable exultation.
“Mr. Rearden,” she asked, laughing at her fear of him, at their danger, at everything but the triumph of the moment, “what is it you’re doing?”
He sat in a pose he had never permitted himself before, a pose he had resented as the most vulgar symbol of the businessman - he sat leaning back in his chair, with his feet on his desk - and it seemed to her that the posture had an air of peculiar nobility, that it was not the pose of a stuffy executive, but of a young crusader.
“I think I’m discovering a new continent, Gwen,” he answered cheerfully. “A continent that should have been discovered along with America, but wasn’t.”
>>> What is the problem with the “I have nothing to hide, who cares?” argument?
The NSA: Future Crime Unit (Jim Harper) CATO Institute
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nARsYRMQKE&feature=player_embedded
This NSA stuff is a distraction that Obama welcomes. There probably is a drone with Snowden’s name on it.
Just between the two of us, so do I.
I agree with your premise, but this is a fallen world full of fallen people. There will always be government as an accommodation to that fact.
It’s the matter of who’s spying. Banks, credit cards, grocery stores where we have those “club” cards, know more about us than the gummint. What power do these commercial interests have to use that info against us? Oh, yes, credit rating, spam, anything else?
And the power of the government? Does this question even needs to be asked?
No doubt. In fact, I am even skeptical of this whole round of revelations. What better way to supress opposition than to engender fear of surveillance even before there is any need.
And no doubt some politician will suggest using the NSA data in exactly that way.
Or, in some cases, simply make it up out of whole cloth if it furthers their agenda.
Completely agreed. Wait, you don't recycle? Can you repeat that again for the microphones? ;-) For the record, neither do I.
Tomorrow even the supposedly un-corrupt bureaucrats will make the same call.
My problem with it can be summed up in two words: slippery slope.
Or three: can of worms
Or two more: Pandora’s box
There’s no end to how much information “needs to be gathered” once the process begins, nor how it will be used (most likely adversely).
Yep. Love Thor. Hate the way his themes are so accurate to the real world.
“1. Fundamentally what is wrong with being spied upon? “
You seriously have to ask that? How old are you?
Sadly, Congress, the Executive Branch and SCOTUS have all three given their blessing to FISA, the Patriot Act and the stuff the NSA is doing. That is a pretty stacked deck.
And a fine list it is, too.
I completely agree. In an effort to do positive PR, they have created possibly the scariest page on the Interweb. (http://nsa.gov1.info/data/index.html)
What they hear:
Point well taken, but, uh... some things might really be better left unsaid.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.