What reason is there to object to the U.S. Government’s monitoring of all internet traffic in the U.S.? Other than “the principle of the thing,” is there anything that anyone should need to keep private? If so, why?
Comments
2 responses to “”
-
Would you want a stranger or strangers to come into your house & say “I’m going to watch your every move & while I’ll stay out of your way, I’ll still be watching you.” You’d most likely say, “No thanks, I’d prefer my privacy. I want to have a say in the matter of my personal privacy.”
Peeping Tom government just doesn’t sound right, in fact & sounds down right creepy. Just because I don’t have anything to hide, doesn’t mean I want to be watched under surveillance 24/7.
-
They are many reasons to object to it. They are so obvious I cannot believe that they have to be spelled out, but I welcome the opportuniy!
The first would be that this so-called” transparency” is not mutual. When the government and all its employees are as “transparent” as they want the American population to be, when ACTUAL transparency is universal, there will be no reasons to object.
The second is that this monitoring is done against the will of the American people. The government did not ask, it decided to do it, and without telling the population, and while LYING about it, by the way. That’s several reasons right there, but let’s pretend it’s only one.
The third reason is that this monitoring has nothing to do with transparency. Spying and openness are two very different things. Spying is undertaken, in the name of fear (or paranoia) or aggression to gain power over someone or something (like another nation, a business, a group of people) and to attempt to control them. The aim is POWER over the entity that is being spied upon.
The fourth is that the balance of power between populations and a government like that of the US is heavily tilted towards government. In other words the US government spying on us with its giant bureaucracy is like a gorilla monitoring an ant colony…the playing field is not even. Does this gorilla need more power than it already has, and is not this a potentially very dangerous situation? Was not the original vision of the “founding fathers” to LIMIT the power of government?
So, really, these objections have NOTHING to do with “the principle of the thing”, and everything to do with REALITY. Coercive spying by a secretive government that is armed to the teeth and that is claiming ever more power over the population, and voluntary, mutual, universal transparency among EQUALS…are these synonymous in your mind?
Leave a Reply