Surveillance is necessary precisely because we say it is necessary.
The Cold War nuclear buildup was a positive feedback cycle driven by paranoia and thirst for conquest. It escalated logarithmically precisely because it had escalated before. It was endeavored to expand principally because the inertia was towards expansion. If you think that sounds like insanity, that's likely because it was insane.
Arguing over the formation of government surveillance or the proliferation of nuclear weapons is a bit like asking whether the chicken or the egg came first. The Bush administration merely reignited an American tradition of government sponsored witch hunts. That is not to say that responsibility has been diminished for the Bush administration. It's casting doubt on the surprisingly popular principle that the wrongs of America began and ended with the inauguration and final exit of Bushco.
So when we consider these surveillance programs under the Obama administration, it is not the same as claiming that Obama started the surveillance or even that he is necessarily a staunch supporter. Nonetheless, the programs continue. To be aware and to do nothing is to be complicit. That goes for every branch of the government.
I am angry with President Obama. Not that my anger is singular. I am angry at the entire system. Admitting the latter does nothing to diminish the former and visa versa. People will say, and have said, that there is a targeted attack on the Obama administration. I don't believe that's true. As a public figure, possibly the most important public figure in the entire government, President Obama becomes a natural target for criticism of the federal government. I am not going to argue whether or not it's fair to place such a burden at his feet because I'm really not sure of the answer.
What's important now is that he knows. They all know now. What's important is how they react and what they do to meet the demands of the electorate and the general principle of justice and transparency.
Proponents of surveillance programs often point out the fact that we are attempting to stay a step ahead of national and foreign aggressors, be they nation states or stateless entities. This feeds into the perpetuation of the myth that we must diminish our already diminished rights in order to protect the rights that have been diminished. That's truly insane. It's insane and antithetical to the maintenance of a disturbingly and unnecessarily tenuous fabric of humanity. That fabric is the belief in weak and strong bonds of affection for our fellow (wo)man brought about by the reality that, as President Kennedy put it so beautifully, "we all inhabit this planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's future. And we are all mortal."
Take a moment. Step outside the bounds of nationalism and self-defeating thought. Take a deep breath of that fresh air. Let the brotherhood and sisterhood fill your lungs.
We are building a bulky police state upon a crumbling foundation of ethics and human identity. If we keep building, there will be a collapse and we all will fall. At what point will we realize just how much we control our fate? As we build? As we start to feel the floor wobbling? Or through bright flashes of enlightenment and regret as we plummet back to Earth?
= new reply since forum marked as read
