Thomas P.M. Barnett :: Weblog

Ahh yes Cheney sits back (relaxing from his meal of small children of course) and does his Mr. Burns "ish", "excellent!"

Too bad about the Pack again BTW.

Maybe you’re right- maybe privacy is dead.

That’s fine, but I think you miss the entire point of Orwell’s parables. It’s not so much the fact that such surveillance exists, as it is the fact that this surveillance is centralized in the hands of those in power.

If the government can spy on me, and I can also monitor them for any shady dealings, under rule of law and the Constitution, then fine- I suppose that’s quid pro quo.

But if the government can spy on me, and there’s no oversight into how they’re spying on me, and any investigation into criminal wrongdoing on the part of folks in the government is quashed before it can begin in the name of “national security,” then *that* is where things get Orwellian.

The fact that this distinction isn’t even mentioned in passing in your article or response gives me concern.

The whole point of the idea of “Big Brother” is that Big Brother knows everything about you, but you know nothing about who he is, who he’s conspiring with, or what his methods are- and thus is de facto above the law.

The main difference between this “spymasters above the law” argument and your “invisible nazi robots” example is that invisible nazi robots did not happen and was unlikely to ever have happened, whereas blatantly illegal and unconstitutional spying on American citizens is already a common practice- as well as using the specter of “national security” to prevent even the possibility of any legitimate oversight.

We already got a taste of this from the EFF’s lawsuit over the NSA/AT&T illegal domestic spying lawsuit. It’s quite clear from the proceedings that the defendants aren’t fighting for a precedent of defining their domestic spying practices as legal- they’re fighting for a precedent where those practices are above the law, and investigation and oversight of said practices are themselves illegal.

If you're not careful, could find yourself in the ER having small food particles removed from your nasal passages as life is returned to your body! OMGoodness!

Privacy? Hmmmmm .... what privacy?

Chris - Sousveillance may be of interest to you. There is something of a movement out there to use 21st century tools to monitor the elites.

Crepe and a cigar?

Bong and a blintz?

This is where the fear/criticism blows up : you know who the NSA is. They aren't some nameless and faceless pack of jackals deciding what to do with your life behind closed doors. There's Congressional oversight. There's professional oversight(seeing as I know a person or three currently working for NSA on TDY, and how they're way rabid libertarians, I put great stock in the professional/colleague level oversight). These people screw up all it takes is one joker to talk in a bar, or a disgruntled one(like the people in State who are now infamous for it) before it winds up in the New Yorker/WaPo/NYT/CNN/AFP/AP/REuters/who-else-would-you-like-to-name.
This isn't a parrallel analogy to 1984(and what was it that hs ENglish teachers say about parrallelism in analogy making?).

This is just taking policing to a level you aren't comfortable with yet. Like when it used to be unheard of for a CHP officer to pull someone over for illegal activity they suspected was occuring in a moving or stopped car. Or cameras above street lights to catch speeders. It's a new capability utterly in step with the letter and spirit of the COnstitution. It just isn't comfortable yet.

YOu know who the NSA/DIA/NRO/CIA/insert alphabet soup agency to be feared dejour is. They aren't nameless or faceless. They aren't beyond your reach---write a letter to Congress, file a FOIA request(your own FBI files can make for interesting reading), or stage a protest to get your grievance heard(the Mother Sheehan of Privacy). What it isn't is comfortable for lots of us.

For some "national security" has become a four letter word. In the two previous crises in which our nation's survival was seriously at stake (the Civil War and WWII) "national Security" took a front and center spot among most Americans. For some reason many in this generation have decided that personal liberty trumps the survival of the nation. If we must give constitutional rights to the enemy and consider attacks simply a matter for the police and courts then we may not survive this cirsis. It has become a race between connectivity and Moslems with anthrax powder and we should at least keep an eye on those Moslems and especially those Americans who want to help them along,

Eric Blair (a/k/a "George Orwell" because he loved dressing up and playing proletarian) was wrong about so many things, it's hard to know where to begin. I think Barnett is correct that surveillance is not evil per se, and in fact, can be highly beneficial. My problem is that the Bush Administration's surveillance practices have been carried out without meaningful oversight and in violation of existing law (namely FISA). If they want to change the law, fine, and I think that the Constitution has plenty of room to permit modifications of FISA and permit broader types of surveillance than what FISA currently allows. But what Bush (or any other President) cannot be permitted to do is just ignore the law. That's what violates the Constitutional scheme of checks and balances and leads to abuse. The Constitution is alive and well and, hopefully, will be for a long, long time. However, remember that what the Constitution is about is preventing abuses of power, not necessarily preventing the exercise of power where it can be used for beneficial ends.

I found your "Big Brother" article outstanding and a tremendous positive for the future.

I'm a recipient of a nanosensor regarding my heart which can be fixed anywhere I am in the world by just standing in front of my machine. How exciting that these nanosensors will get a chance to work within the Universe. Science is the answer to the Universe and not some Geezer like Rangel wasting our time with useless conversation about the draft.

Frightening for some to be sure, but Pops was an Astronomer and Mom a Botanist so my life has always revolved around the Heaven and Earth.

Mankind will be stunned to discover our Constitution, Representatives and Judiciary hasn't been functioning on our behalf for years. No more "bread services" for our votes. Seventy-two years of the same drivel over the airwaves will be the end of the Real Abuse. GO NANOS GO!

Thanks for Dr. Barnett's genius.