The Blinded Public

[RESiNATE]

I was recently involved in a discussion on Facebook.

It started when a friend of mine stated that she was considering removing her account because she was worried about the level information that Facebook demands from a person. This rather harmless discussion quickly descended into an argument (well, heated discussion) over how much surveillance the government(s) were carrying out generally.

As you can probably imagine (those that know me will testify) my input quickly became the centre of attention, and it wasn't long before a 'battle' of opinion grew between myself and another person. What started out as effrontery at the apparent need for Facebook's need to know the ins-and-outs of a cat's arse whenever you want to add any kind of app to your page, evolved into a spat about why the government(s) are pushing through various laws and bills that not only erode our right to privacy, but curtail our rights to free-speech and protest.

We can discuss those laws and their effects in due course, but what worried/concerned me more was the ignorance of this other fellow (and I say that with respect). Here is an example of his blindness:
*just discovered that I can't copy-paste from Facebook...so I will retype and paraphrase*

"You really have nothing to worry about. This has been massively over-hyped by the media and 'edgy' teenagers.

The NSA, GCHQ, MI5, etc are far too busy monitoring domestic threats [...] to worry about what we are talking about on Facebook.

Despite what the conspiracy theorists will have you believe, they [the government] really do protect us"

Despite my production of numerous articles, commentary, and all manner of things that would dispute his claims and beliefs, he was unwavering in his belief that none of his civil liberties had been harmed or diminished since 911, and subsequent 'terror' attacks. He was adamant that it was only America that was suffering any kind of erosion of freedom.

It was very much like talking to a religious person about the validity and existence of God - I was getting absolutely nowhere with him - no hint of him backing down or even considering that he should be mindful of these activities.

Even when he was asked by someone else " are we not fed fear and suspicion on a daily basis?"

His answer was " No, not really. It's not like the media are asking us to act a certain way and using them as a control mechanism. And the right to protest and right to assemble is unchanged."

I was, and remain, staggered!

I am genuinely concerned that he is not alone in his view, and this is a real problem. Especially as there are bills moving through Parliament right now that are aimed at extremism. This is another topic that I mentioned, citing that there is (thus far) no definition of what an extremist is! I mean, think about it, we that occupy this board could well be considered 'extremist' if you take the definition as stated in the OED - aren't we?

I know that, due to many discussions that I have had both here and in other places, I could be considered extremist...couldn't I?

OED definition: A person who holds extreme political or religious views, especially one who advocates illegal, violent, or other extreme action.

I know that none of us here would advocate violence, of course, but therein lies the problem.

Is anybody else here concerned about the level of naivety shown by the general public in this and other related issues?

Res...

[Ian]

I'm concerned less about widespread naivete than I am about widespread cynicism and paranoia.

[cronus]

Many people live mundane lives. What is there to worry about for them? If a government wants to mess up ordinary folks lives deliberately there are many ways offline. The Interweb is not necessary for a evil government.

[Hermit]

Wholesale, indiscriminate snooping by government agencies has been going on for decades. I know for a fact that I managed to get on file of what then was known as "Special Branch" some time in the late 70s. There was one of those units in every state police force as well as the federal force in Australia. The reason for this honour? I was one of several housemates of someone who was a Vietnam protester. I found this out when someone I got talking to at the beach asked me where I lived. I told him where and also who I was sharing with. When he heard the name, he went: Oh him? That old commo?" To me he was just a bit of a rabble rouser who opposed the war in Vietnam. I asked him what made him think he was a communist, he told me that his dad is a sergeant in the NSW Special Branch, and he knew, and that everybody who lived in the place with him is on file too.

One by one all the state special branches were dissolved and the task centralised with ASIO. Much more thorough, systematic and efficient.

[piscator]

I'm concerned less about widespread naivete than I am about widespread cynicism and paranoia.

You're a Watcher, no?

[pErvinalia]

Is anybody else here concerned about the level of naivety shown by the general public in this and other related issues?

Yep. If I hear one more person say "if you've got nothing to hide, then you've got nothing to fear", I'm going to punch them in the face. For me, the naivete is the lack of sophistication to understand what liberal enlightenment has brought our societies.

[Seth]

Yes, the public is credulous and ignorant, but then again there's mostly no good reason to sweat it right now unless you're involved in something nefarious because there's not a damned thing you can do to prevent the three-letter agencies from spying on you if they want to, not even the Congress is immune.

And the best defense to government surveillance is to appear harmless, which means not doing anything that might interest the spooks online. That's how all the wannabe terrorists get caught in stings before they hurt anyone...because they blab their intentions on the Internet. Real covert agents don't use the Internet. Ever.

Or, do what you want and expect them to have a dossier on you, which is my plan. I know the FBI has one on me, and I don't care what's in it because I don't do anything illegal and they know that, and they know that if they need me for some reason, they are welcome to drop by and recruit me to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and the People of the United States.

When it becomes worrisome is when the political climate changes and those files start being used to round up people (or guns) for being political enemies of the current administration.

My plan for that eventuality is to bug out to the bunker so they can't find me. And they absolutely do not know where my bunker is. Nobody does except me.

Then I lay low till the worm turns.

[pErvinalia]

They follow you to your bunker, Seeth.

[Seth]

They follow you to your bunker, Seeth.

Good luck to them on that. I learned how to duck a tail long ago...and how to detect a GPS or radio tracker. It's simple actually.

[pErvinalia]

That's what they want you to think.

[JimC]

I'm in the middle in this issue (as usual... )

RESiNATE's friend sounds rather too complacent and trusting; people need to be at least watchful and wary of the level of government surveillance, and be prepared to vote against governments that go too far.

However, there is no point in being hyper-paranoid, either. For a start, there are enough fundamentalist arseholes around with evil intent that every government needs the abilities to gather intelligence which may prevent at least some terrorist attacks. For another (sorry, rEv), it remains true that it is incredibly unlikely that, unless you have clear evil intent, that government surveillance will have a negative impact, at least from most democratically elected governments. Sure, both Hermit and I were on ASIO files for our (generally legal) activities in opposing the Vietnam war, but we have not disappeared into Gulags as yet...

[Brian Peacock]

'The Terror' is a great excuse for authoritarians to exercise their authority, which mostly entails pushing laws they think are politically beneficial. But there's always a snap back in the end. Just look at China to see the old Fists Of Righteous Harmony increasingly snatching at thin air as the fight among themselves.

[pErvinalia]

I'm in the middle in this issue (as usual... )

RESiNATE's friend sounds rather too complacent and trusting; people need to be at least watchful and wary of the level of government surveillance, and be prepared to vote against governments that go too far.

However, there is no point in being hyper-paranoid, either. For a start, there are enough fundamentalist arseholes around with evil intent that every government needs the abilities to gather intelligence which may prevent at least some terrorist attacks. For another (sorry, rEv), it remains true that it is incredibly unlikely that, unless you have clear evil intent, that government surveillance will have a negative impact, at least from most democratically elected governments. Sure, both Hermit and I were on ASIO files for our (generally legal) activities in opposing the Vietnam war, but we have not disappeared into Gulags as yet...

It's the principle that is important. That's what enlightenment was about. Just because government 'x' doesn't pose a threat to liberty, it doesn't follow that government 'y' at some point in the future won't.

[JimC]

I'm in the middle in this issue (as usual... )

RESiNATE's friend sounds rather too complacent and trusting; people need to be at least watchful and wary of the level of government surveillance, and be prepared to vote against governments that go too far.

However, there is no point in being hyper-paranoid, either. For a start, there are enough fundamentalist arseholes around with evil intent that every government needs the abilities to gather intelligence which may prevent at least some terrorist attacks. For another (sorry, rEv), it remains true that it is incredibly unlikely that, unless you have clear evil intent, that government surveillance will have a negative impact, at least from most democratically elected governments. Sure, both Hermit and I were on ASIO files for our (generally legal) activities in opposing the Vietnam war, but we have not disappeared into Gulags as yet...

It's the principle that is important. That's what enlightenment was about. Just because government 'x' doesn't pose a threat to liberty, it doesn't follow that government 'y' at some point in the future won't.

Agreed - that's what I meant by "watchful and wary"...

[pErvinalia]

I don't agree with your statement "it is incredibly unlikely [that surveillance will have a negative impact] from most democratically elected governments". Define "democratically elected government". What we have now doesn't meet that definition, imo, in the context of trusting governments with surveillance.