I used to think there might be some way to erect a legal bulwark between the ravenous state and the vast troves of private data. I now think that is a losing battle, primarily thanks to the too-common eagerness of the firms we entrusted with our intimate information to hand it over to law enforcement without even the formality of a warrant.
So we cannot keep our secrets much longer. But there is still hope. A minimal state where civil liberties are expansively interpreted and scrupulously protected offers the best chance to preserve the sphere of individual liberty. It matters much less if the state knows everything about you when it has no cause and no right to act on that information unless a genuinely serious crime has been committed.
Toward a Small, Weak State
Civil liberties can only now exist in such a context:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Some of that is true enough. But it elides the fact that the only true bulwark is We the People--who must ourselves be virtuous.
We're the ones who keep the State minimalist, or get fat and sassy in our personal comfort and so lazy and let things slide.
We're the ones who require our electees to enact laws emphasizing, for instance, the ownership of our personal data, regardless of where it's stored, or get fat and sassy in our personal comfort and so lazy and let things slide.
We're the ones who require enforcement of those laws, or get fat and sassy in our personal comfort and so lazy and let things slide.
We get the government we're willing to tolerate. The question is whether we can, in today's tech environment vs that of 200+ years ago, throw off a Government gone abusive. My sense is that we can, but it'll be the messier, for that tech. And for the impediments allowed to accumulate through our laziness.
Eric Hines
Counting on the State to be just or minimal is a crazy notion.
In a society of constant pervasive surveillance, one cannot hide anymore. The only recourse is not to care what they do to you. The only way through that is a belief system that transcends mortal power. The reason the communists have such an aversion to religion is because they cannot accept a superior power, that dilutes their terror campaign.
Nathan Hale may have had but one life to give, but he was assured of another in Heaven - this is what brings courage under oppression.
(as an aside, we seem to have created a surveillance state uniquely suited to oppress peaceful citizens,and worthless to counter real terrorists- it's main purpose seems to be storage of information to be used as a club should an political adversary arise, but worthless in terms of real time actionable data.)
The novel Freehold explores this concept, as does the Freehold concept of that sci fi writer.. that's his name, Heinlein.
I think some aspects could use some improvement but... it was at least better than Demoncracy.
The only way through that is a belief system that transcends mortal power.
Can't disagree with that. Mortals have certain problems.
The reason the communists have such an aversion to religion is because they cannot accept a superior power, that dilutes their terror campaign.
I would take it one level farther. The entire reason communism exists is because of Satan. It's a test. The humans took the concept too far of course. They thought they could subordinate human experience solely to materialism. And materialism means the ego, means attachment to physical things, including your life and your pleasures. Thus they use the conditioning psychology of pain and torture. They intentionally go out of their way to lock up innocents and to terrorize people. These were not means to an end, ala a police state. These were ends in themselves. Only by making people afraid can they hold them to their genetic and epigenetic sins. They have to be marked with the mark of the beast. They have to become beasts. They have to follow their conditioning, fears, and physical processes. They cannot be divine. They cannot look to the divine. They cannot think of the divine as a goal. Because then they would be Saved. Then communism would die. Everything within the State. The State is the Enemy of the Divine. Natural human bio instinct is the enemy of the Divine.... actually, a lot of things are the enemy of the Divine and we Sons of God, now that I think about it. No wonder there are a whole bunch of...
worthless to counter real terrorists
"real terrorists" are way too useful for red flag ops via the Deep State. Look up Operation Northwoods, and other such shenanigans.
it's main purpose seems to be storage of information to be used as a club should an political adversary arise, but worthless in terms of real time actionable data.)
Don't even get me started on 9/11's connections to the Deep State. People aren't ready to hear that yet.
So we cannot keep our secrets much longer.
And people think I am being cryptic and secretive online.
No, sons and daughters, it's called OPSEC. Read what that means. Starting 2001, OPSEC.
Why?
Cause the Divine Counsel told me to do it. The avatar of a god obeys the Divine, we don't get to "question" why or what or when or whatever. You humans call it gut instinct or intuition. Same thing.
Every time some flamer online starts talking about what I can do or what I know or don't know, and while I could say something about it, that nobody would believe... OPSEC prevents that. They don't need to know. Well, even I don't need to know what I am not told.
Cryptic? That is called OPSEC. Mysterious? That is called OPSEC. Unfathomable? That is a derivative of holding OPSEC.
The Divine Counsel has had plans that extend before the beginning of humanity, and past the end of humanity. They are not... some third world banana republic "military" gunta, that the American hyperpower seems to want to become in the future.
Post a Comment