Freedom

[Stu2630]

May people in the UK, myself included, are alarmed to say the least about the losses of our cherished freedoms, privacy and civil liberties that are under way at the moment.

The government are trying to foist identity cards upon us all, force us all (every citizen) to be subject to an interview, made to answer a number of quite intrusive questions, be photographed, fingerprinted and have an iris scan, and they intend to put this information on a huge database. Some of the information on this will be sold to commercial interests. In spite of that, we will be charged a considerable fee for the privilege! They are also compiling a detailed database listing every child in the country, and the government are now trying to legislate to give social services and other government spies the right to find out any information about any child, and then direct the parents as to how they should be raising their child - that can include forcing them to go to parenting classes etc. If the parents don't comply with whatever dictats they choose to make, they risk losing their children and even going to jail. Some schools are now routinely fingerprinting all children, some as young as 5 years, and without parental consent. They are doing this on the pretexts of speeding up registration or the loan of school library books etc.

Our government are now involved in schemes to have "black boxes" fitted to all cars that track their movements by satellite and charge the motorist a tax according to how many miles they travel, when they travel, and which roads they travel on. These can also detect whether you are driving too fast etc, so they can send off a fine automatically each time you exceed the speed limit.

If we don't stop our government, we will find ourselves firmly in George Orwell's 1984, and that's a terrifying prospect.

Are such things happening in the countries of others who visit this site?

Stu

[Stu2630]

May people in the UK, myself included, are alarmed to say the least about the losses of our cherished freedoms, privacy and civil liberties that are under way at the moment.

The government are trying to foist identity cards upon us all, force us all (every citizen) to be subject to an interview, made to answer a number of quite intrusive questions, be photographed, fingerprinted and have an iris scan, and they intend to put this information on a huge database. Some of the information on this will be sold to commercial interests. In spite of that, we will be charged a considerable fee for the privilege! They are also compiling a detailed database listing every child in the country, and the government are now trying to legislate to give social services and other government spies the right to find out any information about any child, and then direct the parents as to how they should be raising their child - that can include forcing them to go to parenting classes etc. If the parents don't comply with whatever dictats they choose to make, they risk losing their children and even going to jail. Some schools are now routinely fingerprinting all children, some as young as 5 years, and without parental consent. They are doing this on the pretexts of speeding up registration or the loan of school library books etc.

Our government are now involved in schemes to have "black boxes" fitted to all cars that track their movements by satellite and charge the motorist a tax according to how many miles they travel, when they travel, and which roads they travel on. These can also detect whether you are driving too fast etc, so they can send off a fine automatically each time you exceed the speed limit.

If we don't stop our government, we will find ourselves firmly in George Orwell's 1984, and that's a terrifying prospect.

Are such things happening in the countries of others who visit this site?

Stu

[missouriboy]

And who says totalitarianism ended in 1989...?

[luvnaturism]

Stu is describing trends in his country that go beyond anything I'm aware of in any democratically governed western country, but it's all a matter of degree. Privacy as we used to take it for granted is a casualty of the digital age. For instance anyone who travels around with a cell phone turned on leaves a permanent record of their movements, especially if it's a newer phone. Many new cars retain a record of how fast the driver was going when the accident happened, whether he braked before he rear-ended that other car, etc. Everything you ever posted on the internet lives on, and much of it can be traced back to you.

The perils of the time we live in also tend to drive us in the direction of less privacy. I am one who believes that the time has come for the US to have a national identity card, but I also recognize the danger in that: no one can be certain how future governments will use that information.

[Naturist Mark]

Trust us, we're from the government ...

Yes Stu, many of those 'reforms' have been proposed here as well.

National ID is being promoted as part of immigration reform.

Under "no child left behind" (a national program to reduce the effectiveness of public schools) detailed records on every school child is turned over to the federal government - where they are used to help military recruiting. And they are slated to be used in a program - the "New Freedom Initiative" - under which every student will be evaluated by representatives of the major pharmaceutical companies in order to identify who should receive mandated psychiatric drugs.

US law already mandates that every new cell phone (mobile phone) contains a GPS-type locator that can be remotely accessed.

Under our CPS (Child Protection) laws the local government already has the right to compile detailed information about children, interview family members, and have the presumptive right to remove children from the home without prior due process. This is not done universally nor without cause, but the cause can be as little as an anonymous tip.

We do not yet have laws that allow the computer record or GPS locator in our cars to be used presumptively to issue speeding fines, but they could be used as evidence.

And we certainly don't (yet) have a proposed program such at Tony Blair's initiative to predictively identify future offenders as children for pre-emptive rehabilitation. That is scary - in the US our "rehabilitation" system is so dysfunctional that it routinely turns minor offenders into career criminals. Such a program here would be used to start the persecution earlier. Following our "Columbine" episode several years ago, authorities tried to find similarly "at risk" students - goths, loners, 'picked-on kids' - and responded by mistreating and persecuting them even more than they were before. Hopefully Blair's scheme won't follow the US example of encouraging the behavior it aims to prevent.

We have recently learned that our government compiles lists of all our phone calls, just in case Osama calls us on a phone registered under his name. Or we talk to a reporter.

No, we haven't fallen quite so low on that slippery slope as Britain. But on the bright side you have a government which can be forced to investigate its own wrongdoings, and your elections aren't shams.

-Mark

[Boreas]

Canada has proposed an identity card containing some sort of computer chip. That of course has been met with much consternation! This has been mostly in the name of allowing citizens to cross the border with the US more easily. It would also, I believe, replace passports.

Stu, none of what you suggests surprises me. We have a new government that allegedly want "less government" yet that is questionable. Only time will tell.

[Bob S.]

The most dangerous threat to the worls's public: their own government.

Bob S.

[hm0504]

quote:

From the Hamilton Spectator:

The Privacy Commissioner of Canada is questioning the need for proposed legislation that would let police spy on Internet users without obtaining a warrant.

"As privacy commissioner, I want to have a lot of questions answered about why this is necessary because, up to now, I haven't been convinced," Jennifer Stoddart said in an interview.

The minority Conservative government is expected to reintroduce the Modernization of Investigative Techniques Act this fall or next spring.


...rest of the story...

[l2ltlarry]

Stu, I'm surprised that you are saying such things. You've always been very pro-government when it comes to prohibiting expansion of nudism, except for its practice in very constricted, furtive (hidden or secret) venues. The works of Franz Kafka (and my own experiences) say that the government (government in the largest possible sense) far too often gets things wrong. As the Bible says -- and I know you and many or most others on this board, don't think the Bible has anything valid to say -- "The law kills, the spirit gives life." The word translated "law" is grammateis, i.e., grammar meaning the rules and regulations, laws and orders, commands and controls. The word translated "spirit" is pneumatika, i.e. compressed air or atmosphere which I think means the timeless logic or timeless principles by which life works.

I think huge skepticism, even cynicism, is warranted toward all things governmental, given the way they typically work.

As for widespread display of the human body, a textbook I have which is titled 'Human Sexuality' starts out with a picture of a family who is nude, black, and from a non-Western country that appeared in an issue of 'National Geographic'. The caption is "Nudity. Acceptable if it's them. Obscene if it's us." I've seen many programs on the Discovery Channel, Travel Channel, and National Geographic Channel in which it was normal for the people, who were not nudists as we normally think of nudists, to live completely nude. Nobody seemed the worse for wear for their living nude. Also, where I lived in West Virginia (USA) when I was growing up, it was somewhat common for people to go naked part of the time. It just wasn't very startling or upsetting. Surely people's being upset or offended by having people live around them without clothes is a learned response. Why can't what is learned be unlearned?

Last, Art Linkletter, a 90-some-year-old TV personality whom many people would consider a fine, upstanding, "salt-of-the-earth kind of person" was on the Robert Schuller "Hour of Power" Sunday morning program a couple of years ago. He related that then he was growing up he used to keep 'National Geographic' magazines under his matress so he could look at naked people. Looking at naked people did not seem to hurt him too much.

[LamontCranston]

Stu, mind if I join you in the hot tub?

quote:

If we don't stop our government, we will find ourselves firmly in George Orwell's 1984, and that's a terrifying prospect.

I happened to pick up Orwell's 1984 this summer. I'm about half-way through and man-o-man boy-o-boy are the similarities frightening.

There's a ubiquitous Telescreen where they listen to fragments of conversation filtering for words and deeds that might be anti-Party. (or unParty in Newspeak). There's the Thought Police where people are encouraged to turn others in for any suspicious behavior or language. There's a suggestion by one character that the rocket bombs are fired by the Party itself and there's not really a war on. She says, "it keeps them frightened and reliant on the Party." And there's a character - Goldstien - that's the focus of national hate and hysteria. No one sees him, but the Party brings out recordings and deeds that coincide with new rationing announcements.

Anyone else see the parallels?

People don't vanish yet, and they're aren't public hangings, but it's quite something. Pick it up and read it. You're eyes will pop at some passages.

[Rabid_Clam]

We have had to relinqish some freedoms and some privacy in the interest of fighting this war on terror. Even when this war is won we will have to continue these new policies so others will not take advantage of the rest of our freedoms.

We as a society allowed ourselves to be wide open but there is always that one person that will mess a good thing up and it did happen for sure.

We can complain over the policies that take some freedoms away but do you know a better way? And if so how can you implement it never mind prove that is in fact a better way?

Complaining about all this is moot unless you can provide that better way. Is easy to say what you feel is wrong but to say what is wrong is hollow and useless unless it is backed up with a better way. To just point fingers is part of the over all problem.

As I stated, if you cannot provide a proven better way, then is best to go with the flow.

[LamontCranston]

I simply do not accept this premise. Neither did our founding fathers.

quote:

We have had to relinqish some freedoms and some privacy in the interest of fighting this war on terror. Even when this war is won we will have to continue these new policies so others will not take advantage of the rest of our freedoms.

A better way, and still the best way, is to follow the rights and precepts outlined in the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. Those served us well during expansion West, a Civil War, two World Wars, assasinations, and a years-long Depression. Why not now?

Where's the Lincoln-Douglas style debate on giving up freedom to appease a murky ever-changing foe?

Live Free or Die.

[OZJames]

Every day our human rights are reduced, we are subject to more and more invasions on our privacy, more and more Government control. To a large extent it can be attributed to terrorism but I think Governments love the power of this control. When a madman shot many people in Tasmania the Government almost immediately made laws and took all our guns away (except for occupations which needed guns, gun club members, farmers, security guards etc). By the way I am not against the gun laws.

We are subjected to video cameras almost everywhere in cities, telephone and credit card tracking, huge data bases of information regularly sold on, recorded telephone messages, internet records being sold, computer retention of internet use, computerised records of all our transactions. Toll payment records and radar cameras on highways tracking our speeds and movements. I think the list is much longer. It's very hard to be a successful criminal these days.

Government power – why do you think that people want to be politicians. It’s not for the money (private industry pays much more) and its not for the work hours. I do not envy any politicians work load. People like to be politicians because it gives them satisfaction from having power – the more controls over the people they can create the more power they have the more job satisfaction they get.

Some years ago in Australia the Government tried to bring in an “Australia Card” . The public opinion was so against it and the Government feared a voter backlash that they dropped the idea. In recent times the Government has again put an identification card back on the agenda. I think it will not be long before it is introduced.

JAMES

[Boreas]

quote:

Originally posted by Rabid_Clam:
We can complain over the policies that take some freedoms away but do you know a better way? And if so how can you implement it never mind prove that is in fact a better way?

Complaining about all this is moot unless you can provide that better way. Is easy to say what you feel is wrong but to say what is wrong is hollow and useless unless it is backed up with a better way. To just point fingers is part of the over all problem.

As I stated, if you cannot provide a proven better way, then is best to go with the flow.

I just finished watching a segment on 60 Minutes where 13 paramedics from NYC went to Afghanistan to help after the earthquake last year. THEY will make a difference and will show by actions that not all Americans have poor attitudes towards Muslims and the East. They will show the true spirit of Americans, not what the government and bullying side of the US would like the world to see.

Perhaps if we started building bridges and getting to know each other instead of making blanket comments about terrorists THEN maybe things will improve.

What are you doing to improve things Rabid Clam?

[Caipora]

A few centuries back, when everyone lived in small towns, all your neighbors knew where you went, if you drank too much, how much you made (how big your crop was), if you cheated on your wife, etc.

The difference between then and now is that that relationship was symetrical: they knew all about you, but you knew all about them, too. Mass computerized data-gathering is not a window transparent both ways, but a one-way mirror.

(This analysis is not original; I don't recall the author.)

Another part of the problem is that we live in a "service economy". You probably don't consider yourself especially well served. The kicker is that we don't pick services we want, we are required to pay for services we don't particularly care for: tax collectors and accountants to defend us from them; policemen and lawyers to defend us from them; government people to inspect papers and people to prepare papers for their inspection.

Serious crime has been dropping for twenty years. Rationally, we need fewer policemen. Policemen and lawyers see it differently, and hype rare or victimless crimes as a terrible threat that requires them to defend us.

Lastly, the free press is not too much of a help. Witness the recent cases of absurdly silly accusations against men "caught" with a thousand cell phones, or an obvious nut claiming to have killed Jon-Benet Ramsey. Both accusations could not sustain the most cursory examination (you might trigger bombs with a dozen cell phones; with a thousand you're clearly up to something else). But it was easy news, and if you're repeating nonsense from the Government you're "reporting the news" rather than just taking pot-shots at people who can't defend themselves.

In this part of the world we can't afford the sort of surveilance and "child protection" that are popular in richer places. The inefficiency and incompetence of the police, while it has serious drawbacks, at least means that they are less to be feared than the thieves and murderers.

- Caipora