Greenwald really nails it toward the end:
Many people are indifferent to the disappearance of privacy -- even with regard to government officials -- because they don't perceive any real value to it. The ways in which the loss of privacy destroys a society are somewhat abstract and difficult to articulate, though very real. A society in which people know they are constantly being monitored is one that breeds conformism and submission, and which squashes innovation, deviation, and real dissent.
The old cliché is often mocked though basically true: there's no reason to worry about surveillance if you have nothing to hide. That mindset creates the incentive to be as compliant and inconspicuous as possible: those who think that way decide it's in their best interests to provide authorities with as little reason as possible to care about them. That's accomplished by never stepping out of line. Those willing to live their lives that way will be indifferent to the loss of privacy because they feel that they lose nothing from it. Above all else, that's what a Surveillance State does: it breeds fear of doing anything out of the ordinary by creating a class of meek citizens who know they are being constantly watched.
By no means does this excuse the horrible shit the government and these unaccountable 21st Century Pinkertons are doing, but I find myself feeling curiously liberated by the idea that some cubicle slave working somewhere along in the Mid-Atlantic seaboard knows exactly what Web sites I often visit but never blog about, if you know what I mean and I'm sure that office guy does. If I have a dossier, I might as well enjoy myself by filling it.
0 What Say Youse?:
Post a Comment