The rise of Surveillance - love it? or loathe it?

Many will be aware of the recent increase in public surveillance in China, and to a lesser extent, Singapore. Of course in China, it goes much further than simple CCTV footage - they are now limiting the freedoms of those who fall foul of debts, or do anything which has negative impacts on society.

At first glance, our spoiled brat Western minds think "how dare they!". Then you start to look a little closer, and consider the broader implications of NOT doing what they're doing. You also need to understand why they do it, and not automatically attribute it to some kind of childish power play.

They do it because they believe that a harmonious, decent, safe, society, with all working to more or less the same ethics and goals, is always better for humanity than a fragmented, chaotic, undisciplined, unsafe society. They were once able to secure this 'conformity' simply via their isolation from external negative influence, but the internet and air travel has put paid to that. This is simply their new, adjusted method.

Anyway, I'm curious to know what others think of this approach to securing a safe and well ordered society. Consider that unless you're doing wrong, or don't trust yourself not to do something wrong in the future, there is little to find fault with it. If you are an ordinary, honest, decent, hard working citizen staying out of trouble, this 'surveillance' has zero impact on your life. NONE. But it certainly makes the society you live in much safer. Have a look at Singapore's crime rate. It's not as low as Japan (who are still able to use 'isolation' to retain order), but it is very low. Women can safely walk the streets at night, etc.

Have at it. I expect furious loathing !

 

A people make the society, not the laws.

Then there are also socioeconomic factors that come into play.

To some extent the laws are a reflection of the values in that society, rather than the other way around. Chinese/Japanese/Korean societies are pretty strict.

 

Or don't trust government not to do wrong.
There's very little transparency in the Chinese law enforcement & court system.

 

I am more concerned about what private corporations know about me than what the government does. Kohls and JC Penney let me know when my pants that I wear go on sale, The drug stores know what supplements I take and what toilet paper I use. My internet provider knows almost everything about me. All my medical information is available to anyone that works at Blue-Cross/Tufts to distribute (legal or not) They even track your movements on your smartphone.

 

I choose freedom over security 10 times out of 10. If this is your plan, I ask only that you do me the courtesy of shooting me into a mass ditch as an alternative.

 

I take it you have never read the book 1984 or seen the movie.

What is sad is that so many tout the argument - If you are not doing anything wrong you have nothing to worry about. This speaks to the horrible job our education system does. 12 years of school and we manage not to teach the founding principles and history.

The purpose of putting individual liberty "Above" the legitimate authority of Gov't is not to protect you from some criminal or some terrorist group or from Russian hacking.

The purpose is to protect you from Gov't. Power corrupts and more power corrupts more. Removing the safeguards put in place to prevent totalitarianism - Removes the safeguards that prevent totalitarianism.

You talk about China but in the US it already goes much further than CCTV footage. I am in no hurry to usher in a totalitarian police state - and that is exactly what removal of these safeguards does.

You listed a bunch of good things that might come from this surveillance. What you don't do is list the bad things.

 

Another saddening post. When the Police show up at you or your children or grandchildren's door and arrest you for "thought crimes" - something a private corporation will never do - you will be concerned.

 

Is it any different than the police state that many want?

With the Jussie Smollett thing, I learned that there are already cameras already everywhere. Cops just need to pore over all the footage to figure out what happened (or didn't happen in that moron's case).

I'm a country boy, but I wasn't always. I remember being able to go out on weekends in cities, and cameras being watched by cops just wasn't part of it. Now, everybody seems to be all "yeah well, that's how it is" about being under constant surveillance by the cops.

 

Freedom is the foundation of any worthwhile society.

 

I don't GAF how other countries carry on because it isn't my concern; my concern is my own country and only my own country.

 

Yes, I loathe. As many founders, notably Ben Franklin, knew and noted, those who give up liberty for security deserve and will end up with neither. The assertion that if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear from government surveillance is incorrect and terribly naive. Yes, Singapore does have a low crime rate in part because of surveillance; you don't see many gum chewers walking the streets.

 

Urgent reminder to voters: Patriot Act reauthorization time approaches. NSA / CIA has invested billion$ to construct "offshore collection hubs" not at all restricted by FISA. So what this indicates? https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-05/nsa-abandons-mass-surveillance-program-exposed-snowden At the risk of being labeled a conspiracy theorist ... lots and lots to see here. From the NSA deleting terabytes of illegal intercepts collected during Obama's last year, in defiance of courts order to preserve. To Brennan / Coats cover

 

Forgive me but - were you not arguing in another thread that Red Establishment does not engage in violation of essential liberty ?

The fact of the matter is that this is just one of many examples of Red Establishment violating the founding principles - increasing the power of Gov't, increasing the size of Gov't, and moving us closer towards a quazi totalitarian police state.

 

I dunno ... why don't you direct me to that or those particular posts? Then we can identify and discuss those specific red establishment individuals who are pro totalitarian police state.

 

Pardon me but I recalled many on the right supported that beast saying if you didn't do anything wrong you didn't have to worry.

I'd preferred not to be so spied on, thank you just the same.

 

Your post gives me chills.

A government can be your worst enemy. You have never been conscripted without your will and send into foreign lands to kill like my grandfather in Barbarossa. Never lived in a surveillance society as my parents did under communism and where 1 in 10 people had to be a snitch. You have never been under the oppression of a gov, you lucky bastard

Crime is related to education and poverty and not to surveillance or the lack of it.

If you are an ordinary, honest, decent, hard working citizen like you said in your post, you must keep our 'rulers' in check. It's our duty.

Saying that you don’t care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about freedom of speech because you have nothing to say. It’s a deeply anti social principle because rights are not just individual, they’re collective, and what may not have value to you today may have value to an entire population, an entire people, an entire way of life tomorrow. E. Snowder

 

I posted numerous threads on the subject. I never supported it, I never will. I've taken the time to contanct my reps, and will do so again. Someone's paying attention, because the last time congress voted on an extension, they DENIED the sought after PERMANENT extension.

 

Continuing from my previous post.

In 2013 (unbeknownst to most citizens because this is apparently "Not" News) the law which bans our intelligence agencies from creating and disseminating propaganda on US citizens was repealed/changed. Not that this was not going on prior to this time but - Propaganda is now "State Sanctioned".

We now see all kinds of propaganda devoted to telling us that it is bad to have certain thoughts or express certain opinions. In France we have Le Penn being prosecuted for posting ISIS atrocities on twitter. In the US we have Omar being persecuted for speaking the truth about the influence of Aipac lobbying. In Texas one has to take a "pro Israel"oath to contract to the Gov't.

Who knows where this path towards "thought crime" will lead. We know where it led during the McCarthy era - and it was not to a good place.

In a Surveillance state this is particularly chilling. People will be afraid to speak their minds in private - God forbid in public.

If someone is suspected of "thought crime" - the "thought police" will be able to go back through one's entire life and convict that person on the basis of something said 20 years ago.

What is particularly evil is that people in general will be afraid to challenge the "State/Establishment" narrative. We are already seeing this to some degree within the PC movement.

This stifling of free speech and freedom of the press is already here in many respects - in particular in the MSM.

It is not a historical secret that numerous regimes that became totalitarian or tyrannical - started out by trampling on freedom of expression/speech/press prior to becoming totalitarian regimes.

This is only one of numerous canaries in the coal mine of Totalitarianism that are screeching at the top of their lungs - in a futile effort to warn a deaf audience. In fact is is rather shocking to go through the list of similarities.

The founders lived during a time where the ravages of totalitarianism were well known by all. The point of putting essential liberty "above" the legitimate authority of Gov't. The founders did not make a list of what all these freedoms were ... one they do mention directly is freedom of the press/expression/speech.

It is not for nothing that the founders did this. They lived through a time were such freedoms were severely restricted and knew the evils that can come from these restrictions.

Keeping the Gov't's hands off essential liberty is a critical safeguard against totalitarianism.

We have only ourselves to blame when we allow Gov't to remove these safeguards. Stop voting for, and re-electing, Politicians who support removal of these safeguards.

STOP IT - especially on the basis of really bad arguments such as "I don't do anything wrong/have nothing to hide" - such as can be found in the OP.

 

Perhaps I misunderstood your position. My bad if that was the case.

 

As I'm not a criminal I don't care one bit about surveillance cameras outside in public areas.

 

I frequently break the law, I hate the idea.

 

Read Posts 6 and 18. This is a really bad argument.

 

It reduces our quality of life.

Life was better 40 years ago.

 

In my opinion post 6 and 18 are bad arguments. I don't give a rats a$$ if the govt has video of me not breaking the law. You can worry yourself over that all you like. I don't and will never be convinced that I should worry about there being video of me not breaking the law. Because the reality is the video surveillance is only used when a crime is committed. In fact, video surveillance is how the Boston Marathon bombers were caught.

 

Video cameras reduces your quality of life? How so?