Privacy, Security and Government

[kever]

I'm writing a paper on privacy and security in the relation between citizens and their government. To what degree are these values reconcilable? I hear alot of "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear". A popular phrase for politicians is: "we're looking for a balance between the two", but why is more security equal to less privacy per se? Guess it depends on the form of government. Under an intolerant totalitarian one it's probably more dangerous to have less privacy than not. So more privacy means more safety in this context as I see it.

Another question I ask myself is what influence the societal context has on the field of tension often discussed between privacy and security. For example, 9/11 catalysed greater government surveillance. The later terrorist attacks on Paris and Brussels too. Covid has caused something similar. But it seems to me that after awhile, people return to caring more about privacy than security. Is it possible to explain this phenomena through Spiral Dynamics or some other model? To me it looks like people temporarily regress to a stage blue need for safety from stage red aggression (or these people are in fact generally (partly) at blue, with no regression involved?). 

And, as a future social cultural worker, how to handle the people's fear and need for security? (from the perspective of SD would be interesting)

Just my thoughts. Please share yours and let me know what important stuff I'm missing and where I might make wrong assumptions or if I'm applying SD incorrectly.

Edited August 21, 2021 by kever

[Blackhawk]

We need more security and less privacy.

Everyone who whine about their privacy are stupid in their brains.

Edited August 21, 2021 by Blackhawk

[Tim R]

33 minutes ago, Blackhawk said:

We need more security and less privacy.

Everyone who whine about their privacy are stupid in their brains.

*every totalitarian regime, ever*

[Blackhawk]

1 minute ago, Tim R said:

*every totalitarian regime, ever*

No.

[Tim R]

@Blackhawk Untrammeled fearmongering and a perceived lack of security is what gives rise to totalitarianism in the long run.

The desire to eliminate threats at any cost (privacy/individuality) is what creates a society where the individual isn't an individual any longer. 

It creates a kind of Panopticon where a very small and powerful minority controls the rest of society by having abolished their privacy and made them slaves to their own cravings for "security". And maybe they are "secure". But at what cost? 

Because if I know you through and through, you are no longer a threat. And those who can, will abuse this. 

Say, have you heard of a country named China? Have you read what happened in the USSR? Where neighbors were spying and snitching on each other to save their own selfish ass? 

 

Don't get me wrong, to a certain extent it's very necessary to give up privacy, i.e. individuality. But if you think that "security" is all that matters, you will lose both privacy and security, that's for sure.

Because a complete lack of privacy is anything but safe.

[Sucuk Ekmek]

Here my popular phrase then: Goverment has many thing to hide but nothing to fear. 

[Blackhawk]

11 minutes ago, Tim R said:

@Blackhawk Untrammeled fearmongering and a perceived lack of security is what gives rise to totalitarianism in the long run.

The desire to eliminate threats at any cost (privacy/individuality) is what creates a society where the individual isn't an individual any longer. 

It creates a kind of Panopticon where a very small and powerful minority controls the rest of society by having abolished their privacy and made them slaves to their own cravings for "security". And maybe they are "secure". But at what cost? 

Because if I know you through and through, you are no longer a threat. And those who can, will abuse this. 

Say, have you heard of a country named China? Have you read what happened in the USSR? Where neighbors were spying and snitching on each other to save their own selfish ass? 

 

Don't get me wrong, to a certain extent it's very necessary to give up privacy, i.e. individuality. But if you think that "security" is all that matters, you will lose both privacy and security, that's for sure.

Because a complete lack of privacy is anything but safe.

Yadda yadda yawn yawn.

If Sweden would give the police a bit more power for surveillance so that the criminals aren't free as birds to do anything and get away with it.. It wouldn't turn Sweden into a fucking Soviet Union or Chinese Communist Party.

It's you who are fearmongering.

Edited August 21, 2021 by Blackhawk

[Guest Tobia]

3 hours ago, Blackhawk said:

We need more security and less privacy.

Everyone who whine about their privacy are stupid in their brains.

@Blackhawk You need the NSA to spy at your stinky asshole?

You need facebook and google to give free access to your emails and messages to the US government for safety?

You need the expand the TSA from the airport to all public places?

Sweden is truly the wrong example to bring up. Sweden has defended individual freedom and privacy over the last year to an incredible extent.  More than any other country in europe.

[Blackhawk]

12 minutes ago, Tobia said:

@Blackhawk You need the NSA to spy at your stinky asshole?

You need facebook and google to give free access to your emails and messages to the US government for safety?

You need the expand the TSA from the airport to all public places?

Sweden is truly the wrong example to bring up. Sweden has defended individual freedom and privacy over the last year to an incredible extent.  More than any other country in europe.

If that's what's needed to catch the bad guys: yes absolutely, why not? I have nothing to hide. I welcome them to investigate my anus etc.

Edited August 21, 2021 by Blackhawk

[Blackhawk]

I fucking love to get spied on.

When they installed a security camera in the stairwell thing where I live it was one of the happiest moments of my life. And I couldn't care less even if some fat gay guy masturbates to footage of me taken by the camera.

Some other (stupid) people would say: "No security (camera) please. Let the criminals go wild and get away with it. I want to get robbed and killed and the bad guys should get away with it. Because I want to keep my privacy."

Edited August 21, 2021 by Blackhawk

[kever]

11 hours ago, Blackhawk said:

I fucking love to get spied on.

When they installed a security camera in the stairwell thing where I live it was one of the happiest moments of my life. And I couldn't care less even if some fat gay guy masturbates to footage of me taken by the camera.

Some other (stupid) people would say: "No security (camera) please. Let the criminals go wild and get away with it. I want to get robbed and killed and the bad guys should get away with it. Because I want to keep my privacy."

According to criminologist Jelle Janssens who was talking about the camera network here in Belgium: "in some cases the camera's can help solve criminality, but many a times they do not help to prevent it". He adds: "camera's can never really solve the cause of criminality, they only show the symptoms of it". Furthermore, the camera network is very expensive and time consuming, according to the documentary I watched atleast. Better, cheaper and more effective it would be to invest in people to increase security.

[Blackhawk]

1 hour ago, kever said:

According to criminologist Jelle Janssens who was talking about the camera network here in Belgium: "in some cases the camera's can help solve criminality, but many a times they do not help to prevent it". He adds: "camera's can never really solve the cause of criminality, they only show the symptoms of it". Furthermore, the camera network is very expensive and time consuming, according to the documentary I watched atleast. Better, cheaper and more effective it would be to invest in people to increase security.

I disagree.

[kever]

@Blackhawk Well, there's no scientific evidence that I know of that supports the idea that extra camera's really solve criminality problems. Not to mention that for all we know there may come a day we get a government which misuses the citizen's data for persecution of dissidents, idk. Hope I'm wrong. 

[kever]

@Amelie Hayes It's a difficult subject. But hey I got 15/20 on my essay so I'm happy

[TheAlchemist]

I think the need for what people call privacy, represents the natural need in humans for autonomy, specifically the need for space, and the need for independence. 

The need for security is of course also a human need.

Imagine a human relationship between two people where there is security, while maintaining independence and space for both people.

If you think this kind of relationship is possible, where these needs are being met simultaneously, then this kind of community, government, state or coalition is possible as well.

Edited October 19, 2021 by TheAlchemist