Should National Security Supercede Civil Rights?

[Afrobean]

Re: Should National Security Supercede Civil Rights?

Broad oversimplification based on the parties that run the country rather than the people who its citizenry is made up of.

Yeah, well I wasn't meaning to be totally serious anyway. Figured that would be obvious by how absurd my generalization was.

But either way, a lot of people DO think that government should have more power, and they always cite ideas that are positive (particularly ones that help the economically weak to keep their head above water) and fail to take notice of the things that a big government can do that are bad.

I suppose that my stance on it is that if we give them too much power (which, I would say, has potentially already happened), they'll take more and more until we've got 1984 knocking on our door (ala If you Give a Mouse a Cookie). Could even potentially be argued that such Big Brother ideals may already be present in our current society, in the way the war in Iraq has been handled*, or in the ideas over domestic spying. Some people are even of the opinion that thoughtpolice-like tactics can be fundamentally good. It's really troubling to me when someone says something like "people who think about raping children should be in jail"... yes, raping a child is a bad thing, but so is trying to control the thoughts of a person, trying to measure the thoughts of a person, and trying to punish for thinking of a crime but never committing it.

* Hasn't it seemed that we've always been "at war" with them, even before we really were? See: the "military strike" during President Clinton's second term or how about the Persian Gulf War of senior Bush's presidency? Older people may remember a time when Iraq was not "the enemy", but it sure seems to have been that way through my fifth of a century.

[Vendetta21]

Re: Should National Security Supercede Civil Rights?

I don't wholly disagree with you, I just thought your oversimplification was your weighing in on whether militias would revolt, and I think they would.

[x After Dawn x]

Re: Should National Security Supercede Civil Rights?

I don't know if you guys are familiar with this, but there something exists in Canada called the "War Measures Act", and it's basically used in a time of crisis or war and it allows the government to supersede (to some extent) our Charter of Rights with this. It has only been used once in history, and it basically gives the government the right to arrest anybody and put them in jail, and prevent them from getting a lawyer or being bailed out and the such.

My opinion on the matter is, if the government were to suspend civil rights to the point where there were "thought-police" or internment camps for specific races or religions, then I'd have to disagree. But if the government uses its power accordingly and rightfully (I use this term very loosely) and implements an act similar to the War Measures Act in order to preserve the safety and interest of society as a whole, then I'd have to agree with national security's power over civil rights in such a time. The only problem with this is as a government gains power, it tends to lead into a domino effect where it keeps gaining more and more power until the point where a country becomes communist or completely controlled by the government.

[Afrombean]

Re: Should National Security Supercede Civil Rights?

My opinion on the matter is, if the government were to suspend civil rights to the point where there were "thought-police" or internment camps for specific races or religions, then I'd have to disagree. But if the government uses its power accordingly and rightfully (I use this term very loosely) and implements an act similar to the War Measures Act in order to preserve the safety and interest of society as a whole, then I'd have to agree with national security's power over civil rights in such a time. The only problem with this is as a government gains power, it tends to lead into a domino effect where it keeps gaining more and more power until the point where a country becomes communist or completely controlled by the government.

Does it count as Godwin's Law if the discussion is about authoritarian government?

You say you'd agree with it if it's "in order to preserve the safety and interest of society as a whole"? This is called "the Greater Good", and it is an ideal that Socialism is often tied to. Sometimes bad things need to happen for the greater good; you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs. But look at how this idea has been applied in history. You're familiar with the Holocaust, right? The Nazis called it the Final Solution. It was one of those "for the greater good" type plans. They believed Jews and immigrants to be the cause of the economic troubles they had, or, at the very least, they were scapegoated that way.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that people are not justified to make the judgments necessary to choose sacrifices "for the greater good". If I were a religious person, I'd say that only God can judge, but since I'm not, I'll just say that no man has the right to judge another in the way that would occur in a "greater good" situation.

Furthermore, communism is an economic policy, not a political one. It is not necessarily true that a Big Brother type of government would have to be communism-based. Things could just as well be authoritarian on top of basic capitalism.

[Forum922]

Re: Should National Security Supercede Civil Rights?

Honestly, who cares if they listen to your phone conversation, who cares if they watch you take a shower, who cares if they know when you drive your car!? People think way too into life these days as if you're going to live forever with never-ending consequences. I for one could care less if the FBI knows what I'm saying to my girlfriend on my cell phone. I mean unless you're planning to end the the world you're fine in that department. Regarding Government power in general... it's extremely opinionated as to was is "too much" power. Me for example, I could care less what they do as long as it's not deeply prejudice to any minority group or any type of mass murder to their own people. Sometimes they may step in a bit too much; but as far as businesses, home life, and city life goes, you have to realize, we're all just dealing with people, nothing is concrete, even the "Government's" decision. After all, the they're just groups of people that other groups of people say have metaphorical power over other's decision as a society, and that can just as easily be agreed that they no longer have those "powers".

[TrueBOSS]

Re: Should National Security Supercede Civil Rights?

lol, Benjamin Franklin himself has a famous quote on this matter.

"Those who would give a little Liberty to gain a little security, will deserve neither and lose both."
-Benjamin Franklin
Note: There are A LOT of variations of this quote so I'm noting now that this is just the one I heard.
I believe civil rights should never be underminded. It's a very real threat to civil rights for, once it has been underminded once, it will be sought to undermind it again. That is my belief at least.

[Afrobean]

Re: Should National Security Supercede Civil Rights?

I just saw the V for Vendetta film for the first time.

Entirely relevant to this thread.

Would never happen in real life though... if the government goes that far in that direction, the protests would end in mass murder of civilians rather than revolution.

[Vendetta21]

Re: Should National Security Supercede Civil Rights?

Would never happen in real life though... if the government goes that far in that direction, the protests would end in mass murder of civilians rather than revolution.

I'm going to make the vague claim that in this day and age, and in the future, it will take 5 times more effort to stop the flow of information than it does to create the flow of information, and given that everyone is a walking information-transmitter (G1 Phone, iPhone, blackberry,) and everyone has a hub for information transmission (computer) that you're an idiot and you don't understand America.

Some like to characterize Americans as fat and lazy and stupid, but the truth is that they seem to be more stupid than anything. But just because they are stupid doesn't mean they are submissive. We throw a bitch fit at a grocery store when something rings up for .50 cents more than it should. Know your culture, Afro. Americans are a people who don't let shit go.

[devonin]

Re: Should National Security Supercede Civil Rights?

They've been taking 4 bucks a gallon gas prices like a little chump though.

[TrueBOSS]

Re: Should National Security Supercede Civil Rights?

As I said before. The government should never be allowed to slip under civil rights. At first you may think they're just going to listen in on you and you'd let that slide but they WILL then try and push the boundaries even more. Sadly I'm at a loss at the moment for an example or I'd give one...

[kmay]

Re: Should National Security Supercede Civil Rights?

Most of FFR is democratic because we are young. So of course the main thing you are going to hear is. NO! blah blah, but of course security can be more important civil rights. If a group of people where looking through mail, computers, or even tampering with the phones, all form of privacy, i would want them put in jail. I don't care if they were black or white. Whatever, they tampered with my privacy and should be punished.

[x After Dawn x]

Re: Should National Security Supercede Civil Rights?

I just saw the V for Vendetta film for the first time.

Entirely relevant to this thread.

There seems to be a lot of movies nowadays that are relevant to this, another example (though not a great one) could be Death Race.

[kmay]

Re: Should National Security Supercede Civil Rights?

aside from the critical thinking: was death race good?

[robertsona]

Re: Should National Security Supercede Civil Rights?

aside from the critical thinking: was death race good?

Get the **** outta here.
Also the movie was garbage.

[kmay]

Re: Should National Security Supercede Civil Rights?

i already said my thought. i was asking a question. and thanks for the answer now i dont have to rent it when it comes out... if its not.


Back to the topic. Security is less important then civil right, but when security has been invaded on multiple accounts by the same group of people. Something has to be done.