Turnkey Tyranny and the Youth Vote

The title phrase for this post we will credit to Edward Snowden, the now famous / infamous insider who divulged information about the scope of US government surveillance programs.  Whether it is suspicious or only ironic that Snowden would initially make the comment while seeking refuge in Hong Kong, the Special Administrative Region of the Peoples Republic of China, is grist for other commentators.  However Snowden’s stated concerns, reflected in the above quote we find  so appropriate, is not foreign to this publication’s editorial discussions.

Our Illustrious Senior Editor (ISE) is a well traveled individual who has spent several  stretches embedded, for job and familial reasons, in Red China.  Now some might think our use of the term Red China, old fashioned, quaint, archaic, out of touch.

Kool-aid drinking liberal apparatchiks like our local Davenport Mayor Bill Gluba come to mind. Total time in country for our illustrious trade representative, perhaps a few days, enough to practice his bow and scrape routine even more unfettered by any restrictions of a pretend backbone in defense of American culture.  The supineness of local mandarins like Bill Gluba, to party dictates, I guess should  not be surprising. That does not mean it loses its nauseating effect.

According to our actually well-informed descriptions of Red Chinese society by our ISE , the uniformed policeman on most corners, (substitute  “security” cameras here)  is only part of the intimidating aura. From his actual conversations with Chinese proletariat,  the foundational oppression in China is the extent of the “rules.”  The Chinese are subject to so many niggling and catch all rules, often of the catch 22 variety, that the citizen is probably always in violation of something. That is by design.  It is a control feature of the totalitarian state.

However the Marxist state learned it cannot survive with total prison camp regimentation. Infractions are either “benevolently” overlooked or set aside but not forgotten. But anytime the regime finds it necessary to exercise what it considers its prerogatives, in the smallest of matters, they can pull a rule or regulation out of “their” back pocket and see to its enforcement . . .  “you are in violation of the people’s laws.”

True, some democratic socialist countries are able to produce a fairly docile, seemingly prosperous societies for a generation or two, but in a ponzi scheme sort of way, based on debt,  grifting and grafting off of freedom’s defenders, and the oblivious lethargy of their own populace.  If the US does not right itself, and continues to head that way, the world economy is in for a huge shock.

The control necessary to achieve the socialist state is enabled by the tools of tyranny, including the prying eyes of government.  The surveillance society is the status quo of most of the so called developed nations around the globe today. And the cost of it, the inability to get around it, is a big reason for retrenchment in world economies.

Furthermore, government having just the known capability to pry on any and every citizen through their communication avenues, gathering information attributable to individuals unrelated to any proper law enforcement purpose, is by its nature intimidation and inevitably has a chilling effect on the exercise of free speech and association.

While the proliferation of laws and willing submissiveness to the alleged greater good of constant surveillance may have been bequeathed in good trust, the implications of the possession of such power is not limited. The history is that such powers left on the shelf too long are likely to be abused.  We are seeing it now. Most politicians and political institutions cannot be trusted for long.  There must be fire walls,  multiple balances of power,  and real substantial consequences for abuses of power.  The best security is to prevent the ability to engage in abuses.

Phyllis Schlafley , and many other defense hawks with solid anti-terrorism credentials ,are writing with authenticity that the undenied scope of the NSA data gathering is an abuse not only de facto but de jure.  They recognize that freedom is most fragile internally, that internal assumptions of power can be more dangerous than impositions of power from external forces.

It is a proper concern that programs designed for one thing can be easily used or turned into nefarious ends not only when it is by government initiative. The ability of government to confiscate  “meta data ” records is dangerous no matter who collects it and the collection itself is not without problems for civil liberties, no matter who collects it.

Where are we going with this?

We remain advocates of measures to guard against terrorism that are focused on regimes that foster it. That is a big difference between us and fortress America isolationist libertarians who fail to understand the implications of tyrannical states beyond our borders.  Our internal security should be focused culture wide, on inculcating and expounding on the protections of our constitutional republic, the benefits of free markets and limitations on government.

The message we advocate to legislators is to pull back, don’t allow the executive branch such overwhelming  tools of control and intimidation over essential freedoms. Require that  peaceful freedoms be unmonitored, unrecorded. Prevent to the greatest extent reasonable a governmental environment where the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is but one turnkey switch away from denial .  That our constitutional liberties  are not a suicide pact has no meaningful application to this reckless assault at best with sinister portents.

Run against “the man”

The GOP has embarked on a youth outreach program.  A report to that effect was released last week. While we are not confident it will not result in undermining the Party platform in some aspects, if it is a genuine matter of advocating for improved messaging of our existing principles, we are all for it.

Not mentioned in the report, but now fallen in our lap, is the issue of  big government cyber privacy abuses by the Obama Administration.  It is an issue that “youth” will naturally rate high and Republicans can legitimately claim a superiority to Democrats.  It is one of those craw issues that motivates youth. We think it has more potential power than the superficiality of the gay marriage issue which is addressed in the outreach report  (more on the report in subsequent posts).

There exists a natural youthful attitude . . . throwing off the big surveillance of “big parents.” Many young people think that Republicans are bad, but as bad as we are, we can be effective with the message that big surveillance is part and parcel with big government   . . .  that all of the Democrat promises require the big eyeball of government.  Republicans with the right messaging and current authenticity to back it up, can run against “the man” and improve our performance with youthful voters.

But alas there are enough Republicans who think government prying power is innocuous, who will serve to deflect criticisms of Obama and Democrats.  And of course local establishment Republicans tossed off the involvement of a ready youth brigade (Republican Ron Paul supporters)  already conversant in the issue by denying them the integrity of the caucus and convention process.  Maybe we should just throw the Democrats the keys.   R Mall

0

0