From: Smigrodzki, Rafal (SmigrodzkiR@msx.upmc.edu)
Date: Mon Apr 15 2002 - 06:54:55 MDT
Samantha Atkins [mailto:samantha@objectent.com] wrote:
Pure accountability doesn't work if the guys over there with
most of the armament and in control of the courts and the jail
have very wierd notions about what is and isn't ok behavior for
you and I to engage in. Full disclosuer, the transparent
society, works if you are dealing with rational people,
particularly in a position of considerable power over you.
Otherwise it simply full enables 1984.
### You are somewhat right. But, see below.
-----
You seem to
believe we have the power to hold government fully to account if
we had full video and sound of everything they ever do. First,
they would never ever allow that.
### History is full od examples of irrational, evil, organized people giving
in to pressure from persistent, nice people. Communists in Poland in 1979
looked like they could stay in power forever (at least to those who didn't
know the economic data). In 1989 they lost an election. A couple years later
they voluntarily dissolved their organization.
The main ingredient in their defeat was the persistent resistance of the
population. No revolutions, just an everyday stubborn dislike, minor acts of
defiance, adding up to a great power. If you persist in demanding the right
to use a camera, if you disobey them, if they forcibly take it away from you
(all broadcast to your data bank), and put in prison for "contempt of court"
- well, it's a little step on a long road. If you do have a video, the jury
will believe you more, and there is no power that can stop you from telling
them you have the video, no power to stop you from demanding that it be
admitted, and no judge who can last long against juries who mistrust him.
Today on the NPR I heard about the government of Illinois considering the
videotaping of police interrogations, to reduce the risk of putting innocent
people on death row. The little steps will be taken, but only if we persist
in demanding reciprocal openness, not "privacy" for all.
---- Second, if they have the power they can tell you to go take a flying leap. ### There are dozens of ways you can throw sand in the gears of their machine. Civil disobedience won't get you killed, as in USSR in 1950's, so those who engage in it and publicize their cause well will have a good chance of improving the situation. ----- Your vote? They can give you TweedleDee and TweedleDum for a very long time while most of their organization is not even elected. Thanks, but for now I require a fair amount of privacy if I am to have any real security at all. So I would not like to overthrow that part of the Constitution just yet. ### Privacy in an illusion if you are dealing with an immoral, corrupt organization (best made so by lack of accountability), and a useless impediment in dealing with nice people. The sooner we Brin the world, the better. Rafal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:32 MST