Freedom means non-interference

When I started blogging, I didn’t really give much thought to what kind of things I would write about. I figured that something would always be happening or not happening, and I could be creative enough to write about either without really worrying about it. I also thought I’d stay away from politics more often than not, because I’m usually either wishy-washy or un-informed. But I keep feeling like I need to talk about it.

In particular, Bush apparently has a habit of authorizing the NSA to eavesdrop on international phone calls and international e-mails since Patriot Day.

Since October 2001, the super-secret National Security Agency has eavesdropped on the international phone calls and e-mails of people inside the United States without court-approved warrants. Bush said steps like these would help fight terrorists like those who involved in the Sept. 11 plot.

“The activities I have authorized make it more likely that killers like these 9/11 hijackers will be identified and located in time,” Bush said. “And the activities conducted under this authorization have helped detect and prevent possible terrorist attacks in the United States and abroad.”

Despite the fact that I don’t think I’ve said anything even particularly embarrassing in international communications, I do have friends in other countries who I e-mail and will probably talk to on the phone (not to mention I’ve been abroad fro several months). And the idea that government agencies could be reading or listening to any of that is not a happy thought.

I feel like the argument for it runs something parallel to things I’ve seen quoted on CNN about the PATRIOT act renewals. People seem to think that “if you don’t have anything to hide from the government, then there’s no problem letting them invade your civil liberties.”

But this is terribly naive. The whole point is that the government isn’t allowed to manufacture justice, even if it’s only just to put guilty people away. If you think you have nothing to fear from the PATRIOT act because you’ve done nothing wrong, then you’re not asking enough questions. Who defines terrorism? Who determines whether or not you’ve done something wrong? If the government can both unilaterally decide what “treason” is and also monitor every form of expression, what has happened to freedom of speech?

The freedom to have a private sphere of action, separate from the state, is something that has been cherished in (most) political philosophy since John Locke, and it’s also the basis for the rights we enjoy as American citizens every day. There is really no excuse, however well intentioned, for replacing foreign terrorism with state terrorism. The erosion of personal liberties is the first step in that direction.