First, we need to be clear that the NSA’s surveillance programs exceed those that were POSSIBLE in the old Soviet Union, but are quite similar in their ambition. Yes, we can in theory track everything, keep it sealed until we need to investigate something, get an actual court order to, say, unseal something that happened 7 years ago. But what prevents abuse? Who watches the watchers? If the IRS can be abused for political purposes, why could not the Chief Executive of the Executive Branch not find or seed coconspirators–perhaps with the help of a measly few hundred billion from Wall Street–who would dish up dirt on anyone? Why could they not blackmail Congresspeople? Senators? Generals?
Who was tapping Petraeus’ emails? Who released that data? It was no friend of his, and his sexual transgressions were not important to anyone until he became a political liability. Do you honestly think that a high percentage of our power elite are not doing things on the side that could be hung around their necks by unscrupulous power-mongers? They were in the Soviet Union, no? They corrupted some of our Generals there: why not here?
Police have to get a court order to tap a phone. The NSA is tapping that phone by default.
And we are seeing this ridiculous argument that “those who have done no wrong have nothing to fear”. This was of course a common totalitarian theme, for both the Nazis and the Communists. But I think of it in the Harry Potter movies, after the Ministry of Magic has fallen, and the Inquisition begins.
In a totalitarian regime, to be accused is to be guilty. And plainly in a world which demands ideological conformity, “doing wrong” can be as simple as having an opinion other than that demanded by the power elite.
I just listened to a lecture on the Spanish Inquisition. Did you know that many Jews, in times of violent pogroms, were given the choice of converting to Christianity or dying in the 1300’s, and early 1400’s, and that not unreasonably many chose life? The Inquisition arose around doubts that they were universally sincere in their conversions, which were made at the point of knife.
In many respects, Dostoevsky was quite right that the human need for certainty, and a following freedom from freedom, has always been with us. The Communists were really no different than medieval Catholics, who also demanded utter and complete conformity to creeds and people who were quite corrupt.
Oh, I’m tired and rambling, but will end with this: all our problems begin with bad thinking. Bad thinking in turn begins with emotional incompletion: with an inability to find peace, to make meaningful and lasting connection with others, and to rest outside of dogma.