“The way we’re encouraged to cope with this is to make it about privacy: to turn inwards, take stock of our personal inner domain, and decide just how much of our lives can be offered up to the state. Large scale, bureaucratic intrusion into our personal lives is a given, but we can fill out a customer response card if we have any comments about the degree of the intrusion. If this is about privacy, the onus is on us to define its limits, to guide our servant institutions to the right policies that will protect our newly cordoned-off personal space. And so they invent a clever distraction about what the limits of privacy should be.”
Related posts:
Robert P. Murphy: The Economics of Bitcoin
A Colonial Gatekeeper That Hillary Would've Approved Of
Anthony Gregory: The Standing Army Marches On
Former CIA Officer Philip Giraldi: 'Edward Snowden Is No Traitor'
Michael Scheuer: The price of U.S. interventionism in Syria and Israel
The real story behind the demise of America's once-mighty streetcars
Putin was wrong: The exceptionalism of the United States is alive and real
Don’t Be Fooled, ObamaCare Will Drive Up Unemployment and Healthcare Costs
Khan Academy's Challenge to State-Certified Educators
Are You A Good Candidate For Expatriation?
The Road to the Permanent Warfare State, Part 12 - Gregory Bresiger
America’s Gulag
Drawing Down: How To Roll Back Police Militarization In America
The Million Man Market
State-Wrecked: The Corruption of Capitalism in America - David Stockman
