“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:
Bill Bonner: How I Explained Bitcoin to My 94-Year-Old Mother
From the Files of the Nineveh PD
Hey, kids – let’s talk about heroin!
Perfecting Tyranny: Foreign War as Experimentation in State Control
Wendy McElroy: The Competitive Provision of Security
Will Grigg: The Triumph of the Reich-Publican Party
Austrian Detroit?
Not Worth a Continental
Bipolar Silver: How to Profit
Dual Canadian-American citizens: We are not tax cheats
The Fourth Branch: The Rise to Power of the National Security State
Is Your Out-of-State LLC “Doing Business” in California?
Why people renounce US citizenship: A most Noble perspective
The Corruption of Capitalism in America Excerpt: Chapter 17, Serial Bubbles
The True Value of Bitcoin