The preventive state: how to find a way to protect against threats, leading to a total lack of freedom
Photo by REUTERS / Ammar Awad
The terrorism of radical Islamists threatens global security. But even more, he is threatening world freedom
Life threatening — probably the most terrible of threats. Every person in a critical situation, when at stake the lives of loved ones and his own, would give very much to take this threat. And the house, and wealth, many — and freedom. For life some will go on and betrayal. Exactly this logic trying to vaccinate the world, the terrorists, deprived of a considerable portion of humanity the sense of security. The wealth they are interested in to a lesser extent. But out of a sense of self-preservation exchange of liberty for security — that they would probably be quite satisfied.
Over the past decade the population of developed countries are accustomed to freedom and security. Out of the stormy times of ideological and class struggle “Golden billion” has confidently stepped into another world. Compared with the previous versions of the current social order assumes a much greater individualism, freedom of expression, diversity of views, styles of life. No one hunts for witches — they may live among us. Can remain unnoticed, and can operate in an open — meeting at the full moon, a web site registered community and account for donor contributions from outside sympathizers. Freedom!
This is not like in the modern Western world to the Islamists.
They hate tolerance “apostates” should be eliminated and not to complacently accept their right to Express themselves.
If the Western world refused to tolerate dissent, the degree of hatred toward him from the radicals would decrease considerably. The paradox and tragedy of the situation is that “victory over terrorism” just need to do is “claim” all those who hate the Western world.
The recipes are simple and known. Increasing the powers of intelligence agencies. Total control over thoughts, and social connections of all those who cause suspicion. And in order to detect any suspicious (missed a couple — and tomorrow shooting at the stadium with dozens of victims, or worse) — total control of all who theoretically might seem suspicious. Also known criteria — race, nationality, ideology, religion… Plus need strong leaders, not bred nurse, but acted boldly and decisively. Like Putin, not like Merkel, Obama and Cameron. Leaders taking responsibility and crushing enemies inside and outside the country. So that was for that respect. They would have respected and feared — and the Islamists, and other radicals, and the Russian “criminality”, and Putin himself.
A well-known phenomenon — when in a death match of two hating each other enemies, they likened each other to the degree of indistinguishability of views, methods and ways of struggle willingly nothing to stop. You kill innocent victims in our cafes and on the streets — we bomb indiscriminately villages, where some residents (or captured them) belong to radical groups. The terrorists are sure that at least someone from killing their innocent people deserves it — because he lives in “unjust” state. Fighters against terrorism are confident that at least someone in their bombed-out villages deserve to die — since the settlements were under the control of radical groups. If we imagine that the Western world became as intolerant of dissent as all who hate America and Europe, the reason for hatred is weak, there is a possibility of dialogue.
Radicals of all stripes very uncomfortable in a world where everything is possible. Being realistic, they probably understand that you will not be able to remake the world at will. But they are not without reason expect to return to it’s old state when each state has the creed and each engaged in a struggle with their witches. And no matter what in one state is considered apostasy, the other to righteousness. It is important that the borders were closed and “black” not mixed with white. Sorting in this manner will allow each state to return to the principles of the “closed order” (Douglas North), when elites control the rules of the game and allowing people to participate in economic, political and social life. The world was in this state many centuries, and supporters of tradition do not see reason to change things.
The Western world is very easy to fail, to stray, to perform extended him an ultimatum. Because it will save lives. The main thing — to start to suspect everyone, and suspect control. “Preventive state is insatiable,” says German political scientist and journalist Heribert Prantl. In such a state that blurs the boundaries between guilty and innocent, we all become risk factors, says Gerhart Baum, former Minister of internal Affairs of Germany, whose book “to Save the rights of citizens: freedom or security” just translated to Russian language by the Friedrich Naumann Foundation. We are all potential suspects, so the government keeps personal data at all. They can be useful, if we do something bad. The fight against terrorism is forcing the company to cancel the constitutional human rights that the state didn’t touch it, yet his actions do not provide grounds for the intervention of law enforcement agencies.
You can understand supporters of the revision of this constitutional right. Indeed, in the case of terrorism to intervene when “received signal”, it’s late. This justifies the need for an early warning system of potential threats — wiretapping, monitoring of social networks, letters and conversations.
The terrorists fight without declaring war — and we are going to control them without the ads on the control.
Why not go to preventive arrests of suspicious persons? The problem is that security is never too much. Its never enough, says Prantl, the terrorists have managed to make the world very dangerous. For the sake of preventive protection of the state will take from a citizen more and more freedom, to give him a sense of security. Or at least that the state did everything for his safety.
The urge for security is one of basic human needs. The threat of terror this need very strongly actualizes. Increase its place in the hierarchy of values and priorities. As more and more people are beginning to aspire to greater security, to accept infringement on their rights and freedoms, this requirement is fixed in nature, the pursuit of security is becoming more common, socially approved and normal, says psychologist Rainer Funk. As it happens, can be traced to the Russian opinion polls over the last fifteen years. “We are set to strive for security as a way of life [… But] a free man inevitably deprived of security, thinking person inevitably deprived of confidence,” said 60 years ago Erich Fromm, author of the famous book “Escape from freedom”. The desire for security easily leads to a willingness to accept the guardianship, or in the pursuit of it. I will pay for life and I will thank the defender!
From discussions on the exchange (or exchange — exchange) freedom on the security in the U.S. and Europe can be many thousand-page volumes. This debate are political parties, officials, security officers and other security specialists, lawyers (in the courts, journalism and scientific literature), judges, economists, publicists, etc. the Attacks of 11 September 2001 and the recent wave of terror has exacerbated the dispute. And in Russia to recalculate visible to the public participants in this conversation — may be the most important for the twenty-first century — enough with the fingers of two hands.
In one case (it tells Baum), where the police used wiretaps, the Federal constitutional court of Germany decided in 2004: “the Revelation of the personality in the sphere of private life implies the opportunity to Express their inner world, feelings, thoughts, views and experiences of a personal nature, without fear of what the authorities will supervise them. Protection also applies to the manifestation of subconscious experiences and expressions of sexuality. The possibility of proper disclosure of the identity implies that a person is fit for this space.” That is, the wiretapping of a person against whom charges is unacceptable because it deprives private space.
Are you ready to accept that freedom of private life is more important than security? And to prevent that freedom of communication and expression on the Internet is more important than security? Many German politicians and almost all of the Russian — no.
Victory over terrorism inside the country, the Minister of internal Affairs, the secret police and the security service became something of a Supreme commander. Because the internal enemy, the army here not the assistant. As you line up the new line exchange of liberty for security? Will there be a way to protect against threats, not entailing the total lack of freedom? The answers to these questions will determine the way people live in the twenty-first century. In our country, alas, the search for answers is not yet underway. On the contrary, we, being not the source but the object of terrorism, right before your eyes join those forces that are pushing the world to the freedom and the refusal of tolerance of dissent.
