Professor: Lorraina Pinnell
Written Argument 54
March 10, 2014
Government Surveillance Should Stop Snooping
Despite the security of states and individuals privacy being in contradiction, every person needs his own privacy. Nowadays, in our socialized world we have become so distant to one another, such as even when you stay close to somebody you need to keep one meter distance. Safety of the current states appears to be more protected, but rather it has become even more fragile. This is due the fact that the expansion of technology in this last two decades has brought its benefits as well as its shortcomings. Nowadays, we are witnessing a worldwide debate which is about the issue of the government surveillance, which is done by a variety of different intelligent agencies. The increasing number of people in our planet is leading to various global threats such as: economic rivalry, politics, terrorism threats, and cyber-attacks, which has pushed many western governments to spy on their own citizens. In the first paragraph we stressed a saying which addresses our argument: man needs one meter privacy every time you approach him or her. Even if the state or government has to infringe the laws to find potential terrorists, our privacy must stay inviolable; this does not have a compromise.
Firstly, if a citizen is obliged to obey all laws in a society or state then that state institution is not allowed to violate the laws even when using the argument of citizen protection. It is not logical that millions of people are being spied during their phone conversations, or their personal data are gathered from various intelligence agencies for the sake of combating terrorism or even worse such as following their economic and political activities for the purpose of competition. With this opinion, we are not trying to contest the necessary surveillance of suspicious persons who may be a risk for our global society, but we are trying to tell that this survey could be accompanied with a court mandate. This debate is raised worldwide, especially after the emergence of the scandal from NSA regarding the surveillance that this government agency of the United States of America is doing to its citizens. This kind of surveillance was also conducted by the “Five Eyes”, — Australia, Canada, United Kingdom, and New Zealand. All of this was recently revealed from former contractor of CIA Edward Snowden.
The second point in favor of the argument includes new technological achievements such as smartphones, laptops, and other gadgets which should not be used for any other purposes except for that thing they are destined, — surfing the internet, playing games, and so forth, without being monitored by the government. By this we mean that any kind of surveillance on these equipment outside the legal rules violates individual privacy, and this fact worries all the people who use the network.
The third point in favor of the argument, is related with the consequences that can originate by this surveillance if the data collected would be misused, — such as for blackmail or degradation of the other person’s personality, because the network, even with great many security protocols, is not safe. This perhaps is best proved in the Snowden case. The secrets extracted by him affected the reflection of two parties i.e. the governments as well as citizens for the fact that those secrets affected the personal dignities, and in some cases they also affected family issues. Instead of governments minimizing surveillance, the opposite is happening. This is better shown with what Google said in its last government transparency report “Governments want more data about Google users and want more content posted by Google users removed” (Claburn, par. 4). Moreover in a blog post, Google analyst Dorothy Chou said, “Government demands for user data have increased steadily since we first launched the Transparency Report. In the first half of 2012,...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document