In response to the news that the NSA has collected vast amounts of electronic information on all Americans, many people on this site have downplayed the report’s significance. As usual, Digby, a master at putting spin into perspective, has posted a simple example of what we will have lost if we rubber stamp Obama’s surveillance policies.
(The following excerpt was taken from a passage of Robert Kennedy’s Day of Affirmation Speech delivered at the University of Capetown, South Africa, on June 6, 1966.)
At the heart of that western freedom and democracy is the belief that the individual man, the child of God, is the touchstone of value, and all society, all groups, and states, exist for that person's benefit. Therefore the enlargement of liberty for individual human beings must be the supreme goal and the abiding practice of any western society.
The first element of this individual liberty is the freedom of speech; the right to express and communicate ideas, to set oneself apart from the dumb beasts of field and forest; the right to recall governments to their duties and obligations; above all, the right to affirm one's membership and allegiance to the body politic -- to society -- to the men with whom we share our land, our heritage, and our children's future.
Hand-in-hand with freedom of speech goes the power to be heard -- to share in the decisions of government, which shape men's lives. Everything that makes men's lives worthwhile -- family, work, education, a place to rear one's children and a place to rest one's head -- all this depends on the decisions of government; all can be swept away by a government which does not heed the demands of its people, and I mean all of its people. Therefore, the essential humanity of man can be protected and preserved only where the government must answer -- not just to the wealthy; not just to those of a particular religion, not just to those of a particular race; but to all of the people.
And even government by the consent of the governed, as in our own Constitution, must be limited in its power to act against its people: so that there may be no interference with the right to worship, but also no interference with the security of the home; no arbitrary imposition of pains or penalties on an ordinary citizen by officials high or low; no restriction on the freedom of men to seek education or to seek work or opportunity of any kind, so that each man may become all that he is capable of becoming.
Here is a link to a text of the speech.
http://rfkcenter.org/...
There are no adequate reasons to justify the surrendering of our rights to privacy. The United States government has more than adequate methods of combating terrorism without resorting to sweeping up vast amounts of electronic data containing the private information of innocent American citizens. Such actions should not be self-granted, and they certainly should not be all-encompassing in scope.
The truth is these actions are so perilous to our liberties and freedom that the costs outweigh the protections gained.
Anyone that has been exposed to similar restrictions under an oppressive regime -- even for a short period of time – knows it is the most demeaning, dehumanizing thing that can happen to a nation’s populace. Once fully aware that his or her actions are being monitored, a person will no longer feel secure.
And the spin that Obama and Feinstein offered today was misleading; the actions taken by this administration are less about terrorism than about the lust for power.
As Digby said:
It's a little bit hard to believe that he [Obama] "welcomes" a debate about all these programs he's gone to such great lengths to keep a secret.
This administration has made an unprecedented effort to suppress dissent. That is why many legal scholars have voiced concern over the unusually high number of whistleblower prosecutions that have taken place under Obama’s leadership. It is the reason the Justice Department’s investigations of a few reporters have been a lot more important than we have admitted. It was why the use of FBI resources to quash dissent by Occupy Wall Street members was so odious.
Hand-in-hand with freedom of speech goes the power to be heard -- to share in the decisions of government, which shape men's lives.
After eight years of Bush and five years of Obama, I don’t think anyone believes his or her voice is being heard in D.C.
The U.S. Constitution is one of the most remarkable documents ever written, and to jeopardize the protections provided under its framework is one of the most myopic and destructive decisions that any American leader has made, especially if a Democratic president enacted that decision.
And even government by the consent of the governed, as in our own Constitution, must be limited in its power to act against its people.
Once again, I admire Digby’s wisdom:
Just as we look back on the savagery of the Mongol hordes in revulsion today, there will come a day when future generations look back on us today and shudder at the horror of it. And they will wonder why we didn't band together to do something about it sooner.