the political correctness in privacy talk
The one thing that DC types seem to have learned from the digital age is binary thought. We're ruled by the bin-heads. You're either for us or against us (the war). You're either for us or against us (the copyright war). And more and more, you're either for us or against us (the privacy war). That, I guess, is the nub of what angered me in the latest instance of bin-head "thinking": The RIAA-like wilfullness to take a balanced view and transform it into an extreme. It's bad enough that people hear extremes in balance. It is a special sin to paint balance as an extreme.
| Permalink | technorati
Comments (16)
I have to disagree.
While compromise may be acceptable, when you start with it as a goal, you cripple yourself in negociations.
When I discuss IP (Intellectual PRODUCT, dammit), I object to the use of the word property for that reason. By taking that step, I'm giving the other side 1/2 of their argument.
It's not property, it's a temporary exclusive license granted by the state to foster innovation.
It's no different from a liqueur license.
"bin-head thinking"! Great term!
It is not about compromise. It is about complexity in the issue. I don't support ANY compromise in privacy AT ALL. But to begin to understand how privacy will be best protected, we need to get beyond pc.
I find your oft-repeated use of the term "DC types" particularly ironic in relation to a post railing against the laziness and deceptiveness of failing to view complex matters in a nuanced way. While I understand the desire for short-hand descriptions, I find this one as helpful as "hacker types" or "Valley types."
So I suppose this is a counterexample to the theory that entropy is forever increasing.
Dean's current stand on privacy appears to leave little wiggle room: His campaign platform pledges unwavering support for "the constitutional principles of equality, liberty and privacy."
Fifteen months before Dean said he would seek the presidency, however, the former Vermont governor spoke at a conference in Pittsburgh co-sponsored by smart-card firm Wave Systems where he called for state drivers' licenses to be transformed into a kind of standardized national ID card for Americans. Embedding smart cards into uniform IDs was necessary to thwart "cyberterrorism" and identity theft, Dean claimed. "We must move to smarter license cards that carry secure digital information that can be universally read at vital checkpoints," Dean said in March 2002, according to a copy of his prepared remarks. "Issuing such a card would have little effect on the privacy of Americans."
We should also stop calling everything we want to discuss a "war".
I would like to read your response to Stallman's criticism of balanced copyright.
I read an article a few years ago that in the last presidential election Bush was more popular in rural areas and Gore was more popular in urban areas. One explanation is that Bush promoted a simple world view while Gore promoted a complex world view.
At any rate, I very much dislike the simplistic view expressed by the Bush administration that things are either pure good or pure bad. In particular, when they talk about policy options it gives the impression that, rather than trying to impartially consider all the conflicting concerns, they've already decided based on their own secret reasons and they're just trying to justify what they've already decided.
It's interesting that the divison has percolated up this far and it is being seen as a serious cultural phenomenon. I think Lieberman has been making the case since the start of his campaign that he was a person who could plausibly move beyond the binary and get the country out of the 'with us or against us' mode of thinking, but his candidacy has been ripped to pieces - by, of all people, some of the dyed-in-the-wool Democrats I've met, who identify him as Bush Lite and make gagging gestures when they talk about him. It's a shame, because I think he's a great candidate and, is ahead of his time but trapped in the litmus tests and Flash animations and op-ed pieces that rule our political (binary) world right now.
The one thing that DC types seem to have learned from the digital age is binary thought. We’re ruled by the bin-heads. You’re either for us or against us (the war). You’re either for us or against us (the copyright war).
I don't think "binary thought" is a new thing. The concept probably goes all the way back to the first time one caveman thought a kill was his while another claimed ownership.
I think we've always had "bin-heads" but (and perhaps this was the point that you were trying to make) the Internet affords the ability to translate binary into hexadecimal.
--Jason
The idea that there is a form of "DC thinking" is simply absurd.
Um, what is there to like about Lieberman precisely? He approves of public sponsorship of religions (but only his preferred, monotheistic religions).
That's not 'balanced'. That's anti-First Amendment. It's nastily common, but it's still wrong.
I would add abortion to the bin head issues. Neither side of that issue seems to like or engage seriously in the legal rights balancing mandated (in dicta?) by Roe v. Wade.
If you say that life starts at 6 months after conception, as a matter of cognizable political rights -- then you hear catcalls of "extremist" equally loud from left and right.
The frustrating thing about bin-head thinking, is the complete lack of logical consistancy. Most abortion opponents would wait in line to "give the shot" or "pull the switch" if an abortion provider is ever given the death penalty. Pro-choice advocats will keep alll night vigils to protest executions. At least when the Catholic church is against abortion its also is against the death penalty, euthanasia, and war - any violation of the "sanctity of human life". I might not agree with them, but I at admire their consistancy.
I think there is a form of DC thinking but it is one theory while there are many others. I agree partly with what you say.
Regards,
Alana
It is important to keep an open mind and hear other's theories as well. There is need for both a right and left side way of thinking so we have more choice = democracy!