The Patriot Act: Libertarians, It’s Not As Bad as It Seems
The debate between safety and freedom has existed since the earliest times of our nation’s inception, when Federalists and Anti-Federalists clashed over the role of the federal government in drafting the Constitution of the
The favored horror tale told by most libertarians involves dark alleys and large governmental thugs, the stuff of film noir and gangster plots. Have we heard any instances of the federal government stuffing citizens into the back of an armored car in the dead of the night, to be carried away to some a secret detention facility and interrogated by guards wielding big scary sticks? No. It has not been the first time that the
The government is “We the People of the United States.” Many often mistakenly equate “the government” with “the politicians.” Too much emphasis has been placed on the “bad” of government. However, it doesn’t have to be looked upon with a capitalized G. Are we afraid that with this act the government will be in a massive conspiracy against its citizens and impinge on their civil liberties? Sure we are. I’m not going to deny you that possibility. Nevertheless, our government isn’t that corrupt. While the characterization of our government has been marred by missteps by a small number of people, let’s not forget those who protested against injustice or people who fought abroad. Let’s not be so quick to denounce our government.
Our country was created because we didn’t agree. We didn’t agree with the arrogant British who wanted to tax us, who wanted to come marching in with their red coattails and quash our measly rebellion. If our citizens say we don’t agree with the Patriot Act, then the Patriot Act will be rid of, too. This country was built on debate, and the government cannot simply erase 200 years of work towards democracy and the freedoms of speech and protest with one sweeping gesture. Americans can figure out if the Patriot Act is getting too far. Instead of being so quick to jump onto the bandwagon and scream “I WANT MY RIGHTS,” why not say, “Let’s wait and see?” Will the costs (of money and the “sacrifice” of our liberties) outweigh the benefits (capturing key terrorists and improving homeland security)? It’s too early to assume. Giving in to the speculation is to believe the child who cries wolf.
The famous remark by Benjamin Franklin, “They who give up essential liberty to obtain a temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty” is a favorite among libertarians. Unfortunately, the quotation is cited with ignorance of the true context in which it was made. Franklin lived during the time of the Revolutionary War, where the terrorism was the British threat to independence. What Franklin was referring to were the loyalists who were reluctant to go to war with Britain. These people lived the life of luxury, well above the humble lifestyles of the farmer and blacksmith. They bought goods from Britain, flowing silks and all. Most colonists were happy living under British rule, wanting only to preserve the status quo because it seemed like the easiest thing to do.
Franklin saw the potential danger in this sort of complacence. Franklin looked at these loyalists and thought, “Do they not realize that this sense of security under the British is ephemeral? Do they not realize that they are slowly being suffocated of their liberty? Are we to groan under the yoke of Britain, servile people to a ruthless monarch?” He knew that the longer the colonists submitted to the rule of the British, the less freedoms the people would be allowed to have. This was the “temporary safety” Franklin was referring to—the kind that comes with sitting and doing nothing while having the freedoms insidiously squeezed out of one’s body. Fighting terrorism requires incredible human/technological resources and time and effort and money, all of which our government could find and help us move closer to a safer country. We’re not in the search of temporary safety; we’re in the search of permanent safety. Don’t we trust in ourselves to realize when our rights are violated? Don’t we trust in our ability to fight and preserve those rights? History lends reassurance to our capabilities. The Patriot Act cannot do harm unless we let it.
Terrorism is a down-and-dirty war. I’m not going to be a fear-mongering person and list the potential harm they could do. We’re smarter. We know how to put our resources to good use, even though the degree of effectiveness in current implementation is debatable. Libertarians fear that people will simply cave in and renounce their rights because the Government told them that another huge plane could fly into their neighborhood. Yes, accepting the Patriot Act does set a precedent, a dangerous one at that. However, we need to pick the lesser of two evils. “Which one is it?” It does not matter as of right now. The other details don’t matter when you consider that we actually have liberties, that we can debate when we feel those liberties are threatened, and that we can at least find in the end, we’re always fighting, in our own ways, for the preservation of freedom and democracy.
posted by The Barefoot Lawyer @ 12/30/2006
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home