Sunday, September 22, 2013
Libertarianism, Surveillance, and America
Where is the line?
Look at this statement by the Libertarian Party on privacy.
Think about the libertarian position on domestic surveillance. Here are some videos and articles related to the recent NSA revelations about domestic surveillance in the US. See this video, this PBS news report and this report.
What do you think a libertarian would say about this domestic surveillance of American citizens? What about foreigners living in the US? What about foreigners living outside the US? What do you think that libertarians would say about these issues?
How does your view about this surveillance compare to the libertarian perspective?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I would say that a libertarian would possibly disagree with the surveillance of Americans because they want the government to respect Americans privacy. If foreigners have entered the United States, they are to be considered American citizens so I think libertarians would agree.
ReplyDeleteHaley Greene
PSCI 100:02
I believe that the Libertarians would not be fond of this course of action. Just the fact that the government feels obligated to wiretap, record, and watch whatever we do is no different that the Big Brother notion from George Orwell's 1984 novel.If foreigners from another country came to the US, they are to, without a doubt, be considered US citizen so I think libertarians would agree with this.
ReplyDeleteKevin Cantarilho
PSCI 100:02
Libertarians would be against the survailence of american citizens because they have their right to privacy. Also libertarians would agree if foreigners came to the US they would also considered citizens that shouldn't be under suvailence because they want to become citizens and are in the process and will have the same rights as citizens.
ReplyDeleteJ.C. Mao-Alston
PSCI 100:03
I think all libertarians and all foreigners would 100% disagree with the surveillance that the government is doing. whether you are doing something wrong or not it is still your privacy. a libertarian would especially not like this because liberations believe they have the right to privacy and the government should be putting their noses and our business and I believe the same.
ReplyDeleteDanielle McManus
PSCI 100:02
After watching the videos, I strongly believe libertarians would disagree with the surveillance of Americans. Even if they are watching us for our safety, it is still our privacy and the government needs to respect that. Just because they are watching our every move, and listening to our conversations does not mean they could prevent any crimes from happening. The government can not even take action until after the crime has already been committed, so there is definitely no point in invading our privacy.
ReplyDeleteI also believe liberals would disagree with the surveillance of immigrants. As long as they are on our grounds, they should be given the same right as us. Whether they are just visiting or planning on staying, we should still respect their privacy. The government needs to mind their own business, and stop trying to control our every move.
Amanda Malave
PSCI 100:02
Based on the video, Libertarians would not agree with surveillance of people. Libertarians would not like the government to have that role in our lives. The government's only job is national defense according to Libertarians. They would not agree with surveillance of immigrants because they believe people all are equal. The government should respect everyone to make their own decisions.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I do not agree with governmental surveillance. It is an invasion of personal privacy. It is not the job of the government to control everything we do. I do not believe the government should have surveillance in other countries' citizens. The government needs to stay out of our daily lives.
Brenna Rose
PSCI 100:03
The Libertarian Party would be completely against this, But they would be totally for it in a case where that said person was harming them and that they would need too then in-gauge too defend them selfs. In my own opinion you do need a backup plan and surveillance like the government has set up is the ideal format.
ReplyDeleteDominic Vaccaro PSCI 100.03
I couldn't agree more with the libertarian point of view in this instance, as the way the government infringes upon peoples' rights to privacy specifically is both mind-blowing and nauseating. I agree wholeheartedly and I believe any foreigner (unless they are of a completely different belief system which is entirely possible) or other libertarian (or any true american) would believe the same.
ReplyDeletePete Sheehan psci 100.03
The libertarians would be furious about the surveillance of U.S. citizens. They want the government to stay out of issues, and for people to have their own privacy and freedom. The libertarians would not care about foreigners entering the U.S. because they believe in open borders and for people to go about as they please. Foreigners would be considered U.S. citizens. Libertarians would highly disagree with what the government is doing and try to stop it. I agree with the libertarians, the government should not be so involved with people's lives. Everyone has their own freedom and it should always be that way.
ReplyDeleteBlake Johnson
PSCI 100:03
Based on the videos and previous statements from others, it's to no surprise that I share the same belief. Libertarians would not vote for surveillance; especially since it invades into their personal privacy. Along with them, I wouldn't want the government to record what goes on in my home; I believe that a home is personal space that allows freedom to do whatever you want. ( as long as you're not causing harm)
ReplyDeleteVictoria Wilson
100:02
I believe that Libertarians would definitely not agree with government surveillance. The way that the government does it, it infringes on citizens and non-citizens freedom, more than it protects them from anything. The Libertarians also strongly oppose any regulation on privacy; that is not the governments concern.
ReplyDeleteBrandon Smead
100:03
Libertarians would for sure not agree with government surveillance in any aspect. Government surveillance interrupts libertarians freedom. Just like libertarians, I don't agree with government surveillance because I have my right to my own privacy. Also, libertarians wouldn't have a problem with foreigners entering the US.
ReplyDeleteNicole Ruane
100:02
I think Libertarians would completely oppose the surveillance of its citizens, because it really is no ones business what we do behind doors unless we are harming someone else. Also they don't believe in boundaries so there would be no immigrants, everyone could travel freely in and out of America. My views on surveillance are pretty much right in line with the liberals, stay out of my business, and I will stay out of yours.
ReplyDeleteChelse O'Connor
I agree that libertarians would oppose the surveillance of the citizens and I think that everyone would. It is just not right, and liberal's would not agree to someone watching their every move. There would be no immigrants and I think that the liberals would allow people to travel without any hinderances. I agree also with your views and the views of liberals.
DeleteTHe libertarians would oppose the domestic use that the NSA is conducting in a libertarian society foreign immigrants would not exist therefore it would not be needed to spy domestically in the US however if preventative measure were taken by the NSA in order to prevent and secure AMericans in the name of National defense then would the NSA be a legitimate agency. The libertarians would not agree with Americans spying on other Americans domestically. I believe that the NSA should not be able to use records to pinpoint someone breaking a law and be able to use it as evidence in court therefore spying domestically in the US should not be permitted only in the name of national defense and the libertarians would agree only because the NSA cannot be used against them and is established for national defense.
ReplyDeleteBen HOwar PSCI 100:02
Libertarians would not agree with the domestic surveillance in the United States. In a libertarian society they would want no surveillance because what we do would be our own business. There would also generally be a lot less crime, so there would not even be a need for it. On the topic of immigration, there would be no topic. People could move freely in and out of the country without regulation.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the idea of no domestic surveillance.. if our world was one of a libertarian society. Everyone would mind their own business and would not be watched every move they make. It seems today we are so reliant on this "domestic surveillance". In terms of immigration, I do believe there should be restrictions. In "Free America" it explains that the more immigrants, the better off the country. This may be true at first, but how would a libertarian society handle overpopulation?
They wouldn't! It wouldn't be any of their concern. They just assume everything would work itself out. The inivisble hand of crap isn't something we should ever rely on.
Delete-Jessica Fort PSCI 100 - MWF 11-12
Libertarians do not agree with domestic surveillance. Libertarians believe that people are naturally good and do not need to be watched or monitored. However in the event that one does harm another person they believe that action should be taken against that person.
ReplyDeleteI for one agree with surveillance to an extent. I believe that if it saves even just one life it is worth it. The government is not going to filter through your calls, texts, emails without reason/warrant. Just last week I ran a red light and I texted a friend telling them I did. I have not had any police knocking on my door with a ticket in hand.
-Alicia White
PSCI 100:02
A libertarian would not agree with any surveillance, that is to much government power. If the government is only supposed to be defensive then you wouldn't need to attack until someone attacked you. For domestic surveillance, the government wouldn't be involved but private individuals. Surveillance encroaches on your right to freedom, but if everything was owned in Free America then every private owner could put up their own surveillance. For a libertarian, there should be no foreigners because they would get rid of the borders and everyone would be the same. I think that the amount of surveillance that we are under today is very creepy, after the videos, the government collecting data on me that they can bring up at any time is in no way freedom. And if it's not even helping us stop the terrorist attack that they claim it's for then they should stop.
ReplyDeleteKayla Piechowiak
PSCI 100-03
When it comes to the question of surveillance, it gives us two distinct entities, American citizens and foreigners. American libertarians do not view themselves as citizens of the world. They believe in a limited government with very very few roles for that government. They are not so naive to believe that there are not forces within the world that would have no problem with ridding the ideology of libertarianism from the face of the earth. So the libertarian has an interest in self preservation and their way of living.
ReplyDeleteLibertarians are vehemently against government surveillance of it's citizens within the private realm; however, there are a few exceptions, all which require a warrant. Are foreigners citizens? No, they are not and therefore do not have the political protections and privileges that American citizens do, yet at the same time, they do have common law protections.
If one takes a closer look at the libertarian platform, especially 3.4, one can see that some type of screening of foreigners is advocated for. One could then presume surveillance of foreigners in the public realm could be acceptable, again pointing out that foreigners do not have the same political protections as citizens.
Migration is simply movement through and the libertarian espouses the freedom of movement for all, however, immigration is another matter. Where movement stops. In 1980, Fidel Castro opened up his prisons and allowed the mentally ill and violent criminals to migrate to the US. No matter what your political bent is, would you be ok with Fidel's undesirables as your next door neighbor?
3.4 Free Trade and Migration
We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property.
On migration, what a startling example to use and effective when it comes to my opinion on the subject, I would NOT be okay with Fidel's "undersirables" anywhere near myself or my family.
Delete^^ That was Jessica Fort PSCI 100 MWF 10-11 post
DeleteLibertarian positioning on domestic surveillance is strongly opposed, because the government would be over stepping its duties. Even though one could justify that surveillance would be for the general populations safety it is no longer part of the government duties to protect its individuals, unless from foreign attacks and only as defense mechanism. NSA surveillance is necessary in the world we live in, to the extent that they have pushed the envelope is the cause of individuals in a uproar, but if in public domain NSA should be able to access surveillance whenever they choose, or if by warrant. It’s only when private property that NSA surveillance knowingly violates this, or with the examples like enabling web cameras in homes or phone calls should not be in the access of any form of surveillance group. Surveillance is necessary but the regulations and constant vigilance of NSA to maintain those rules and regulations. Along the lines of immigration, there wouldn't be to much form of regulation of the flow, there would be no standard of who could come or go because who would enable it?
ReplyDelete- Jessica Fort PSCI 100 MWF 11-12
Libertarians would mostly likely oppose domestic surveillance and also oppose surveillance for foreign people as well. Libertarians are for the individuals to do whatever they want as long as no one is harmed. So if people can do whatever they want then whats the point of surveillance of the entire country. There will obviously be security camera for banks and stores, but other than that they will oppose surveillance. My view is that we should monitor people as long as we are not invading their privacy. People need to be monitored because people can't be trusted, we also need that sense of security that when something happens they is always someone watching and that could help right away.
ReplyDeleteCarlos Amaya
Libertarians would be against NSA privacy rules because they are openly against surveillance and view it as infringement by the government. But in the book "Welcome to Free America" it displays a pure libertarian world where most if not everything would have to be under surveillance in order to prove certain broken contracts. Libertarians are for immigration and freely moving in and out of the country so they wouldn't consider anyone to be a foreigner.
ReplyDeleteThere are some positive things that have come through surveillance like gps mapping and keeping them in stores but keeping records of what each person is saying through calls is a bit extreme.
Joey Diaz
PSCI 100.03
Libertarians are strongly opposed to any kind of domestic surveillance of our own civilians, as well as surveillance of foreigners living in the united states. Libertarians are still mostly opposed to surveillance of foreigners living in other countries, but under certain circumstances would probably be at least begrudgingly tolerant of it.
ReplyDeleteThe issue of domestic surveillance is one of the few issues that I strongly agree with libertarians on. In this aspect of life, I would much rather have freedom than security.
Joseph Smith
PSCI 100.02
I think libertarians would strongly oppose surveillance in any of these forms - whether it be concerning American citizens or foreigners. Libertarians strongly advocate the individual's rights to privacy and to speak or not to speak. They believe that these rights should not be infringed by the government in any way. As for me, I mostly agree with the libertarian opinions of surveillance. I do believe that sometimes this kind of surveillance could be helpful, such as in times of terrorist threats. However, I think that without significant evidence indicating a terrorist movement against the US, the US government should have no right to use their surveillance into anyone's private lives.
ReplyDeletePSCI 100.03
I think libertarians would strongly oppose surveillance in any of these forms - whether it be concerning American citizens or foreigners. Libertarians strongly advocate the individual's rights to privacy and to speak or not to speak. They believe that these rights should not be infringed by the government in any way. As for me, I mostly agree with the libertarian opinions of surveillance. I do believe that sometimes this kind of surveillance could be helpful, such as in times of terrorist threats. However, I think that without significant evidence indicating a terrorist movement against the US, the US government should have no right to use their surveillance into anyone's private lives.
ReplyDeleteKayla McFarland PSCI 100.03
I think that Libertarians would be against the government performing surveillance, but in an ideal Libertarian country the protection agencies would have just about that same control. In certain contracts the protection agencies could, for example, have protection from online/phone abuse because that presents potential harm to that individual. Meaning, that there would have to be online and phone observation. Immigrants living in a Libertarian country would have already gone through a checkpoint, so no further surveillance would be needed (unless under protection agencies). I do not think there should be surveillance to that extent, and the government should not do this to gain more power, it should be to protect the people.
ReplyDeleteCarleigh Underwood
PSCI 100:03
I think that libertarians would be against the government surveillance, although it is a protection to the united states and in a libertarian government they support the whole protection agencies but i believe libertarians would think that surveillance is too much. As to the Immigrants they would have been completely checked so there would be no need for surveillance on immigrants. Although the government should be using surveillance as a tool to protect it is giving them much more power than the government should have in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteLibertarians would be against governmental surveillance. They want the government to have as little control as possible. Allowing the government to watch everything we are doing is not what libertarians want. The libertarians would allow you to protect yourself through private surveillance of you own properties. They believe that we as citizens should step up and not rely on the government to do things for us that we can get taken care of ourselves.
ReplyDeleteAlicia Himes
PSCI 100.02
The libertarian mindset would be highly against government monitoring of the sort. Libertarians are against government uniformity in almost all ways, including using a social security number for universal identification.
ReplyDeleteRyan Miller
PSCI 100:02
Libertarians would be absolutely furious about the surveillance of the people by the government. They would consider this to be a huge violation of human rights and they would demand that the government have its power limited. Whether you're a foreigner or and American, libertarians would not like the fact that government is watching our every move. It restricts people's privacy and violates their rights and there is no justifiable reason for the government to be doing this. They can't say it's for national security because unless there is a known threat to others, there is no reason to watch people's everyday lives. Libertarians want a method of defense that involves being able to fight back if attacked, they don't want the government trying to be a threat preventer.
ReplyDeletePrevious to reading "Welcome to Free America", I probably would have said that the surveillance violates the freedoms that libertarians believe in. However, the book showed surveillance as a means of proving innocence at all times, and it was quite commonplace within the society. Therefore, I would have to say that though libertarians may be upset about not willingly going under surveillance, they may not be entirely opposed to the idea. I do not necessarily feel comfortable with the idea that I am being watched without having agreed to it. However, I have come to terms with the idea and I really have nothing to hide, so let them look all they want.
ReplyDeleteAs for the foreigners living in the US, libertarians do not believe in national borders, so I feel as though they wouldn't consider the people foreigners at all, thus eliminating the issue. People should be free to come and go as they please, thus meaning that there can be no such thing as foreigners.
Katelyn Amspacher
PSCI 100:03
My Comment apparently didn't post or there was an error so I am poorly paraphrasing what I said on Friday on here:
ReplyDeleteLibertarians are against domestic surveillance. It would be violating the right to privacy for citizens. International espionage would be very limited considering the fact that the government would be significantly smaller, as would the military, and only concerned with mostly domestic issues.
Immigration seems to be a little more of a gray area because they support screen checks and what not on immigrants. But after processing they would fit under the treatment of other citizens.
I am completely against domestic surveillance. There is no need for it at all. It DOES NOT prevent crime. So what is the point?
The Patriot Act needs to be gutted because it allows the NSA to spy on US citizens and it just tramples all over the US Constitution.
Matthew McNuss
100-02
I believe that Libertarians would strongly oppose the use of domestic surveillance of American citizens. However, in a Libertarian world, there would need to be some kind of surveillance to hold people accountable for their actions and also protect them. Libertarians also believe that their should be no boarders or boundaries, so on the issue with monitoring foreign US citizens, I feel that libertarians believe everyone is equal, because without boarders what defines someone as being a foreigner and a native? I personally don't mind government surveillance to an extent. We certainly should not be monitored by our every move, but if government truly feels that the US is under serious danger, than they should do what is ethically necessary to protect us, but ensure that there is a real need to do so.
ReplyDeleteShannon Lyons
PSCI 100:03
I think that libertarians would be against spying on Americans, but that some would be okay with spying on foreigners if it was to provide national security. I understand that there could be some internal national security threats, but I think there's a problem when the only oversight is secret courts that make secret decisions based on secret evidence and the vast majority of requests are approved.
ReplyDeleteAlex Smith
PSCI 100:02
I will reiterate what has been stated by a majority of the posts; libertarians are strongly against any type of domestic government surveillance. In Barker's vision of a Libertarian society, the protection firms do use surveillance, but it does not seem to be opposed because it truly is for the use of safety and accountability. No one would be considered a foreigner because there is no such thing as a border or boundary. I would agree with most people who say that surveillance by the government is unnecessary and there is no need to monitor everyone's every move. It does not prevent any harm from being carried out, so what is the point?
ReplyDeleteHaley Smith
PSCI 100:02
Libertarians oppose to surveillance of anykind, and thay like the borders to be open, so there is no problems go in and out of the country, they will like this to be the same in other countries.
ReplyDeleteJasnet Loue
PSC 100:02
Libertarians would be furious with any government surveillance. They would say that i the government using and abusing too much of the little power it has. As for the foreigners entering the country. They would not care. All boarders would be open.
ReplyDeleteMike Reed
Libertarians strongly disagree with domestic surveillance, for it is an infringement upon human rights. Libertarians want to limit the government as much as possible. Libertarians would also say that we should limit foreign surveillance and only do so if there was a threat to national security. Under a libertarian government there would be no borders, so a foreigner that lived in the U.S would be given the same rights as a American citizen. I agree with the libertarian view on surveillance. I believe 99% of it is unnecessary and that monitoring domestically does not accomplish anything and monitoring abroad just puts the U.S at a higher risk for attack.
ReplyDeleteConsidering that there is almost no way to stop the NSA from listening in on our calls and all of that, I think the Libertarians would most definitely disagree with what they are doing. It even says on their website that "the individual's right to privacy, property, and right to speak or not to speak should not be infringed by the government." And that is exactly what the government is (trying) to do; essentially invade the privacy of our private phone calls, no matter who they are with.
ReplyDeleteI think that there is a closer eye on foreigners in the US because of the media's attempt, and triumph, in scaring the country of possible terrorist attacks made by foreigners. Those living outside of a particular country don't always keep up with everything that goes on within that country, but I do know that there are people who do follow US news and whatnot and I don't think they would agree with the domestic surveillance, either.
I believe that my view of domestic surveillance compared to the Libertarian view is relatively the same. Without the individual's consent, there should be no surveillance whatsoever on such private things like phone calls, and even the whole webcam thing. It is completely unnecessary and it is violating our rights. And as many people have stated, it does nothing and if it does, it is always after the fact.
Megan Douglas
PSCI 100.02