Matt Welch at Reason points out an important connection between Martin Luther King and recent controversies involving government surveillance: MLK himself was bugged illegally by J. Edgar Hoover as part of a longstanding and broad campaign of undermining peaceful dissident organizations. They bugged civil rights leaders and organizations and if they found out anything that might be embarrassing they used it to blackmail them into stopping their civil rights advocacy. This is the obvious answer to those who say we shouldn't worry about unchecked presidential authority for NSA wiretaps, that they're only using that power to go after terrorists.
I don't trust any government with unchecked power; I certainly don't trust this government with unchecked power. The Bush administration has already proven, with its assertion that it alone can suspend habeas corpus in select cases, with its conflicting stories on American citizens they've held for more than 3 years without charges, with its "free speech zones" at Presidential appearances, and with its own surveillance of gay rights groups, that it cannot be trusted with our civil liberties.
- Log in to post comments
Along the same lines as Volokh defending the ACLU...
Although this administration has greatly increased their use, "Free Speech Zones" date back at least to the Clinton administration. I don't think it affects your (very true) ponit, but your comment could be read as implying that the Bush administration had invented them.
Todd Larason wrote:
Although this administration has greatly increased their use, "Free Speech Zones" date back at least to the Clinton administration. I don't think it affects your (very true) ponit, but your comment could be read as implying that the Bush administration had invented them.
It implies no such thing. If the Clinton administration was in power, I would have written the exact same post but substituted the many actions they undertook that proved that they could not be trusted with our civil rights leader. I wrote many times that Clinton was the worst president on civil liberties since Nixon; sadly, Bush has managed to make those statements false, but that doesn't excuse the damage that Clinton did to the Bill of Rights and that damage was significant. The fact that I criticize Bush for being guilty of something does not in any way indicate that I think Clinton was thus innocent of it. It is exactly that kind of either/or thinking that I spend so much time trying to get people to look beyond.
I think we're in violent agreement on everything here except what the phrase 'its "free speach zones"' implies, and the problem is evidently in my head rather than yours, so my apologies.
I find it terribly amusing when folks decide to invoke Clinton when excusing the actions of the current regime. I understand that there are folks out there who actualy think Clinton was a great president but in many respects the bush regime has just been an extension of the Clinton legacy taken to an extreme.
Many people seem very inclined to invoke Clinton on the wiretaping issue - I wouldn't be surprised if Clinton did in fact order illegal wiretaps and I would be just as outraged. I was outraged at his draconian (that one came from a conservative way back when) anti-terror measures that were quashed. The same folks who were outraged with me when Clinton proposed them are overwhelmingly supportive of the far more expansive patriot act. Clinton was a big supporter of exporting good American jobs through the free trade legacy continued in this regime with the push for CAFTA.
It is dangerous to imply the bush regime invented anything in the body politic, they haven't the creativity for it. Unfortunately many of the blunders of this regime were offshoots of the Clinton regime - just done even worse than Clinton and on a shoestring budget.
When the government spies on Americans, dissidents and otherwise it fosters an environment that stifles positive change. Our nation is only a couple centuries old but what remarkable centuries they have been. The world of 200 years ago was not that vastly different than that of 1,000 years ago. There would be significant differences to be sure but someone from 1,000 years ago would have manged reasonably well in the world of 200 years ago - much better than someone just 150 years ago would manage in the world today. Our government and our people need to be geared for new challenges presented in a everchanging geo-political and geo-economic landscape. Regression into the days of governing by fear will not allow us the room to grow into a evolving world power ever adjusting to our surroundings. If we choose to live in fear and darkness the world will pass us by and leave us behind - they are doing so already.
We are in the throws of a major throwback we need deperately to avoid. I am afraid that the stand the right has taken against gays can easily turn into a push back against the civil rights of others. I am not gay but I am voracious in my support of gay rights because I believe that equal rights belong to everyone in this country. I am also so enthusiastic in that support because if they beat back the queers, who's next? Will it be the Muslim's who are already marginal? Will it be Hispanics or Blacks who still make some people quite angry? Will it be socialists such as myself?
When the government spies on any American without oversight it scares the hell out of me. In some circles gays are far more acceptable than socialists. (or commies as many would mistakenly say) It scares me because the government is incarcerating those they deem "enemy combatants" a amorphous, open ended label allowing them the power to hold anyone indefinately without charge. Nown one might argue that there would be an outcry if the government started rounding up queers and socialists and sent them to Gitmo but if you had told me just 4 years ago what public reaction to the government spying on Americans without oversight I would have guessed that calling the reaction outraged would have been a major understatment - yet we here very little outrage.
Good gods that is a lot more than I meant to say. . .