Are we living under Big Brother?

[Dave]

George Orwell's 'Big Brother' totalitarian Fascist state from 1984 didn't occur in 1984. Maybe it could have if Hitler had won WWII (see Philip K Dick's Man in the high castle), or if the Soviet Block had won the Cold War we might be living in a communist version. But did it happen anyway and we haven't even realised?

Okay, so we don't have state-sponsered brainwashing.
But politicians certainly know how to control the media and 'spin' news stories now. I know it's not exactly Propaganda, but you have to be very careful how you interpret what you read, if you really want the truth.

We do have cameras in the streets, shops, banks, offices, bars and restaurants, stations and factories - 'Big Brother' is watching you everywhere. At least you are safe in your house, if you turn off the WebCam.

Governments and corporations have detailed information on us all thanks to the 'Information Revolution'. Information gathered from your debit card, credit card and ATM transactions, telephone calls and Internet useage, and your weekly supermarket shopping list; if it were all put together, could be used to make a fairly detailed, and accurate picture of your movements and interests, likes and dislikes.
If it were not for Data Protection Laws, you could know more about someone than even they knew about themselves. This is what marketing executives would sell their souls for!

Of course there are laws preventing anyone putting all this information together and using it. But I think that it is only because people such as George Orwell, had the foresight to warn us of the dangers, that these laws exist.

 

[Tabitha]

I haven't actually seen this film (have read the book though). You got me in the front door with your poll -

"No! You're a namby pamby Liberal and should be shot!" - Were you having a bad day when you came up with this option?

My own views on "big-brother" type invasion of privacy are a bit ambiguous. I have no problem with cameras as a security feature, but something I do worry about is the use of this information for marketing purposes. I was reading in the Economist recently about the moves being made to keep our medical records private. There was some concern in the US that medical companies were being allowed access to patients records in order to trawl for potential customers.
This really shocked me. I am annoyed enough at all the junk mail I get because some company I have bought from in the past thinks it is a good idea to make a quick buck selling my address on. But the idea of my health being a statistic for marketing pills is terribly unsettling.

In fact, I don't have that much of a problem with the government knowing everything about me - I have no intention of getting involved in crime, so I (mostly) trust them. I am just concerned that the information might be used unscrupulously by other agencies.

Am I being naive, not being able to take the advice proferred by visions of the future such as '1984'?

 

[Dave]

Interesting that you replied to this very old post of mine today. (I probably was having a bad day) The UK Government has just today announced plans for compulsory identity cards. In the UK we haven't had these cards since the 1950's, and the move is certain to be opposed by civil liberties campaigners on the grounds that it would restrict personal freedom and be abused by the police.

I'm not completely sure about it myself, but what I do find very strange that most other countries have compulsory ID cards and there is no discussion about them, or how they may be abused. They are accepted as a necessary means to fight crime and illegal immigration. Maybe it is just a British thing.

If you live in a democracy, you probably do feel safe that the Government does not abuse its power. There are other safeguards such as the Press. The argument is that Governments can and do change, and people in some countries are not so lucky as those with a free Press and an free secret ballot in elections.

 

[Tabitha]

I usually follow the news from home, but haven't been keeping up with www.bbc.co.uk/news for the last week or two - looks like I have some interesting things to come back to in October! Was this the scheme that David Blunkett has been pushing hard, especially since 9/11?

Originally posted by Dave
Interesting that you replied to this very old post of mine today. (I probably was having a bad day) The UK Government has just today announced plans for compulsory identity cards. In the UK we haven't had these cards since the 1950's, and the move is certain to be opposed by civil liberties campaigners on the grounds that it would restrict personal freedom and be abused by the police.

See, now here's where my ambiguity steps in - I am kind of unsettled by this idea, although I might have just been sucked in by the arguments against it. In what ways are the police expected to abuse it? Would it be for things like detaining people if they weren't carrying their cards - a kind of harrassment? In principle though, I suppose I can't really see why it is such a bad thing. The reasons why people are against it are bound up with other reasons - like a distrust of the police.

Originally posted by Dave

I'm not completely sure about it myself, but what I do find very strange that most other countries have compulsory ID cards and there is no discussion about them, or how they may be abused. They are accepted as a necessary means to fight crime and illegal immigration. Maybe it is just a British thing.

That's a good point - many other countries do have these systems in place already - it is quite surprising that the UK hasn't yet. In comparison to the US our civil liberties are quite narrow already.

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by Tabitha
Was this the scheme that David Blunkett has been pushing hard, especially since 9/11?

The launch does marks the latest stage of Home Secretary David Blunkett's efforts to introduce some sort of ID card in the wake of September 11. I think this is his second attempt since then.

The ID documents - to be known as "entitlement cards" - would be based on computerised cards already carried by asylum seekers.

The Home Office said they would "allow people to prove their identity more easily and provide a simple way to access public services".

But there is to be some "public consultation" before they are introduced.

 

[Tabitha]

I wonder if part of the plan is that it will be mandatory to carry them at all times - I suppose so, or else what is the point?
I think the idea of being stopped on the way to the cornershop and getting in trouble for not carrying the card worries me...