Why do people think the security state is being rammed through with such a sense of urgency right now? Are they expecting something? A war? An economic crisis? Ecological meltdown? Invasion from outer space?
I ask because I get the impression that there is a top-down (from the executive branch) full-court-press on this, and that the gloves are coming off. That leads me to wonder if there's something driving this, some sense of urgency.
I think Charles Stross said it best[1], what we have now is effectively the ancien regime pre-revolutionary state; that MUST retain absolute control, lest the natural order be shattered irretrievably.
In effect, the guardians of the status quo are in full panic mode and are not necessarily reacting rationally.
This is why this incident should be investigated by ( on the UK side ) a parliamentary commission, and ( on the US side ) by an independent congressional commission.
It is not pushed with especial sense of urgency, there were the crypto wars in the nineties for example[1]. On the other hand, if there is a special sense of urgency then it is probably more future shock than anything concrete. From the perspective of the old mans with pencils, suddenly you get all these leaks and you get all this computer stuff they do not really understand. So they err on the side of heavy handed security, because they do no longer trust their model of the world.
I suspect it is actually quite straightforward. After 9/11, security services were given free reign to do whatever they thought necessary to prevent a similar atrocity. Many laws were passed that would never have been considered if 9/11 had not occurred. I don't believe most politicians were taking advantage of the situation, rather they were threatened and scared by what happened and over-reacted.
The recent PRISM scandal has exposed the results of this short-term and irrational behaviour, and now the UK and US governments are embarrassed and angry. Either they regret their surveillance of their own citizens, or else they still believe in it and are angry at the revelation. So rather than repair the situation, they're making it worse.
The final component is that extraordinary powers will always be abused, eventually. And this is probably what we have seen here.
I don't believe in any huge conspiracy, just a political elite that is often incompetent, and (particularly in the UK) stuck in the past.
It now feels impossible to criticise other countries for their appalling human rights records. We don't respect democracy or freedom, so how can we ever argue in its defence? The Western powers should be the torchbearers for democracy, not those trampling on it.
I think the solution is more whistle-blowing until we achieve sufficient transparency from the states involved and ethical behaviour from the security services. The EU is also already doing a great job of criticising the US and UK, and hopefully that political pressure will pay off. A change of government on both sides of the atlantic (don't hold you breath in the UK) would also provide an opportunity for progress.
9/11 and the lack of civilian resistance to a lot of the government actions which followed has (IMHO) shown that they can push the envelope and encounter no outcry. 'They' have continued the push ever since.
I would love to be corrected on this, but I can't think of another modern era when so much obvious, unscrupulous actions were taken by authorities and yet no grand resistance was put up.
Why do people think the security state is being rammed through with such a sense of urgency right now? Are they expecting something? A war? An economic crisis? Ecological meltdown? Invasion from outer space?
I ask because I get the impression that there is a top-down (from the executive branch) full-court-press on this, and that the gloves are coming off. That leads me to wonder if there's something driving this, some sense of urgency.