Democracy and Family Liability

It was not an error, it was done according to plan. British security agents detained Glenn Greenwald’s life partner at a London airport for nearly nine hours, seized his belongings and interrogated and threatened him as well. David Miranda was released just minutes before the time limit expired for such detention prescribed by Section 7 of the “Terrorism Act 2000.” The law is aptly named. Its intent is to intimidate and spread terror. Nine hours without being legally charged and nine hours without an attorney! Reasonable suspicion is not required, it’s all allowed in the name of security. The only question is: Whose security?

If it were the goal of Islamic terrorists to undermine Western civilization, to sow confusion and to expose the hypocrisy of the values the West constantly praises, then one would be forced to say “mission accomplished”— the terrorists have achieved their goal. The balance between civil rights and the interests of bureaucracy and industry has been destroyed because this is no longer about security: It’s about power and money.

Every bureaucracy has a natural tendency to expand and democracy knows how to cope pretty well with rampant government. For example, the European agricultural bureaucracy is kept at least under partial control with democratic procedures. The international security bureaucracy, on the other hand, insists on opposing any outward influences. A highly specialized industry provides the soft- and hardware for it and controls policy lobbying.

The security bureaucracy came into being in Western nations following the 9/11 terrorist attacks and has become increasingly hermetically sealed since then. It completely avoids becoming the subject of public discussion. The democratic system of checks and balances has become little more than a farce and one need have no illusions that this bureaucracy even needs the threat of external attack to continue its self-perpetuation.

Why did the British authorities detain Miranda in London? They surely couldn’t seriously expect to gain valuable information from him or from his files concerning the NSA revelations. It’s far more believable that their action was intended to send a message to Miranda’s life partner, Glenn Greenwald. In earlier times, that was called guilt by association for one’s family and has no place in a democracy, only in dictatorships. The signal they’re sending to Greenwald is a signal to all of us.

Historically, repressive systems of government never admit their repressive actions. Dictatorships don’t want it known that they are dictatorships. They claim always to be doing what’s best for the public. The difference between a democracy and a dictatorship isn’t defined by the words they say, but by the methods citizens may employ and the influence they have on their government. So it doesn’t look especially good for the West. Citizens there nourish the monstrously burgeoning security agencies with their tax monies and their own freedoms. But they do have the possibility to judge their security agencies and their actions. How many attacks have been prevented by NSA spying? How many terrorists have been discovered because of increased liberties for British law enforcement?

The concept of habeas corpus dates from the 17th century and says that one can only be arrested if there are specific grounds justifying it. But as far as Western civilization is concerned, that’s apparently old hat.