Xref: utzoo comp.org.eff.talk:1883 alt.privacy:91
Path: utzoo!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!sdd.hp.com!mips!cs.uoregon.edu!milton!ogicse!intelhf!ichips!iwarp.intel.com!gargoyle!learn
From: learn@gargoyle.uchicago.edu (William  Vajk )
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.privacy
Subject: Re: The end of privacy... and so what comes next?
Message-ID: <1427@gargoyle.uchicago.edu>
Date: 2 Apr 91 04:52:30 GMT
References: <63473@bbn.BBN.COM> <10777@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> <1991Apr1.180311.5557@eff.org>
Organization: Dares No Organization Like Dis Organization
Lines: 74

In article <1991Apr1.180311.5557@eff.org>  Mike Godwin writes:

>It may well be that privacy is "just a cloak for illegal activity"--
>the illegal activity that, as fallible human beings, we cannot help
>engaging in.

Current events have, alas, limited my reading time of late so I've only 
managed to get about 1/4th of the way through _Privacy, Studies in
Social and Cultural History_ by Barrington Moore, Jr. (M. E. Sharpe Inc,
Armonk, N.Y. but distributed by Pantheon Books, a division of Random House,
Hello Bennett old pal......1984)

I fear the view held by most classicly "law & order" oriented folks dismisses
a lot of human nature and human needs with the irrereverance of citing
irrelevance.

Moore explores privacy issues in several frameworks. He studies the
anthropological perspectives, practices in classical Athens, in the Old
Testament, and ancient Chinese conceptions of public and private.

Ultimately Moore draws in the Great American Dream, the little house
with the picket fence, as a bastion of privacy which has been the dream
of many.

Ultimately, it is this sort of feeling for need of privacy which is demolished
when investigations are undertaken. The American response, historically, has
been to defend the individual's right to such privacy unless events of
overwhelming importance to the state mandate a breach of the promise made
to the individual by the Constitution. The legal aspects are not taken
lightly. The laws, generally speaking, establish the limits of appropriate
behavior for the government when dealing with citizens in an investigatory
mode. Sometimes, in spite of the best efforts of the state, events conspire
with temperaments with results which exceede the mandated limits. 

There are two approaches to understanding the human desire for privacy.
The first is to be an armchair philosopher, not taking the time or trouble
to understand beyond some narrow "within arm's reach" data. The second is
to give some real thought and consideration to the problems, understanding
that anything about the human being which has cross cultural manifestations
doubtless has multiple reasons for being.

For those of you who wish to delve a bit more deeply into several of the
issues relating to privacy, I offer the following little bibliography
as highly recommneded reading (please feel free to add your favorites):

=============================================================================

The Mind Managers, Herbert I. Schiller, Beacon Press, Boston, 1973

The Age of Attila (op), C. D. Gordon, Univ. of Michigan Press, 1972

Utility and Rights, R. G. Frey, University of Minnesota Press, 1984

Essays on Freedom and Power, Lord Acton (any number of paperback versions...)

Controlling Unlawful Organizational Behavior, Diane Vaughan, Univ of Chicago
Press, 1983

The Rights of Man, Thomas Paine, (any number of paperback versions...)

===============================================================================

I don't deny the concept that we all violate laws, mostly inadvertantly. But I 
strongly oppose the notion that such human behaviors result in anything more
than yet another reason for desiring privacy.

Bill Vajk   |   Fundamental to our way of life is the belief that when 
            |   information which properly belongs to the public is
            |   withheld by those in power, the people will soon become
            |   ignorant of their own affairs, distrustful of those who
            |   manage them, and --eventually--incapable of determining
            |   their own destinies.
            | 
            |     - Richard M. Nixon, 22 November 1972