It's Not Just Bush
As this New York Times article on NSA spying reminds us, the erosion of civil liberties isn’t just a product of Bush gone wild. The war on terror has enhanced the already permissive environment in which any number of state officials can expand their reach. In fact, as David Cole and James Dempsey remind us in their Terrorism and the Constitution, the anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act passed under Clinton ’s watch in 1996 set many of the precedents upon which the Patriot Act merely expanded. What we’re dealing with is not just the extreme actions of an out of control president, but a more deeply rooted obsession with security.

1 Comments:
The politics that currently surround the “erosion of civil liberties” only remind me of the critique offered by Carl Schmitt; these so called “liberal democracies” will give way to national emergencies. It is not odd, but the nature of liberal democracies. In fact, it is not a question of “Bush gone wild,” but something that is gravely rooted in “liberal democracies. However, I do not intend this comment to be a debate of theories, therefore raising the question about America’s obsession with security is of great importance. As the leading realist country, I think, at the moment, America needs to pay close attention to security issues. I’m basing this simple suggestion on the fact that America, and Americans in general, are not that popular in the world. The “unipolar moment,” if there existed one, is over! America is no longer the grandiose super power it once was, post WW II. Therefore, it would be wise to acknowledge the fact that the world is a changed place, and if this “war on terror” can ever be won, I suggest that America pay close attention to her actions.
Post a Comment
<< Home