Sunday, July 24, 2005
Big Brother is Watching You...
Big Brother is Watching You. It is the sentence with which 1984 can be summarized.
In his classic novel, 1984, George Orwell described a totalitarian society in which the government, referred to as the Party, had almost complete control over the people. The supreme ruler of the Party was Big Brother. Posters announced that "Big Brother is Watching You". Telescreens, which could not be turned off, droned endlessly with brainwashing propaganda about wondrous government programs. Coins, stamps, books, films, and banners proclaimed the three slogans of the Party: War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength.
We want to arrive to that situation? We have another way?
The psychosis caused by the series of attacks of Al-Qaeda in London or the most recent in Egypt is extending for the entire world. In New York the bags are registered before entering in the subway, London is a city in state of siege and in the rest of the world every type of emergency and security plans have been activated, or simply have been filled with eyes, as in Barcelona. Of this situation use is being made by the legislators most favourable to increase the measures of police control on the population, since increasing the security is increased by the control, but and the freedom? In United States a proposal in which the majority of extraordinary norms of security (as that of being able to intercept communications without judicial authorization) approved exceptionally as a result of the attacks of the towers, pass to be considered of normal character has been carried out. In the United Kingdom, Tony Blair, now, he has excuse to be able to implement the digital ID card with data biometrical, as in USA some months ago, but will it work?
The society in which we live is imperfect, that we all know. But we also have to have the right to being able to choose, to make a mistake. During these years that the "world campaign against the terrorism" is going on, the results have not been too flattering. In the same way it is that we have to change strategy to fight the Islamic fundamentalism. Probably the problem we have it because from a beginning we set off of a conception different to the problem. What for us is a question of security and of direct attack against our system of life. For them it is a holy war in which, what do is to answer to the rough handling that is suffering the third world, more precisely the Arab world. But it can also be that those groups are turning into the liberators of a cause. A cause that is only an excuse to impose their way of fighting because of something. That fanaticism, and belief in an absolute truth it does them to be intolerable with the rest of beliefs and opinions and as child that it does not have more than the right of fit of ill temper, the terrorism is their way of proving their disagreement.
Although it can be said that the goal of the terrorists has been obtained, they have sown the terror between thousands and thousands of citizens, put in alert many governments and plans of security, with the consequent economic expense. But especially with the created insecurity, they favor more extreme reactions. This radicalization in the mode of behaviour of west still gives more legitimacy to what they are making. An end cannot survive without his opposed, for with it it's having its justified existence.
Therefore, we do not have to arrive to the extremism and have to arrive to the situation that precisely they aim for. I do not want a society as that of "Minority Report" in which the administration knows everything, up to what it is going to pass. It is so pro-active that it acts before that the things happen, and consequently, the logical errors being produced.
We do not act as this a fight among cultural worlds, we do not try to defend ways of life to death, because we cannot. The cultural differences come from the isolation of the people and of their different evolutionary paths. In a world globalized, inter-connected and in which the distances have been reduced considerably, as we intend that not have mixtures and cultural influences. Until now we were adjacent, but we share flat from now on. The communal life is difficult, we do not have the clear norms and nobody wants to be sent by anybody. But we will have to learn to make it if we want to live...
All in all Security vs. Freedom
It is a clear problem of interoperability. Independent systems, every one trying to maintain its territory and without communication with the other one. All trying to preserve their identity. It has to be done that they are connected, that that they communicate and that that they work joint. As in the administration... Or not?
Technorati Tags: security e-government attacks terrorism Islamic+fundamentalism big+brother 1984 control identity interoperability London Barcelona United+States digital+ID+card
# posted by Carlos Guadián @ 2:09 PM 
!REMEMBER¡ Your searches about e-Government with K-Government Swicki
Sunday, July 24, 2005
Big Brother is Watching You...
Big Brother is Watching You. It is the sentence with which 1984 can be summarized.
In his classic novel, 1984, George Orwell described a totalitarian society in which the government, referred to as the Party, had almost complete control over the people. The supreme ruler of the Party was Big Brother. Posters announced that "Big Brother is Watching You". Telescreens, which could not be turned off, droned endlessly with brainwashing propaganda about wondrous government programs. Coins, stamps, books, films, and banners proclaimed the three slogans of the Party: War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength.
We want to arrive to that situation? We have another way?
The psychosis caused by the series of attacks of Al-Qaeda in London or the most recent in Egypt is extending for the entire world. In New York the bags are registered before entering in the subway, London is a city in state of siege and in the rest of the world every type of emergency and security plans have been activated, or simply have been filled with eyes, as in Barcelona. Of this situation use is being made by the legislators most favourable to increase the measures of police control on the population, since increasing the security is increased by the control, but and the freedom? In United States a proposal in which the majority of extraordinary norms of security (as that of being able to intercept communications without judicial authorization) approved exceptionally as a result of the attacks of the towers, pass to be considered of normal character has been carried out. In the United Kingdom, Tony Blair, now, he has excuse to be able to implement the digital ID card with data biometrical, as in USA some months ago, but will it work?The society in which we live is imperfect, that we all know. But we also have to have the right to being able to choose, to make a mistake. During these years that the "world campaign against the terrorism" is going on, the results have not been too flattering. In the same way it is that we have to change strategy to fight the Islamic fundamentalism. Probably the problem we have it because from a beginning we set off of a conception different to the problem. What for us is a question of security and of direct attack against our system of life. For them it is a holy war in which, what do is to answer to the rough handling that is suffering the third world, more precisely the Arab world. But it can also be that those groups are turning into the liberators of a cause. A cause that is only an excuse to impose their way of fighting because of something. That fanaticism, and belief in an absolute truth it does them to be intolerable with the rest of beliefs and opinions and as child that it does not have more than the right of fit of ill temper, the terrorism is their way of proving their disagreement.
Although it can be said that the goal of the terrorists has been obtained, they have sown the terror between thousands and thousands of citizens, put in alert many governments and plans of security, with the consequent economic expense. But especially with the created insecurity, they favor more extreme reactions. This radicalization in the mode of behaviour of west still gives more legitimacy to what they are making. An end cannot survive without his opposed, for with it it's having its justified existence.Therefore, we do not have to arrive to the extremism and have to arrive to the situation that precisely they aim for. I do not want a society as that of "Minority Report" in which the administration knows everything, up to what it is going to pass. It is so pro-active that it acts before that the things happen, and consequently, the logical errors being produced.
We do not act as this a fight among cultural worlds, we do not try to defend ways of life to death, because we cannot. The cultural differences come from the isolation of the people and of their different evolutionary paths. In a world globalized, inter-connected and in which the distances have been reduced considerably, as we intend that not have mixtures and cultural influences. Until now we were adjacent, but we share flat from now on. The communal life is difficult, we do not have the clear norms and nobody wants to be sent by anybody. But we will have to learn to make it if we want to live...
All in all Security vs. Freedom
It is a clear problem of interoperability. Independent systems, every one trying to maintain its territory and without communication with the other one. All trying to preserve their identity. It has to be done that they are connected, that that they communicate and that that they work joint. As in the administration... Or not?
Technorati Tags: security e-government attacks terrorism Islamic+fundamentalism big+brother 1984 control identity interoperability London Barcelona United+States digital+ID+card