A day to day acount of the whacky and wonderful world of Muggaz - i tend to be having too much fun these days, and often cannot remember moments due to debauchery - its time the internet repayed my loyalty by recording my antics.
State before Self?
Published on September 1, 2004 By Muggaz In Politics
The fervour of the Olympics have died down, the patriotism of those countries that did well have not. Over the last few days, I have no doubt that I love my country, and the reasons I love my country are for all to see – however there are plenty of reasons why I should always question those that lead my country, and I will refuse to be blinded by patriotism.

Collectively, Australia is a spirited nation, depicted by the surf, sun and sand – laid back and care free, however we have the dark spectre of our colonial past, with various act’s committed by previous governments that should be, and are, held in contempt. The thing I love about Australia is that we can admit these grievances occurred, and as a nation, we are always moving forward. While cooperatively we are interested in the development of our nation, there will always be that sense of self which is evident in any western culture – self improvement and individualism, personal development, no matter your class, creed, or race.

This brings me to my next point. It’s a big one, and certainly open to interpretation, as the written word always is – my greif is with the P-P-P-Patriot act of the United States of America. Traditionally, I would argue when it comes to patriotism, no one loves their country more than the average American citizen. Australians love their country, but you don’t see flags posted out the front of every second house, and we don’t have figures or gimmicks if you will, like Uncle Sam – well, the boxing Kangaroo can be classed as a gimmick, but the boxing Kangaroo doesn’t need YOU for war – if you know what I mean.

The Patriot act walks all over everything Americans hold dear about their great country – home of the brave and land of the ‘free.’ From the moment an American is born, they are watched by the hawks, or bald eagles, whichever you want to say, I know it’s easy from the outside looking in, but the whole notion of American patriotism appears very authoritarian to me – a state before self if you will.

I am fortunate to know many Americans, some I hold dear, and some not so dear, but the simple fact of the matter is, in America’s eyes, the Patriot act is a good thing because essentially it was created to protect civilians from horrific events such as 9/11 – this tells me a lot about the average American – as long as their personal rights aren’t infringed upon, they don’t really care about the rights of others.

Americans are always having cracks at the French for their justice system, cheesy odours, whatever. In France, you are guilty until proven innocent. The USA is held in high esteem for the free and choice filled image it conveys, however, the rights and freedoms that so many US troops are dying for are being infringed upon with this Patriot act – suspicion should not be enough to invoke the act, hence rendering the liberties Americans hold dear useless.

America is regarded as the leader of the free world, this was true to me before the Patriot act, however, now I am not so sure. With the state before self ideology, the general American is happy with the Patriot act – the average American has nothing to hide from the government, besides, it would be futile as the government has been watching since birth anyway – immigrants come to America for the right to be treated as a normal person, they take American citizenship so they too can enjoy the rights Americans ‘enjoy’. These rights no longer seem attractive.

The Americans aren’t entirely to blame for the Patriot act though – it’s unfortunate that people like the 9/11 hijackers utilised these civil liberties, and used them to spit in the face of America – but when America takes these liberties away based on suspicion, the entire American value system is brought into question. It’s ironic that it is called the patriot act – Americans are patriotic because their country is great – there are only a few countries in the world where you can make yourself with hard work, where you have the liberties to do and say what you want – America is one of these countries, or was one of these countries, until they were attacked because of the very values they are destroying.

Its hard for me to see where America will head towards in the next few years – what their social conscience will say in the back of their heads, based on what I know of America, granted, it may be not so much, though, I do see Americans following their commander and chief just because of the office he represents. It is my honest opinion that America has a problem with personal integrity going out the window because the president says it’s ok – respect the office, not the man, all that kind of talk. The president of the United States of America should command tremendous respect – when the office represents traditional American values of the family and fair go.

Maybe if Australia was attacked in the same fashion, our government would try to try and pass a similar act through our senate, however, I believe such an act would not get of the ground based on the traditional Australian values of giving everyone a fair chance, and you truly are innocent until proven guilty. Australians need to protect their interests by maintaining our national identity, and to maintain out national identity, we need to be consistent with our personal identities – Australia is a beautiful and great country, but my integrity will always come before my countries, and hopefully that holds true for our population, we wont be blindly led by the red white and blue of any flag, state before self sounds like a policy from authoritarian China – there are bad people everywhere in the world, but when you stop trusting the good on their account, it’s an inevitable decline in all that countries like America are perceived to represent.

BAM!!!

Comments (Page 1)
7 Pages1 2 3  Last
on Sep 01, 2004

Kerry voted for the Patriot act. And while people, not familiar with the Patriot act, try to make it out to be some boogeyman act, it hasn't changed our freedoms.

Our freedom of speech, right of assembly, etc. haven't been affected. In fact, I would challenge you to put forth some specific "bad things" about the Patriot act. It's been in effect for awhile now, so surely, if it's the boogeyman you should be able to come up with some good examples.

on Sep 01, 2004
Kerry voted for the Patriot act. And while people, not familiar with the Patriot act, try to make it out to be some boogeyman act, it hasn't changed our freedoms.


I dont care who voted for it - it's bad.

It is my understanding if someone is suspected of terrorism - the authorities have access to all private records - all of them... you dont see that as a bad thing? that's the difference between you and me...

BAM!!!
on Sep 01, 2004
the PATRIOT Act:

• Allows the FBI to obtain individuals' medical, mental health, financial, educational, bank
and library records without showing probable cause
• Prevents libraries, hospitals, internet service providers and other institutions from
informing clients that private records have been released
• Expands the FBI's powers of internet and phone surveillance
• Permits the Attorney General and the Secretary of State to designate domestic groups, including religious and political organizations, as terrorist organizations. Based on this provision, organizations engaging in political advocacy may be subject to surveillance, wiretapping, harassment and criminal action
• Authorizes eavesdropping on confidential communications between lawyers and their clients in federal custody
• The law allows law enforcement agencies to obtain a warrant and search a residence without immediately informing the occupants if the Attorney General has determined this to be an issue of national security.
• Finally, the act also allows intelligence gathering at religious events.

BAD.

Link

BAM!!!!

on Sep 01, 2004
Our freedom of speech, right of assembly, etc. haven't been affected. In fact, I would challenge you to put forth some specific "bad things" about the Patriot act. It's been in effect for awhile now, so surely, if it's the boogeyman you should be able to come up with some good examples.


I can come up with some good examples, although they happen to be more about inconveniences than about serious civil rights issues; I will admit to that. The most prominent situation that I experienced was cleared up with a very brief conversation with the captain of the local police department. The biggest fear, I think, is the potential for abuse...through wiretaps, etc.
on Sep 01, 2004
It is really a pity...you like most other americans just can't see what is happening....

Read 1984....Orwell has a very good description....

Peace my friend....

an Ex Pat.

on Sep 02, 2004
without showing probable cause


In other words, America will be removing the word 'privacy' from all new editions of dictionaries shipped across the country....
on Sep 02, 2004
knee-jerk, rhetoric-soaked... I could go on for hours.

Don't you find it odd that when someone passes a law that threatens abortion rights they get it overturned in a matter of days or weeks, and yet the big, scary Patriot Act has been floating around drawing hateful diatribe and it has barely been challenged?

Another funny part is that most of our "progressive" allies in Europe and elsewhere already have powers like this. Many of these powers were already available to law enforcement in the US, but were stated in ambiguous ways. The Patriot Act just made the definitions more concrete.

In the end, you can sit and talk about the law in broad terms all you like, but frankly no one is making an argument to the American people about legitimate, tangible wrongs. Instead, we get pages of teary-eyed descriptions abou the end of freedom as we know it. When you show people what the ACLU's main gripes are, many say "Huh? I thought they had always been able to do that..."

The above article is like almost every other argument I see about the Patriot Act. A great deal of imagery and poetic allusion, and very, very little in the way of tangible threat.
on Sep 02, 2004
Don't you find it odd that when someone passes a law that threatens abortion rights they get it overturned in a matter of days or weeks, and yet the big, scary Patriot Act has been floating around drawing hateful diatribe and it has barely been challenged?


Are you saying that acts regarding abortion rights aren't challenged? I dont think that's what you meant - ideally, every act should be challenged.

Of course the Patriot act is no threat to me, I am not a United States Citizen - and people have been stating that authorities have had these powers, and they have been watching US citizens all along, that the Patriot act makes it more concrete...

That doesn't make it right.

Europe, whatever, We dont have anything like it in Australia, and I imagine the Australian citizens are smart enough to keep it that way... Big Brother can't control everything, and a free people is a happy people - I hope and pray you never come under the scrutiny of the Patriot act - I know you never would, but I imagine you would feel quite violated if that was the case.

The USA shouldn't use the term 'freedom' so loosely, thats all I am saying.

BAM!!!
on Sep 02, 2004
Don't have anything like it in the UK either, though the new stop and search rules are already been abused and challenged.

To be honest though, if US citizens are happy with giving up freedoms in certain cases then fine. It's their right, just as it's their right to want to own guns, just as it's French citizens rights to ban religious symbolism in schools.

Nothing undemocratic with any of this. Sure there is always a risk that giving too much power to the state could lead to a police state, but maybe the US citizen want that, and again if they did that's their right! It's a fairly small risk anyway.

Paul.
on Sep 02, 2004
Bakerstreet,
A quick check reveals nothing like these laws in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Luxemburg, Belguim, Portugal, Ireland, The Netherlands, Denmark, ... ...

No country in the EU has any laws like this as they get challenged in the European courts and removed for contravening the European Convention on Human Rights. Even the current new British anti-terrorism laws are already being reviewed as potentially too strong, and they don't go a fraction as far as the Patriot Act.

Paul.
on Sep 02, 2004
You can count the slate of senators who voted against it with one hand.
on Sep 02, 2004
RATM4EVA, just because people vote for a law doesn't mean it is a good law. Prohibition?

The thing I hate about the Patriot Act is the concept you can invade people's privacy if you have suspicion they will commit a crime. It used to be you could invade privacy if you had suspicion they had committed a crime. Slippery slope.
on Sep 02, 2004
RATM4EVA, just because people vote for a law doesn't mean it is a good law. Prohibition?


I think rage against the machine 4 eva was saying how it's a bad thing

Suspicion is open to interpretation, proof is not...

BAM!!!
on Sep 02, 2004
I think an interesting question is, how do the freedom's of countries like Australia, the UK, and France stack up to the US (with the Patriot Act).

Allows the FBI to obtain individuals' medical, mental health, financial, educational, bankand library records without showing probable cause


What are the standards in Australia, UK, and other countries for accessing these records?
on Sep 02, 2004
In Germany a person is Guilty until proven innocent. It may not be a Patriot Act, but I think that goes a long way down that slope.
7 Pages1 2 3  Last