If you have nothing to hide, should you be worried about the increasing surveillance state?
Well, yes, according to a letter by French libertarian writer Pierre Lemieux for today's Laissez-Faire Today article.
I recommend that you read this interesting letter.
I particularly liked the way that Lemieux dealt with why the state should have as little information as possible: "The first reason why private information should remain private is that the state — the whole apparatus of government, all branches, all levels — has an incentive to use your information against you. There, as elsewhere, incentives matter." And not only that, lack of information "is a useful constraint on government action. The less the state knows about individuals and their associations (including their business corporations), the less it is able to enforce its laws and regulations that are detrimental to liberty and prosperity."
Well, yes, according to a letter by French libertarian writer Pierre Lemieux for today's Laissez-Faire Today article.
I recommend that you read this interesting letter.
I particularly liked the way that Lemieux dealt with why the state should have as little information as possible: "The first reason why private information should remain private is that the state — the whole apparatus of government, all branches, all levels — has an incentive to use your information against you. There, as elsewhere, incentives matter." And not only that, lack of information "is a useful constraint on government action. The less the state knows about individuals and their associations (including their business corporations), the less it is able to enforce its laws and regulations that are detrimental to liberty and prosperity."
No comments:
Post a Comment