“Citizenfour” (2014)

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • bigburner
    Super Senior Member
    • May 2005
    • 2649

    “Citizenfour” (2014)

    This documentary, directed by Laura Poitras, covers her visit to Hong Kong in 2013 to meet a whistle blower called “citizen four” who turns out to be the infamous Edward Snowden. She filmed her encounter with Snowden and the results are riveting. I was on the edge of my seat for much of the film, just as I would have been for a fictional spy thriller.

    Regardless of whether you think Snowden is a patriot or a traitor no-one can deny the fact that we now live in a mass surveillance society. I think our Western governments want us to vigorously debate the rights or wrongs of Snowden’s behaviour because it distracts us from seeing the elephant in the room, i.e. that mass surveillance is now taking place.

    Normally at this point someone says “if you haven’t done anything wrong then you don’t have anything to worry about”. This argument has merit given the relatively benign Western governments that currently govern us, but what happens if the next government or the one after that is much less benign? What if they put democracy on hold for some manufactured reason, e.g. a security crisis that makes a free and fair election impossible? We the citizens of our Western countries will be powerless to oppose our new dictatorial governments. Our every contact with other humans will be monitored, making it impossible for us to organise opposition.

    As a teenager in the 1960s and a young man in the 1970s I grew up in a world where we protested if we saw that a wrong in society needed to be righted. We observed what mass surveillance did to the repressed peoples of the Soviet Union and its subservient allies and we were grateful that we lived in the free world. 50 years later we are going down the same road as the Soviet Union and the protestors are thin on the ground and have very small voices. George Orwell’s “1984” is happening; he just got the date a bit wrong.

    For these reasons I am greatly in favour of films like “Citizenfour”. They provide food for thought, even if the majority of the population is only interested in nutrition-free takeaways.

    Nigel.

    PS. You may be interested to know that my country New Zealand, as a member of the “Five Eyes”, is a significant contributor to mass surveillance. You can read about Five Eyes here.
    Attached Files
  • Chris D
    Moderator Emeritus
    • Dec 2000
    • 16877

    #2
    Interesting, Nigel.

    Originally posted by bigburner
    Normally at this point someone says “if you haven’t done anything wrong then you don’t have anything to worry about”. This argument has merit given the relatively benign Western governments that currently govern us...
    I'd disagree with those who argue thusly. Not doing anything wrong doesn't require citizens to surrender privacy. On the contrary, right to privacy, and personal rights are surrendered only when people violate the law, and even then, the burden is upon the state to show just cause for needing to infringe upon those rights of that individual.

    The government who requires that its citizenry abdicate their rights in order to secure the preservation of the state itself, is a state toying with tyranny
    CHRIS

    Well, we're safe for now. Thank goodness we're in a bowling alley.
    - Pleasantville

    Comment

    • Ovation
      Super Senior Member
      • Sep 2004
      • 2202

      #3
      I'm sad to report that privacy as it has been understood in western cultures in the past two, two and a half centuries, is fated to be a passing fad of history (fads of history tend to be longer lasting than those of fashion, but are no less temporary in the end). The concept of individual autonomy and a right to privacy has not been the norm of human existence and with the combination of technology that ceaselessly erodes privacy, combined with the (in my view, asinine) tendencies of people to willingly share the most intimate details of their personal lives on social media (and, as a precursor, on the Maury Povich/Dr. Phil-style TV shows) renders the maintenance of privacy doomed. I suppose a determined hermit, living off the grid, could maintain privacy, but that scenario is never going to become widespread. The only real chance of privacy surviving as we know it would be the overdue gigantic solar flare that would have the unfortunate side effect of killing all our electronic infrastructure (beyond that currently used to erode our privacy), sending us back to the technological level of the mid-to-late 19th century. Even then, it would be a temporary respite. We would not forget, collectively, how to make electronic devices and the cycle would re-emerge. I'm not suggesting we should abandon attempts to protect our privacy, but as an historian, I've studied far too many long-term trends not recognize the relatively fleeting nature of most social concepts, including privacy.

      Comment

      • madmac
        Moderator Emeritus
        • Aug 2010
        • 3122

        #4
        I for one agree with the term "If you've done or are doing nothing wrong, or not planning on doing something wrong" you have nothing to worry about". People give themselves and their so called privacy way too much importance nowadays. The truth is, nobody cares what your doing honestly!. I am willing to give up some of my privacy to stop terrorism. How much is subject to debate but the new World that we live in and what terrorists are doing and planning MUST be stopped. I do not want to get a call from the police telling me that my daughter is dead from a school or mall shooting, or that her bus got blown up by a terrorist. If these acts can be avoided by me giving up some of my so called 'privacy'..........then so be it.

        I understand that my opinion is in the minority judging by what I read on social media but if the 'authorities' want to probe my emails or my cell phone activity as well as those of a potential terrorist and stop a massacre, then I am fine with that. Sorry!
        Dan Madden :T

        Comment

        • wkhanna
          Grumpy Old Super Moderator Emeritus
          • Jan 2006
          • 5673

          #5
          Originally posted by Chris D

          The government who requires that its citizenry abdicate their rights in order to secure the preservation of the state itself, is a state toying with tyranny
          And herein lay the conundrum of the US government's reaction to 911 & the resulting ironically named Patriot Act legislation.
          _


          Bill

          Practicing Curmudgeon & Audio Snob
          ....just an "ON" switch, Please!

          FinleyAudio

          Comment

          Working...
          😀
          😂
          🥰
          😘
          🤢
          😎
          😞
          😡
          👍
          👎
          Searching...Please wait.
          An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because you have logged in since the previous page was loaded.

          Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
          An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because the token has expired.

          Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
          An internal error has occurred and the module cannot be displayed.
          There are no results that meet this criteria.
          Search Result for "|||"