Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges
If, just a few years ago, Americans were told that they could be arrested, denied access to an attorney, held indefinitely and subjected to a secret trial where the defense was not allowed full access to the evidence which might convict them--if any American had been warned of this happening, they would have scoffed and replied, "not in America." Furthermore, that America would be in such a state that the people and, remarkably, the press as well, would fall silent and be afraid to criticize the government, for fear of being shouted down and perhaps even assaulted by their peers, would have sounded almost as far-fetched. And yet, here we are. And more alarmingly, most Americans actually approve of this state.
Most Americans approve because of two reasons: fear, and the confidence that "it will never be turned against me." The fear is easy to see in the wake of 9-11, although the fact remains that we have far less to fear than we think. First of all, it is not as if terrorism were just invented yesterday; we have faced this threat for a long time. And what many Americans miss is the fact that we are in no more danger of terrorism today then we were before 9-11. Terrorists could have flown planes into skyscrapers 30 years ago. Anthrax is nothing new. We even considered terrorists with nukes before last year, and knew it could happen.
We think there is more danger only because we tend to react more strongly to the spectacular. Just as many Americans are more afraid to fly than they are to drive a car despite the fact that planes are far safer, we are also more afraid of terrorism today than is warranted because we saw one terrifying act of it carried out so publicly. The fact, however, is that flying on an airplane even on 9-11 was still a safe proposition, in general terms: on any given day, there are more than 25,000 commercial flights in the U.S. alone, meaning that your chances of being on one of the hijacked flights on 9-11 were 1 in 6,250. Extend that to the length of a year and the odds rise to 2,281,250 to 1. If we count the number of total deaths on 9-11, not just those on the planes, against the population of the United States, the odds were around 940,000 to 1. Even if there is a 9-11 every year, you are still 13 times more likely to die in a car accident.
We are afraid of images, not reality. We fight laws to make cars more safe if it means we pay a few more dollars here and there; we face an increased risk of death on the road instead of driving a little more slowly or taking the trouble to be more conscientious about safety rules. We bridle and complain at laws requiring us to wear seat belts and put away our cell phones in the car. We could save the equivalent of at least a few 9-11's every year by taking that small extra bit of effort--but we do not. Yet we are ready and willing to sacrifice our most cherished freedoms for a far lesser danger?
Perhaps the reason why has to do with that confidence that it "won't happen to me." After all, I'm not a terrorist. I will never even be accused of being so much as a suspect (or, more insidiously, a "person of interest"). And the people they take away, they will certainly be bad people; we don't arrest and detain innocent people, after all.And it will make me safer.
There are a few flaws in this line of thinking. The most important is based upon the presumption that innocents are never arrested or convicted. In fact, it happens all the time, much more so in an atmosphere of fear and suspicion. We do our best to believe otherwise--which is why so many Americans accepted Bush's flawed argument that there is no evidence that even one innocent person has been executed by the government. With DNA exonerating so many on death row, and with no DNA identification technology available before the 90's, it is sheer idiocy to assume that innocents were never put to death. And with DNA evidence unavailable for the majority of cases even today, we can be certain that a similar percent of current executions are killing innocents as well. Similarly, to assume that innocent people are never arrested on suspicion of terrorism is a dangerous fallacy; you can be certain that there are innocents being imprisoned. And you are an innocent, remember?
Another flaw in this belief is the assumption that the excess of power now being exercised by the state (apparently to continue indefinitely) will never be abused. Authorities will never intentionally use these powers to harrass, to carry out vendettas, or to attack personal or political enemies, we presume. But authority has always been abused, and this will continue to be the case. Add to the equation a public that is afraid to speak out and the effect is magnified.
Will either error or corruption ever reach you? Does it matter? Should you allow this even if you are guaranteed that you, personally, will never fall to such a fate? Are you willing to sacrifice the freedom, liberty, and even lives of innocent people so long as your hide is a bit safer?
There's a word for people who act in that manner: cowards.
It was said so eloquently by the Pastor Martin Niemoller: "In Germany they first came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. And then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up."
Most of us know that haunting story, but fewer of us remember what he said next: "To make sure this does not happen again, the injustice to anyone anywhere must be the concern of everyone everywhere."
We have forgotten that part. The most important part. How to avoid repeating the errors of the past.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. \ Benjamin FranklinFunny how I don't remember any famous stories or quotes which essentially say, "It is better to sacrifice your freedoms and punish innocents than to face a threat to your safety."
Oh, no, wait--I do remember a saying like that. I believe it went:
"Throw him to the wolves, and maybe they won't eat us."
Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges: "In Times of War, the Law Falls Silent" -- Cicero