Why you should be concerned about America’s surveillance state, even if you aren’t committing crimes

Glenn Greenwald has talked with many people who tell him that they haven't done anything wrong, so why should they be concerned about America's surveillance state? Here are the reasons: Those who wish to organize should have the right to do so away from the targets of the organization. If the government is listening in, this makes any type of activism "extremely difficult." It is exclusively in the private realm that creativity, dissent and challenges to orthodoxy. Only when you know that you can explore "without external judgment where you can experiment" and "create new paths." Psychological experiments verify this need for privacy; without it, people speak more stiffly. When you assume that you are being watched, your speech will be chilled and you will be encouraged to act in a conformist way. Third, surveillance creates a "pervasive climate of fear." It makes people afraid to speak candidly and meaningfully to other people in their same community. Greenwald (who admits that he has 11 dogs) draw on a dog example. Even when a fence is taken down, dogs are hesitant to go into a previously fenced-off area. The most insidious part of the surveillance state is that those who are being monitored are easily convinced that their limits, their conformity, is liberty and freedom. What can be done about this situation in the United States. There are things you can do to remove yourself from the "surveillance matrix." Some people have limited their economic interactions to cash transactions. There are way to communicate on the Internet that maintain anonymity (e.g., The Tor Project). It is important to educate yourself and others "beyond the prying eye of the United States government. For instance, you can educate yourself as to your rights when you have direct interactions with government officials; sources include Center for Constitutional Rights, National Coalition to Protect Civil Freedoms and the ACLU. To this list, I would add the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Forcible radical transparency is a way to take the offensive. That is why Greenwald (and I) support Wikileaks and Anonymous. Greenwald states, "I want walls to be blown in the wall of secrecy."

Continue ReadingWhy you should be concerned about America’s surveillance state, even if you aren’t committing crimes

American voters are now less apprehensive about atheists

For the first time since PEW tracked these voter attitudes, a majority of Americans say they would vote for an atheist. Hotair offers this explanation:

What you’re seeing here, I think, is the fruit of normalization: It’s not so much that people are becoming more sympathetic to atheism (although that might be true) than that, as atheists become more visible culturally, people see for themselves that we’re not that weird or threatening.

Continue ReadingAmerican voters are now less apprehensive about atheists

A few thoughts on Obamacare – more questions than answers.

I often wonder why the Republicans chose the name "Obamacare" in their attempts to ridicule Barack Obama's "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act." After all, the first half, "Obama," merely gives credit to the person who orchestrated the passage of the legislation and "care" is a benign word, even a pleasant word. Maybe they liked it better than the "Make the Rich Pay for Poor Children's Medical Treatment Act." Or maybe they thought that people hate "Obama" so much that just by saying his name it will make them angry. The bottom line is that it seems to be a lot like the phrase "Yankee Doodle," originally meant as an insult, but adopted and even embraced by the target of the taunt. Now that the new law has mostly survived, what does it mean for real-life Americans? There are many articles, like this one, that point out some things and make a few predictions, but no one seems to know the answers to two basic questions that are on my mind. What kind of insurance will ordinary Americans be able to purchase with regard to A) Quality of Care and B) Cost of Care? I'm not convinced that the new act has meaningful price controls on premiums or that the quality of care will be well-regulated. In fact, I will predict that the insurance companies will essentially take the following position: "Sure, you can have all of those new bells and whistles demanded by the Act, but you're going to need to pay for it." Here are some of those bells and whistles. And then the American public will likely not be witness to the intense behind-the-scenes lobbying that will result in 20% premium increases every year. I hope not, but I'm not optimistic. [More . . . ]

Continue ReadingA few thoughts on Obamacare – more questions than answers.

A criminal act by Congress: cutting the budget for Legal Services

Last week I attended the annual seminar my law firm (the Simon Law Firm) puts on for the benefit of Legal Services of Eastern Missouri. We've done this for almost ten years, and I'm proud to be part of a firm that has raised a total of more than $100,000 for the St. Louis office of Legal Services. What does Legal Services do for the folks it serves? The lawyers of Legal Services provide "high-quality legal assistance and equal access to justice to low-income people." Consider this:

Our lawyers provide counsel, advice and representation to clients in a variety of domestic cases including orders of protection, dissolution of marriage, modifications, paternity establishments and child custody cases. Other legal needs are addressed as well, sometimes by bringing the expertise of lawyers in other specialty practice areas like public benefits, housing or consumer.

Continue ReadingA criminal act by Congress: cutting the budget for Legal Services

Does college make people smarter?

College can be thoroughly educational experience. Many people who graduate college are much smarter compared to when they entered college, but this is not true for all of those graduate. An indictment of higher education came this year with a book, Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses, by Richard Arum of New York University and Josipa Roksa of the University of Virginia. As reported by the Washington Post, the authors of this book offer these stunning conclusions: ●Gains in critical thinking, complex reasoning and writing skills are either “exceedingly small or nonexistent for a larger proportion of students.” ●Thirty-six percent of students experience no significant improvement in learning (as measured by the Collegiate Learning Assessment) over four years of higher education.

Continue ReadingDoes college make people smarter?