Vineland echoes: Is America a Police State?

Is America a Police State?
by Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX)
June 29, 2002

[...]

But, Mr. Speaker, my subject today is whether America is a police state.
I'm sure the large majority of Americans would answer this in the negative.
Most would associate military patrols, martial law and summary executions
with a police state, something obviously not present in our everyday
activities. However, those with knowledge of Ruby Ridge, Mount Carmel and
other such incidents may have a different opinion.

The principal tool for sustaining a police state, even the most militant,
is always economic control and punishment by denying disobedient citizens
such things as jobs or places to live, and by levying fines and
imprisonment. The military is more often used in the transition phase to a
totalitarian state. Maintenance for long periods is usually accomplished
through economic controls on commercial transactions, the use of all
property, and political dissent. Peaceful control through these efforts can
be achieved without storm troopers on our street corners.

Terror and fear are used to achieve complacency and obedience, especially
when citizens are deluded into believing they are still a free people. The
changes, they are assured, will be minimal, short-lived, and necessary,
such as those that occur in times of a declared war. Under these
conditions, most citizens believe that once the war is won, the
restrictions on their liberties will be reversed. For the most part,
however, after a declared war is over, the return to normalcy is never
complete. In an undeclared war, without a precise enemy and therefore no
precise ending, returning to normalcy can prove illusory.

[...]

But what about here in the United States? With respect to a police state,
where are we and where are we going?

Let me make a few observations:

Our government already keeps close tabs on just about everything we do and
requires official permission for nearly all of our activities.

One might take a look at our Capitol for any evidence of a police state. We
see: barricades, metal detectors, police, military soldiers at times, dogs,
ID badges required for every move, vehicles checked at airports and
throughout the Capitol. The people are totally disarmed, except for the
police and the criminals. But worse yet, surveillance cameras in Washington
are everywhere to ensure our safety.

The terrorist attacks only provided the cover for the do-gooders who have
been planning for a long time before last September to monitor us "for our
own good." Cameras are used to spy on our drug habits, on our kids at
school, on subway travelers, and on visitors to every government building
or park. There's not much evidence of an open society in Washington, DC,
yet most folks do not complain - anything goes if it's for
government-provided safety and security.

If this huge amount of information and technology is placed in the hands of
the government to catch the bad guys, one naturally asks, What's the big
deal? But it should be a big deal, because it eliminates the enjoyment of
privacy that a free society holds dear. The personal information of
law-abiding citizens can be used for reasons other than safety - including
political reasons. Like gun control, people control hurts law-abiding
citizens much more than the law-breakers.

Social Security numbers are used to monitor our daily activities. The
numbers are given at birth, and then are needed when we die and for
everything in between. This allows government record keeping of monstrous
proportions, and accommodates the thugs who would steal others' identities
for criminal purposes. This invasion of privacy has been compounded by the
technology now available to those in government who enjoy monitoring and
directing the activities of others. Loss of personal privacy was a major
problem long before 9/11.

Centralized control and regulations are required in a police state.
Community and individual state regulations are not as threatening as the
monolith of rules and regulations written by Congress and the federal
bureaucracy. Law and order has been federalized in many ways and we are
moving inexorably in that direction.

Almost all of our economic activities depend upon receiving the proper
permits from the federal government. Transactions involving guns, food,
medicine, smoking, drinking, hiring, firing, wages, politically correct
speech, land use, fishing, hunting, buying a house, business mergers and
acquisitions, selling stocks and bonds, and farming all require approval
and strict regulation from our federal government. If this is not done
properly and in a timely fashion, economic penalties and even imprisonment
are likely consequences.

[...]

Personal privacy, the sine qua non of liberty, no longer exists in the
United States. Ruthless and abusive use of all this information accumulated
by the government is yet to come. The Patriot Act has given unbelievable
power to listen, read, and monitor all our transactions without a search
warrant being issued after affirmation of probably cause. "Sneak and peak"
and blanket searches are now becoming more frequent every day. What have we
allowed to happen to the 4th amendment?


[...] continues at:

http://www.antiwar.com/paul/paul35.html