I notice that the Devil’s Kitchen is becoming increasingly despairing of Neil Harding’s evermore illogical defence of the ID Cards Bill. Like DK, I have watched this debate and dipped my toe in from time to time. For the most part, though, I have avoided doing so simply because as DK has discovered, reasoning with the unreasonable is a self-defeating activity that leads to irritation, increasing levels of anger, high blood pressure and subsequent lethargy and a couldn’t-care-less despair. It just ain’t worth it. You can’t win – these people will argue that black is white no matter what. Mr Harding assures us, despite clear contemporaneous evidence to the contrary that government is to be trusted – indeed, his sycophantic blithering would be funny if he wasn’t so serious.
So, as I say, for the most part, I have ignored him. However, there was one little gem in among the dross that shone out like a diamond in a coal face. Not because it offered an explanation that he is right and we are wrong; rather that it demonstrates so conclusively why those of us who oppose the scheme are right to do so. During a discussion over at the NO2ID forum, Mr Harding made this comment:
"Our main difference is I actually can see no problem with the audit trail."
In that one small comment it is all there. Indeed, so startling is it, that it took me a moment to realise its significance. It was a mini "road to Damascus" moment for me. There, in one simple statement is an insight into the mindset of the ID cards proponents. This is a statement made by someone who appears to lack a moral compass. Most people will recoil from the idea of casually spying on others – there is something instinctively wrong about it. We might not vocalize it, but it is there. We know that it is immoral to invade the privacy of others without being told that it is inherently wrong. We just know. The people who want this scheme and who will administer it have no such qualms, they are an amoral army of drones who trust that what they are doing is for the best, for "efficiency" for the good of the all seeing, all pervading state and the state is right, benevolent, and our friend. That it seeks to remove one of our most elementary liberties is neither here nor there to these people. In the grand scheme of things, it is the state that matters, not we, the individuals. It would be easy to accuse the people who propose and support this scheme of being evil, but they aren’t evil. They sincerely believe that this is a good thing that will make the state more efficient. They simply lack the necessary moral judgement to realise that it is wrong in principle – that in a civilised society, we do not spy on our neighbours and the machinery of the state does not spy on its employer.
And why should this amoral army bother us? Data mining is already a thriving industry so what harm will a little more do? The audit trail will make matters worse. For government agencies suspicious of those who do not fit its profile of "normal" it will have at its disposal a powerful tool to profile and target malcontents who dare to question the role of the state. A similar picture will build up in the private sector as the unique key provides what is currently missing – a means of joining the disparate information into a cohesive whole. Expect more maildrops, nuisance calls and SPAM. Also, expect your insurance company to suddenly increase your premium as they have profiled you and determined that you are now an increased risk…
Welcome to Neu Labour’s brave new world.
Smashing article, and absolutely spot on. You’ve neatly articulated in just a few paragraphs exactly what the policy wonks are missing. One almost feels sorry for them – so detached from the reality on the street (or even in the home) that they can only look at society as a machine to be regulated and streamlined. The real tragedy is that it’s the party that was founded to represent ordinary working people that’s doing this.
All you have to do is name one specific aspect of your life that will be detrimentally affected by having ID cards. No-one has yet done this. Its alright saying we know this is wrong but if you can’t back that up it means nothing. People ‘knew’ the Earth was flat as far as they were concerned. We should challenge all our assumptions, if they can’t be backed with evidence we should jettison them.
”’Longrider replies: I could give you a list. Indeed, those contributing to the discussions over at NO2ID have given plenty. However, I’ll confine myself to this: Having to identify myself to those who have no business asking in the first place. Being required to submit my life details to a state database and being told who I am at the behest of government. Being unable to define my identity for myself and be anonymous, should I so wish, to reinvent myself should I so wish. To be a free citizen in my own country without having to prove who I am. It really is that simple. And, as has been pointed out to you by others – it is not those of us who object who should provide reasons why not, but you who want to tag us like cattle who must provide justification for why. You have yet to provide one justifiable reason why. Not one.”’
”’Your flat Earth analogy doesn’t hold up. It is another straw man. My piece sums up why not – it is pitiful that you cannot see why not, but as I said, you will argue that black is white ”ad infinitum”. If your masters get their way in parliament, it is up to those of us who value what we stand to lose to resist – and resist we will.”’
”’I will never submit to this insidious scheme. Ever.”’
”’I find it curious that you should preach to me about evidence. All the available evidence so far exposes this scheme for the sham that it is. If you value evidence, you will drop your support for this bill.”’