You started this course by answering a survey worksheet asking for your thoughts on various technologies and providing a breakdown of your overall thoughts on surveillance, the internet, GPS, etc. Since that time, you have completed many different assignments, and discussions. You have delved into your own mobile activities, your uniqueness online, your personal information’s availability online, and many discussions. You have even argued for or against the idea of a surveillance state.
Now, you are being asked to do a second personal reflection. You are to write a 4-6 page wrap-up of your thoughts today versus eight weeks ago. Be truthful with yourself and be truthful in your writing. Below are just a few questions you are going to want to make sure you address in your wrap-up. Refer back to your initial worksheet before beginning and specifically address the following:
What privacy concerns do you have now that you did not have eight weeks ago?
What changes have you made or are you making to your daily activities going forward?
What is your comfort level with your continued use of technology? I.e. are you altering your social media presence or lessening the time spent on your mobile devices?
Finally, do you feel that current laws are sufficient, overly strict, or too loose with regards to protecting your digital self?
1
The Dangers of a Surveillance State: Ethical and Legal Considerations
Student’s Name Garlin Saintice
Course :Stem470 B002
Date : 2024/23/10
2
The Dangers of a Surveillance State: Ethical and Legal Considerations
In the last few years, there has been an increasing concern on the topic of the
surveillance state, especially at a time when insecurity and crime are on the rise.
Governments worldwide have raised the stakes on these events, calling for massive data
collection, people scrutiny, and the decline of privacy rights. Those who support the
surveillance state argue that such measures are necessary to protect society; however,
expanding surveillance raises ethical, legal, and social issues. Regarding the topic of a
surveillance state, this essay argues against its implementation due to the violation of
civil liberties, violation of ethical norms, and legal concerns that are not compatible with
democracy.
Surveillance Society: Ethical Considerations
In regards to ethical questions, the first major question refers to the infringement
of privacy as a fundamental human right, which cannot be denied by creating a
surveillance society. This fear of being watched results in the eradication of personal
freedoms and rights of the citizens, as they cannot indulge in their freedoms knowing that
they are being monitored. This chilling effect on behavior stifles the soul, talent, voice,
and the protection of rights and liberties. In the words of Michel Foucault, the idea of
surveillance is meant to ensure social control, in which individuals behave appropriately
because they assume that their actions are being monitored. This behavioral modification
is ethical because it prevents personality development and freedom of expression, which
are crucial values for any working democracy.
Moreover, the pro-arguments used by utilitarian surveillance states are that
surveillance is for the general welfare of society and fails to consider how the oppressed
3
groups feel the brunt of the surveillance. The use of surveillance technologies is a tool for
the persecution of certain groups of people, such as people of color or activists, which
only adds to the oppression. Therefore, employing surveillance in this way is ambiguous
from the perspective of ethicality, fairness, justice, and decency. For instance,
surveillance features such as facial recognition technology in the United States were
found to have problems such as racially profiling people of color, with some of them
being arrested or otherwise subjected to injustice. However, it is essential to emphasize
that these discriminative practices are not only ethically objectionable but also
counterproductive, which runs counter to the aim of achieving safety through
surveillance.
The other ethical dilemma is the potential for exploitation by the authorities. In a
surveillance state, there is a huge database of people's data collected by the government
or any other interested parties, who can then use this data to control them politically or
economically. Indeed, experience has revealed that governments employ surveillance to
suppress opposition, remove liberties, and establish control over the populace. The ethical
problem in this case pertains to surveillance as it creates scenarios of abuse and
corruption that are detrimental to the society's bond with the government. It is very
difficult to build trust once it has been violated, and the aftermath of such a situation
negatively impacts the country's social fabric.
Legal Ramifications of a Surveillance Society
Surveillance also poses legal questions in constitutional and human rights law.
Democratic countries offer protection for privacy both in domestic laws and international
human rights instruments. For example, Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of
4
Human Rights stipulates that "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his
privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation
(Chin-Rothmann, 2023)." Likewise, the Fourth Amendment also grants the country's
citizens the right not to be subjected to unreasonable searches and seizures (United States
Courts, 2024). These legal measures check the state's power and ensure that the rights of
the people are protected. However, in a surveillance state, such measures are typically
lacking or disregarded as the authorities justify their violation of privacy in the name of
security.
An example of this legal degradation can be seen after the September 11, 2001,
terrorist attack when the U.S. government enacted the USA PATRIOT Act. This
legislation also allowed the government to listen to phone calls, read emails, and monitor
other forms of communication of individuals without any probable cause that the person
being monitored was involved in a crime or without a warrant (American Civil Liberties
Union, 2024). As the act intended to improve the national security standard, it raised
some significant legal issues concerning security and privacy. Another significant
example of legal regulation can be mentioned in the American Second Circuit Court of
the United States case in 2015; the mass surveillance program conducted within the
framework of the PATRIOT Act contradicted the Constitution and, in particular, the
Fourth Amendment (American Civil Liberties Union, 2024). This ruling shows that while
surveillance is all about observing people and their activities, the rule of law is something
else and cannot co-exist with surveillance, especially not as demonstrated in this case.
However, the stigma of the surveillance state is not devoid of constitutional
ramifications like the channels of due process. It is quite evident that most surveillance
5
programs are covert, and people cannot question their surveillance or even seek legal
remedies for infringement of their rights. Since these programs are not closely monitored
and do not have checks and balances, the government can act irresponsibly and
undemocratically. Such negligence and lack of accountability diminish the authority of
law and the citizens' confidence in their government and the system.
The Social Impact of Surveillance
Beyond the ethical and legal ramifications, it has social repercussions. First, it
challenges the freedom of speech and citizens' engagement in the political process
(Murray et al., 2023). This would mean that people are inclined to self-censor when they
believe they are being watched when using or invoking their rights or any other liberty.
This chilling effect is particularly pernicious in a democracy, as it stifles citizens' dissent
and demands for better governance.
Moreover, it conceals the nature of the society in which people exist and creates a
hostile environment where people begin to view others as foes. Therefore, it is possible to
conclude that implementing trust-gap strategies to undermine social trust can lead to
long-lasting negative social consequences regarding solidarity and well-being for society.
It can also limit how people interact and their liberties to attend social functions, thus
negating their freedom and social inclusion.
Besides, it can even cause the aggravation of social status differences and the
stimulation of social injustice. Therefore, it is possible to conclude that surveillance
programs are more effective for certain categories of the population and that this leads to
discrimination and stigmatization of such categories (Sekalala et al., 2020). This type of
targeting in terms of exercising power over the targeted groups thus strengthens the
6
domination relations (Sekalala et al., 2020). Consequently, it cancels any progressive
change or justice orientation for the oppressed groups. Therefore, the surveillance state is
not a violation of the rights of privacy but is also in support of justice for all, regardless
of their status.
The Threat to Democratic Values
Surveillance as a way of invading the privacy of an individual is one way of
violating the basic principles of any democracy (Murray et al., 2023). Democracy is,
therefore, characterized by openness, leaders being held accountable by the people, and
individual freedoms. However, through discretion, authoritarianism, and the limitation of
individual rights, the surveillance state undermines these values. This mostly applies in a
democracy where the citizens are supposed to be in charge of their government through
their vote and not vice versa. However, it is quite the opposite in a surveillance state, as
the government can monitor its citizens in ways that go unnoticed most of the time.
This power shift is not only a threat to the future of the democracies but also to
the citizens of America. When people feel that they are under surveillance, they are likely
to develop a sense of distrust, thereby discouraging them from exercising their
democratic rights, such as voting and demonstrating, among others. In the long run, this
could lead to a situation where the government is in place, though it does not have to
answer to the people as required in a democracy.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the idea of a surveillance state may be viewed as ambiguous in
many aspects and contemplating the ethical, legal, and social implications infringing
upon democratic principles. The infringement of individual privacy, the possibility of
7
abuse by authorities, and the weakening of constitutional provisions are clear grounds for
not allowing societal surveillance. In addition, the social impacts of surveillance,
primarily the repression of freedom of speech and participation in civil processes, are
undemocratic by nature. That is why the surveillance state has to be rejected in favor of
the security and freedom policies that will keep democratic values intact even with
complex technologies and threats.
8
References
American Civil Liberties Union. (2024). Surveillance Under the Patriot Act. American
Civil Liberties Union. https://www.aclu.org/issues/national-security/privacy-and-
surveillance/surveillance-under-patriot-act
Chin-Rothmann, C. (2023). The Right to Be Left Alone: Privacy in a Rapidly Changing
World. Www.csis.org. https://www.csis.org/analysis/right-be-left-alone-privacy-
rapidly-changing-world
Murray, D., Fussey, P., Hove, K., Wakabi, W., Kimumwe, P., Saki, O., & Stevens, A.
(2023). The Chilling Effects of Surveillance and Human Rights: Insights from
Qualitative Research in Uganda and Zimbabwe. Journal of Human Rights
Practice, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad020
Sekalala, S., Dagron, S., Forman, L., & Meier, B. M. (2020). Analyzing the Human
Rights Impact of Increased Digital Public Health Surveillance during the COVID-
19 Crisis. Health and Human Rights, 22(2), 7–20.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7762901/
United States Courts. (2024). What Does the Fourth Amendment Mean? United States
Courts. https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-
resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/what-does-0