Wednesday, January 31, 2007

Libertarians: Amish of the Future?

A couple of days ago, I was watching "2057" on The Discovery Channel, a program looking at life fifty years from now, and wondering; where privacy will be in the future. It was mentioned a few times on the show, but only in passing. Will libertarians be left out of the future wonders if we do not accept the all-seeing state? Will we be the Amish of the future? Will we, will liberty, become obsolete? That is a scary thought. Or will the world be divided into the urban areas of great technology, but zero privacy, and rural areas of greater privacy, but less tech? Perhaps the liberty lovers will be expected to put up with the intrusive state, and pay for it, but will not get any benefit because we won't or can't pay for it. We are already viewed as paranoiacs just because we can see the drawbacks of giving up liberty for (false) security. We are already being marginalized because we don't ask for permission to do the things we know we have an inborn right to do. Try explaining to some state sympathizer why you have no "driver's license". Try to retain a bit of privacy when you open a bank account. Imagine how much harder it will be in the future. It will be hard, but we must never give up. It will be easier to hold onto what we have, than to try to get it back if we give in now.

Then again, government meddling has kept all the wondrous things that were predicted fifty years ago from coming to pass, maybe it will prevent this too. It's too bad. I would really like a flying car, even if I balk at government "requiring" a license and registration for using one.


  1. Stupid question time,

    How would money laundering be prevented if banks couldn't ask you for information when opening an account?

  2. Who is the victim in "money laundering" and why should it be prevented?