When our responses are as predictable to our enemies as clockwork and when they exact a price from the freedom of our own citizens, we should ask hard questions about the bridges we are buying. Many people are willing to endorse “tough” tactics because of their toughness without particular regard to whether a consensus exists on their effectiveness. This can be seen most vividly in the American debate over torture, where tough-talking rhetoricians often attempt to steamroll any and all questions about efficacy or ethics. Making moral compromises is a dangerous business under any circumstances, and all the more so when the profit from those compromises is unclear at best. For politicians seeking job security, visibly tough policies may be more attractive than those that are simply effective. Tough policies are not necessarily ineffective, of course, but policies designed to address identifiable problems are more likely to succeed than those designed to send a message. The new regimen of laws and proposed laws in response to the related problems of foreign fighters and homegrown lone wolves are certainly less extreme than torture, but they still need to be tested. Trading liberty for security is, as Ben Franklin famously noted, a dicey proposition to start with. If you’re going to even consider the trade, you had better be sure you will get the security you crave.
Posted on: Sat, 17 Jan 2015 00:26:32 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015