Mark Steyn commented on the NSA controversy to say that,
“The same bureaucracy that takes the terror threat so seriously that it needs the phone and Internet records of hundreds of millions of law-abiding persons would never dream of doing a little more pre-screening in its immigration system — by, say, according a graduate of a Yemeni madrassah a little more scrutiny than a Slovene or Fijian. The president has unilaterally suspended the immigration laws of the United States, and his attorney general prosecutes those states such as Arizona who remain quaintly attached to them. The ID three of the 9/11 hijackers acquired in the 7-Eleven parking lot in Falls Church, Virginia and used to board the plane that day is part of a vast ongoing subversion of American sovereignty with which many states and so-called “sanctuary cities” actively collude.
Because the formal, visible state has been neutered by political correctness, the dark, furtive shadow state has to expand massively to make, in secret, the judgment calls that can no longer be made in public. That’s not an arrangement that is likely to end well.”
In a way that is the larger point here. A social breakdown can only be controlled by a police state that is applied across the board to everyone.
The TSA is just the most visible element on the kind of universal police state that will try and struggle to cope with the elephant in the room. If you think it’s bad in the US, it’s much worse in the UK, where surveillance of every kind is even more pervasive.
And all this is just a bigger/smaller version of what originally happened with inner cities where the problem couldn’t be focused or targeted, only hit with big broad spectrum solutions. These solutions went too far and violated too many rights, but they were so broad that no one could complain about discrimination.
Effective programs that are in any way suggestive of targeting get expanded and broadened to spread the pain creating a police state that harasses everyone to prove that no one is being discriminated against.
We have 3 tension points. Personal freedoms. Discrimination. Violence. Everyone has agreed that we can’t, at least officially, accept violence, whether it’s crime or terrorism. The elites have all agreed that we can’t accept discrimination. There’s only one more point that can give. And it’s personal freedoms.