.A Phone in for Michael Medved

If you’ve read “1984” or have seen the movie you have no doubt felt the chill of being under the ever present, all-seeing eye of Big Brother. It is one of the most iconic images in all of modern literature. So you can understand my astonishment at radio host Michael Medved’s reaction to a certain caller last week. The caller brought up the issue of the closed circuit television cameras that are popping up in various places in the country to keep an eye on the general population. Medved’s response was a casual, ‘Oh, and what worries you about that? Great Britain has been using that system for years and has had great success with it in their efforts to prevent crime.’

To put it mildly I was dumbfounded. I’m sure that Michael has seen the movie version of “1984” if he has not read the book. How, then, could I possibly have heard what I thought I’d heard? Has he completely lost his mind?

I have begun to wonder lately about our intrepid yacker but since I still have some respect for his powers of reason I have given a good deal of thought to this issue. First I had to consider his side of it. To begin with I doubt that there is any truth in his impression that Great Britain’s People spy system has proven to be of any value in reducing crime or catching criminals. In my opinion the positive spin coming from Britain’s media on this issue is pure Socialist hype. A similar system has been in operation in Chicago for several years and I have yet to hear of a single authentic prevention of a crime or capture of a criminal attributable to these eyes in the sky. As a system for crime prevention it has been a 100% boondoggle up till now.

Still, (Michael might argue) the system may present some psychological deterrence for those who might be thinking about committing a crime. If so, the system might be worth the investment. And what do you have to lose? The system is intended to catch criminals and isn’t that a good thing? You’re not a criminal are you? (Did I capture his condescending tone?)

I’m not a criminal. So why is it that when I pass one of those spy cameras I feel like a criminal and I feel threatened? I had to think back on the book. What had Orwell written into his masterpiece that made those cameras seem so ominous? Was there an actual threat or had Orwell simply manufactured it for the reader’s imagination?

In a typical discussion on the subject of the Big Brother cameras most people will say that the drama centered on the fact that the main character, Winston Smith, had been deprived of his freedom and suffered from the oppression of being constantly under observation. But there was more than this. There was the implication coming directly from the cameras that Smith was an enemy of the State. By having thoughts that were forbidden by the State Smith was guilty of crimes punishable by death – and, in Orwell’s scenario, punishable by a fate worse than death.

As I travel the streets of my city and see one of these cameras pointing at me I don’t simply feel like someone is taking my picture. I feel like someone is pointing a gun at me – implying that I am a potential enemy of the State, and that on the whim of the State some drooling bureaucrat might pull the trigger. Do I sound paranoid?

American society has a distance to go before it reaches the tyrannical State that Orwell envisioned but not very much of a distance. The tools of absolute power are being put in place day by day. And I’m not just talking about cameras. I’m talking about laws that deprive us of freedom – even freedom of thought. Absurd laws are being put in place so that not a single citizen of this country can eat, sleep or breathe without breaking one of them. You can still buy cigarettes but just try to find a place to smoke them. You can still buy a “Big Mac” – but what about next week? Say, those French fries are potential health hazards you know. And can you even begin to imagine how many of our rights will be surrendered in the name of global warming? How long will it be before churches are forced to pull down their crosses or synagogues their stars because they offend? Laws like these and a thousand others like them are on their way and there will be cameras everywhere to make sure they are enforced. Not wearing your seat belt? You're under arrest, never to be seen again.

Do we need these laws? Do they serve any purpose for the citizenry? No! They serve the purposes of the State. Every citizen in an absolute tyranny is an enemy of the State and one of its drones. I predict that these spy cameras will not catch one in ten million civil crimes because they will not be looking for crimes against the People. They will be looking for crimes against the State.

So, Michael, you think being a law-abiding citizen protects you? What laws did 6 million Jews commit against Germany? What crimes were committed against the Nazis by 4 million Russians, 3 million Poles, tens of thousands of mental defects, Gypsies, Jehovah’s Witnesses…? Were a hundred million Chinese guilty of crimes against Mao? Are a couple million victims of Paul Pot, Saddam Hussein and Ho Chi Minh worth a mention? How much easier do we have to make it for the government to round us up?