Semantics?
Brown appears not to understand the concept of civil liberties. Quoth the OED on the term:
civil liberty n freedom of action and speech subject to laws established for the good of community
Legal bods could make the definition more nuanced - but that’s almost good enough. Civil liberties are what Berlin termed negative freedoms; ones which exist and cut down upon, not those created by the state.
Which is why Brown today insisted that:
Gordon Brown has defended the use of CCTV, ID cards and the DNA database - saying they protect civil liberties.
And, moving on to the speech:
“New technology is giving us modern means by which we can discharge these duties, but just as we need to employ these modern means to protect people from new threats, we must at the same time do more to guarantee our liberties,” he said.
“Facing these modern challenges, it is our duty to write a new chapter in our country’s story - one in which we both protect and promote our security and our liberty, two equally proud traditions.”
And so on. Notice what Brown’s missed, though: the fact that he wants to create liberty through state intervention. That doesn’t represent the negative freedom characterised by a lack of restraint typically associated with “civil liberties.”
The state can do a great deal to promote and protect liberties. Intervention isn’t in itself evil at all; the enabling state’s list of achievements is huge. But when the state itself becomes the danger to liberty - as it does with proposals to allow it to lock people up for 6 weeks without charge - then it can’t guard against oppression. Brown would do well to realise that…
Leave a Reply