Wednesday, August 09, 2006

No2IDeas (part 1)

i expect that readers of this blog will be relatively aware about the government's proposed identity card and national identity register (NIR) scheme. you will also, no doubt, be aware that there are various campaigns that have sprung up in opposition to the proposals, the most prominent being No2ID. perhaps unbeknownst to you is the reality that No2ID is largely organised and run by the so-called libertarian right. the anarchist anti-id card network is called defy-id, and whilst it does not boast the support of assorted MPs and lords, or political bedmates ranging from global-/monopolise resistance to UKIP and the Libertarian Alliance, it is, in this blogger's opinion, a more principled and consistent campaign.

no2id has become the biggest anti-id campaign and the default organisation to turn to in order to register a protest against the id scheme. this is worrying, because they use the government's own socially exclusive, anti-immigration, anti-terrorism rhetoric, in a manner that surely many of the campaign's official supporters (such as CAMPACC for example) would surely reject. for example, on their site they list the following reasons why the id scheme won't work:
Terrorism
ID does not establish intention. Competent criminals and terrorists will be able to subvert the identity system. Random outrages by individuals can't be stopped. Ministers agree that ID cards will not prevent atrocities. A blank assertion that the department would find it helpful is not an argument that would be entertained for fundamental change in any other sphere of government but national security. Where is the evidence? Research suggests there is no link between the use of identity cards and the prevalence of terrorism, and in no instance has the presence of an identity card system been shown a significant deterrent to terrorist activity. Experts attest that ID unjustifiably presumed secure actually diminishes security.
this is the wrong place to start. the government realises that it won't stop terrorism - they've admitted it publicly in the past. terrorism is a smokescreen for the real aim of the identity scheme which is a step closer to a total surveillance society, and the encroachment of state control over everyday life. no2id state this themselves in the paragraph, but they still give credence to this reason by putting it as the first of the government's arguments to refute. more importantly, by talking about terrorism as something that should be of prominent importance in everyone's minds, and that we should be expecting the state to counter, no2id lends their support to the idea that the state should be protecting us. it also ignores the fact that most terrorist atrocities are carried out by states like the UK, and feeds into racist and religious prejudice. these are not libertarian arguments, they are statist.
Illegal immigration and working
People will still enter Britain using foreign documents—genuine or forged—and ID cards offer no more deterrent to people smugglers than passports and visas. Employers already face substantial penalties for failing to obtain proof of entitlement to work, yet there are only a handful of prosecutions a year.
from pandering to the government fear-mongering about terrorism to pandering to government fear-mongering about "illegal immirants". again this reinforces the idea that immigration is something we should be worried about and that the state should be something to protect us from immigrants. again it panders to racist untruths about "foreigners" and demonsises some of the most vulnerable people in society, asylum seekers. this argument stems from the assumption that immigration is undesireable and that immigrants are to be kept out, and that it is the state's job to do this. there is no attempt to dispel any of the myths about the extent of immigration, or the reasons why people are entering the country. where is the place of a true libertarian in a campaign that fails to question borders? then we move on to:
Benefit fraud and abuse of public services
Identity is "only a tiny part of the problem in the benefit system." Figures for claims under false identity are estimated at £50 million (2.5%) of an (estimated) £2 billion per year in fraudulent claims.
(dramatic drum roll). that's right people, it's not the tax-evading superrich who are the parasites in our society, it's those who try a dodge here and there to get a slightly bigger fraction of the meagre scraps doled out by the benefits system. not only do no2id support the state, they also support the wealthy power elites that run the corporations. you'd think the libertarian right-wingers would be supportive of the entrepreneurial skills of the benefits blaggers but in fact they foam at the mouth at the suggestion that anyone at the lower end of the economic scale might be cheating the system.

aside from their arguments, no2id support the state in their methods as well. apart from supporting no2id, they suggest the following options for taking action against id: writing to your MP, lobbying your council, and renewing your passport. in other words, their best ideas for taking on the id scheme are lobbying your elected representatives, thus supporting the very system that has produced the unaccountable government and its id scheme in the first place. nowhere is there any suggestion that anyone might be able to make change through their own actions, except in the timing of renewing their passport. whilst there was a "pledge of resistance" that was doing the rounds a while back, it seems that no2id only support legal (i.e. state-sanctioned) resistance to id. the mass illegal resistance that beat the poll-tax is presumably not what they have in mind. however, the government has brought in all manner of new offences to fine and imprison those who refuse to be registered, and so mass resistance by legal means is unlikely to be possible for long.

to be continued...

3 Comments:

Anonymous Alex Gregory said...

"the real aim of the identity scheme which is a step closer to a total surveillance society, and the encroachment of state control over everyday life"

Dan, I just wondered if you could explain who it is that has this aim and is trying to implement it - as it's phrased here, it sounds like a conspiracy theory, which I'm fairly certain isn't what you intend.

4:12 pm  
Blogger DanR said...

hi alex

i agree that that comment isn't really backed up in this context, and might sound like a conspiracy theory (not that there's anything particular incorrect about assuming conspiracy in certain situations). i certainly believe that certain agencies of the state (e.g. the police force, the intelligence services, the home office, etc.) would certainly love to be able to easily access all manner of personal information about citizens with the aim of better controlling them e.g. forcing them to obey the law or be punished, aiming to curtail subversive activites, etc. however, i don't think it really matters whether this creeping surveillance is the conscious aim of individuals involved in implementing the scheme. i believe that this effect is an inevitable path for the authoritarian state to go down. and we do live in a state run by increasingly authoritarian forces.

this quote is from 'governing the soul' by nikolas rose. it's actually from a chapter on the rise of confessional mechanisms in medical science, and social work, but i believe it applies equally to the enforced confession required in submitting one's details to the national identity register:

"In compelling, persuading, and inciting subjects to disclose themselves, finer and more intimate regions of interpersonal life come under surveillance, and are opened up for expert judgement, and normative evaluation, for classification and correction. In the name of the recognition of the subjectivity of client or patient [or the rights of the citizen], a more profound subjection is produced."

more detailed information will be made available to the state in order to sort and select. to judge based on assumptions of normality. it is inevitable given the government's views on anti-social behaviour, on petty crime, on immigration, on 'benefit fraud', that id information will be used to uncover the abnormal (by their standards) and attempt to normalise them. those who are already 'normal' will have their normality enforced through the mass circulation of statistics, through the promotion of certain lifestyles and identity, and through setting an example of the abnormal.

the id scheme must also be considered in the context of the raft of other measures repressive of free expression in the name of security. whose security? not mine or yours but that of the state. whether there is a conscious 'conspiracy' amongst those in the ruling elite that is powering this movement, or whether it is simply a natural result of authoritarian government is irrelevant. it is happening.

7:11 pm  
Anonymous Alex Gregory said...

"finer and more intimate regions of interpersonal life come under surveillance, and are opened up for expert judgement, and normative evaluation, for classification and correction"

I'm guessing that you agree that normative evaluation and correction is sometimes appropriate: if someone's a racist, it's politically appropriate both to evaluate that behaviour as bad, and to try and change that behaviour.

Nor, it seems, can you simply respond that the "intimacy" of such assessment is whats wrong in this instance - feminists have been saying for years that the personal is the political, making the obvious point that traditionally "intimate" subjects like family and sex should be open to political evaluation.

If thats true, what is it you're objecting to? Is it normative assessment in general? This seems to me to be implausible in light of the above two paragraphs. Or is it simply that the kinds of judgements that those in government tend to make are simply the wrong evaluations?

The latter sounds much more plausible to me, but you seem to be hinting at some deeper worry with political evaluation and correction of behaviour.

5:58 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home