Ironically, surveillance does not assure safety. Information gathering is the latest frontier in the quest for power for the world’s leading governments, but that power does not lead to safety, but rather jealousy, anger, and violence.

But the threat of political conflict is not the most freightening potential result of surveillance. The most freightening side effect of our latest quest for power is that addressed in the conclusion of this piece–the self-imposed censorship that can result from ubiquitous surveillance. And this is not only true because valuable, but eccentric ideas will no longer be voiced, but equally because dangerous and off-base ideas will no longer be voiced, either. Instead, they will be hardened. If one feels his ideas can not be voiced openly, they are instead nursed secretly. The fearful opinion-holder will talk only to others who agree with his opinions. He may begin to muse, stew, and fume over his opinions until they becomes solid, cold, and unchangable.
In open dialogue, humans can come together in communication intended to glean the useful and cull the determental parts of each of our ideas and opinions. In natural human relations, people change their minds, modify their opinions, and tweak their behaviors when necessary for the good of the whole. In a fearful, secretive society, people ignore the convictions of others, stubburnly hold on to their own opinions regardless of their value, and refuse to change unhealthy behaviors because they feel the need to protect themselves and their tight-knit group of yea-sayers. This can result in anything from a fragmented society devoid of the shared value of all people working as one to a defensively violent society of hardened, resentful citizens stricking out randomly in anger.