Online “privacy” hysteria overlooks who is REALLY “spying” on you:

Hint: your OWN FAMILY.

Let’s try a thought-experiment, shall we?   Assume for a moment that you are a member of a reclusive and “total” ethnoreligious subculture.  In the interest of being “in the world, but not OF the world” this subculture indulges in a significant amount of self-inflicted “ghettoization”:  its members tend to only communicate with one another, and (as much as possible) to self-segregate from “foreign” influences.

Quite frankly, THIS is the level of “spying” most individuals should be most concerned about — NOT whether or not Google/Micro$oft/the NSA is (or is not) scraping metadata/engaging in “Deep packet inspection”, etc.

Because quite frankly, it is overwhelmingly likely that you (whoever you may be) are UTTERLY IRRELEVANT to any of the above-mentioned organizations — except inasmuch as you are a faceless cipher, lost among dozens/hundreds/thousands/millions of OTHER equally-faceless ciphers.

To make matters worse, most “individuals” are actually little more than bipedal “stereotypes” whose “individual identity” consists primarily of aping and parroting whatever grunts/twitches they’ve been trained to imitate, by some self-proclaimed “authority”-figure, or “role-model”.

Quite frankly, “you” simply aren’t unique enough to be WORTH “spying” on, in any great detail.   At most, the above-mentioned organizations see you as merely one of a myriad of (say) White females between the ages of 18-35.   Quite frankly, the tacit assumption is that you are merely an (imperfect) instantiation of some particular “idealized” version of the specific demographic “identity” with which you happen to have been saddled — NOTHING MORE.

This is what I find so amusing about the “privacy”-related hysteria:  99% of the populace don’t have anything interesting or worthwhile to be worth “spying” on.  There’s a better than even chance (especially given the well-known propensity to what Ayn Rand described as “second-handedness”) that if “they” know about your specific “demographic”, they ALREADY KNOW (ALMOST) EVERYTHING ABOUT “YOU”, ALREADY — without having to actively expend effort spying on “you”.

There is actually very little “you”, for them to spy upon.

It is likely that your (mindless) consumerism reflects that of your specific “demographic group” to a degree which you would probably find bone-chilling, if you were intelligent enough to actually think about it (which the vast majority of Homo demographicus aren’t.)

This is how notions of ethnic/racial/gender/religious “Communities” come about.  The real meaning of “demography is destiny” is: if you’ve seen one, you’ve seen ’em all.

At root, the “privacy” hysteria is more about making you feel special and UNIQUE than it ever was about “spying” on you.   As I said: it is overwhelmingly likely that you are simply not RELEVANT beyond whichever racial/ethnic/religious/political/sexual/gender/brand-loyalty-based “identities” happen to have been assigned to you (from birth — OR BEFORE), by a myriad of “significant others” — who derive their “significance” from the fact of having brainwashed and enslaved you — often-times without ever explicitly understanding that they were doing so.

The tragic fact is: the most genuinely transgressive act is: individual consciousness.

Think about the etymology of the word “heretic”:

Middle English: from Old French heretique, via ecclesiastical Latin from Greek hairetikos ‘able to choose’ (in ecclesiastical Greek, ‘heretical’), from haireisthai ‘choose.’

Once you really grasp the above, all else follows.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s