With great power comes great abuse

In first world countries, humans do a relatively good job of coexisting peacefully. We problem solve, we produce, we create, and we live relatively happily. In a perfect world, how much of this system should be by design, and how much should be self-regulated? Should we rely on ourselves to be good people and to behave appropriately, or do we need to legislate and govern ourselves to a better future? But what exactly does a better future look-like? What is a good person? Should we manage an individual’s finances if they spend too much on shoes? Do you drink too much on a weekend out, or spend too much of your recreational time playing online games? Do you do your grocery shopping once a week, or pick up your groceries on a daily basis? These questions fall into what I like to call a moral grey-area, where an action is neither right or wrong. I strongly believe that most people would prefer to remain in-control of these daily tasks and basic human freedoms.

MORE RULES! YEAH BUDDYYYY!

Shockingly, I’m witnessing clear moral arguments being used to legislate an individual's freedom in these moral grey areas. Do you think we should allow paedophiles to send illicit images through mobile phones? Of course not. So you don’t mind us taking a look through your phone to make sure you don’t have anything? Seems reasonable. But what if instead of looking for those images, I browse through anything I like, flagging possible signs of criminal activity. Isn’t it better to stop a crime before it happens? Maybe you need to spend a few months being re-educated on Australian values in an education camp. It’s not so clear anymore that this is for my own good (or anyone’s good). 

Facing jail time after police found her stash of spongebob memes

Take the new Bill that was just passed in Australia, https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6623. This bill now allows the Australian Federal Police (AFP) and the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission (ACIC) to disrupt data by modifying, adding, copying or deleting data. When used for the right reasons, you shouldn’t have anything to worry about. Of course, I’ve done nothing wrong! But what if the AFP or ACIC used this bill to control your online presence if they didn't like what you posted on social media? What if they posted on behalf of an influential individual? What if you were arrested for not taking your daily vitamin boosters, or if you preferred wearing sandals over enclosed toe shoes? Although it might seem trivial now, humans are notoriously power hungry and historically have used such bills to further their control over a population. 

Soon the whole internet will look like this

In a perfect world, we wouldn’t need rules as we could expect everyone to do the right thing. The only problem is, we don’t live in a perfect world. And we all have a completely different opinion on what a perfect world looks like. What is clear though, is using clear moral arguments as an excuse to legislate control over grey area decisions should not be allowed. Should we grant power to few powerful watchdogs, even if such legislation ignores human privacy, ignores human rights and diminishes human spirit? Should we sacrifice ourselves for the sake of the greater good, or for our own good? It’s a slippery slope, and one that should be cautiously navigated.