Civil Liberties and Privacy in Peril

This week has been troubling for our nation's civil liberties, namely the people's right to privacy and freedom from unwarranted government intrusion. On Monday, the Supreme Court allowed police  to gather the DNA of arrestees to help them solve unrelated crimes. That decision drew justified dissension from Justice Scalia and civil liberties groups. Besides its unsound application of Fourth Amendment precedents, the opinion gave too much deference to the police, as if pretending that the State would not abuse its power to collect DNA for ulterior purposes, and minimized the loss of privacy, which surely was great for arrestees. We shouldn't be less sympathetic just because arrestees are involved - any of us can be arrested and what rights taken from some are taken from us all.

Compound that is this week's revealing of massive surveillance of American citizens by their government and collection of communications records by the NSA. It has drawn justified debate about the extent of government surveillance necessary to protect Americans from terrorism while maintaining their civil liberties. And finally, President Obama and the politicians have to be candid about what's going on. What is discouraging is the muted response from Congress, with many politicians (besides Rand Paul) too spineless to criticize the NSA's actions. While the intelligence community and politicians will try to muzzle the media and informants, this timely revelation advances our ideals of a transparent government and having the people (through the press) check on their government.

These happenings are not surprising and shows what happens what the government has too much power and lacks transparency. The checks and balances prescribed by the Constitution failed because Congress lacks the will to speak up and investigate, the Executive Branch predictably stretched their powers under the Patriot Act, and the judiciary fails to be an independent check on the powers of government. In fact, the judiciary has done the people disservice by trusting the government to not abuse its powers, whether under the Patriot Act or the Fourth Amendment, and by shielding activities of the FICA from meaningful review. What will ultimately drive change will be the people. It might not be easy to advance the cause of civil liberties, especially when terrorist threats remain, but it is necessary to safeguard our right to privacy and check on the power of government.

Complexity behind Asian Americans

This weekend's WSJ featured a lengthy article on Asian-Americans (AAs) and touted their success as a model immigrant group like the Jews in the 19th and 20th centuries. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204076204578076613986930932.html). It relies much on the Pew Research Report released this summer touting AAs' achievement in American society, and their values of hard work and emphasis on family. I think the article, like the Pew study, fails to recognize the complex and multi-faceted status of AAs and portrays them as a model minority, even though the article does note several contradictions facing AAs today.

First, many AAs do not fall under this model minority myth. Many of them, for reasons mostly beyond their control, are part of the shrinking middle class battered by the housing crisis and recession or are barely staying afloat. I know of many problems in the AA community that the mainstream media mostly ignores - such as crime and dropout rates among AA youth, continued hostility and discrimination against successful AAs and businesses, and the lack of services for many AA senior citizens. Granted, AAs as a whole are well-off compared to other racial groups, but most AAs still face the same problems as other groups - insecurity about their finances and the economy, unsure about the direction of this country and the welfare of their children. The Pew study and this article should not have perpetuated this model myth and should have acknowledged the complex reality of the AAs in America today.

What I think the article does point out well are two larger problems facing AAs: first, the lack of engagement in the issues and controversies of today, and the contradictions in many AAs between adherence to traditional values and adopting America's values. AAs are well-known for skirting unpopular and controversial issues, mostly for their own good, but I feel that should not be an excuse for passiveness. I think AAs, especially the young, should be more politically active - such as through voting - and engaged with the greater social and economic developments in America today. Sitting on the sidelines has contributed to the marginalization of AAs and their interests in the greater political discourse. Finally, I think many AAs face, either day to day or every once in a while, an identity crisis. Should they follow the traditional values of their forefathers or should they buck the trend and be more American? Can AAs be traditional - in their values of hard work, emphasis on education and family, and respect for others - but still be liberal and adapt to different and changing times? Many, including I, believe the two sides are opposite and culturally incompatible, but who knows - like the Jews of yesteryear, perhaps AAs and their values will be assimilated enough into American culture one day and become part of the mainstream.

Corrupt Power, and Our Attraction to It

This week witnessed two powerful men whose personal lives were exposed to the public spotlight. Dominique Strauss-Kahn, head of the IMF and a potential French presidential candidate, faces many counts of sexual crimes. His political career is all but ruined. On the other side of the nation, Arnold Schwarzenegger seems unable to extricate his marriage from media attention, and now the tabloids will be running with details about his child with his housekeeper. Who knows whether the terminator has surfaced too early for Arnold.

Let's not forget that these cases are not atypical. The French, after all, have built a stereotype in promiscuity and sexual indiscretion by their politicians hardly seems news to the French people. Likewise, adultery today probably is a widespread phenomenon, especially among the rich and glamorous. I do not want to ingrain these stereotypes or argue that they are pervasive, but merely wish to point out that what happened should not surprise us.


In fact, our obsession with the rich and powerful and the media's role in reinforcing that obsession has created what we face today. Despite our better senses, we glamorize the rich and powerful to hide our own fears and vices. When they prosper, such as winning elections or propelling the stock market, we elevate them on a pedestal. When they fall, such as immersing in sex scandals, we throw them under a microscope. Unlike a scientist whose microscopic lens helps to define the resolution of the specimen, our lens blurs the problems of the rich and powerful and keeps us blind from our personal turmoils and sins.