You May Have “Nothing to Hide” But We Have Everything to Lose
When it comes to data privacy, it’s either all for one or none for all
Privacy has never been just about YOU. In fact, the word privacy wouldn’t matter if other people were non-existent. After all, the definition of privacy is “the state of being FREE from being observed or disturbed by OTHER people.”
When it comes to data privacy, saying “I’ve got nothing to hide…so Facebook, Apple, etc… can take what they want” is ignorant. I recognize that’s not the most articulate way to put it, but it really does sum it up best. At its core, the “I’ve got nothing to hide” argument assumes that not giving a shit about data privacy has no impact on the rest of us who are determined to maintain our right to privacy.
Put another way, the argument for not caring about data privacy is equivalent to saying, “fuck freedom, give me oppression!”
As I said in my first post, the right to data privacy is the right to self.
You own you. You decide when you want to share you and when you don’t. It’s really just that simple. But let’s say for your argument’s sake that you really do have “nothing” to hide. You’re the perfect little angel, whose words, ideas and digital profile can never be misrepresented or misinterpreted. Let’s further assume, you’ve never even once sent or received a message that you weren’t slightly ashamed of or felt that its content could be misconceived. First, good for you Mother Teresa. Second, that’s not the point.
You may think that the main purpose of surveillance is to control bad people — individuals coalescing around ideas that could potentially destabilize the status quo. And maybe that’s another reason why you’ve adopted the “I’ve got nothing to hide” argument because YOU consider yourself not to be one of those people. You’re just someone who likes to cruise around your house, picking your butt, shopping online and liking pictures of your best friends nephew on your newsfeed. Which is fine.
Who’s to judge what or whom is considered to be threatening to the status quo?
You do realize that words like “bad” and “threatening” have been used to characterize nearly every great era of enlightenment before it was considered a progressive movement, right? For example, revolutionaries like Martin Luther King Jr., Jesus and Gandhi were all considered threats to the status quo even though they fought for greater justice and peace.
My point is…
Just by thinking that surveillance only applies to “bad” people, not only have you undermined your own personal freedom by allowing your agency to slip away, but you’re cultivating an oppressive environment for the rest of us. The more you concede to privacy demands, the more corporations will take advantage of your compromises. Historically speaking, every inch of compromise around one person’s freedom has always led to greater injustice for the rest of us.
According to famed data privacy journalist, Glenn Greenwald, the “I’ve got nothing to hide” mindset creates the incentive to be as compliant and inconspicuous as possible. He says that those willing to live their lives that way will be indifferent to the loss of privacy because they feel that they lose nothing from it.
So if that’s really how you feel, then you’ve lost. You’ve lost your freedom and you’ve dismissed the potential for progress just because you think that the issue of data privacy doesn’t apply to you. But more tragically, you’ve forgotten your identity as an individual and your capacity for thinking freely. And because of your complacency and because you have nothing to hide, the rest of society — in our quest for greater justice — suffer the consequences of your ignorance. Because again, the privacy argument has never been just about YOU.
So while you may think you have nothing to hide. The rest of us, have everything to lose.
