Chu 1

Martin Chu
Professor Malcolm Campbell
English 1103
07 February, 2015
Conflicts of national security and individual rights
Introduction/Overview
Fear is one of the oldest of human emotions; it has allowed us as a species to identify
threats to survive throughout history. However fear can also be used as a tool of control and to
incite chaos. Acts of terrorism or demoralization strategies capitalize on fear to achieve their
goals; of breaking the morale of a populace and disrupting the normal patterns of public life. In
last half century the world has seen an increase of terrorist acts by irregular groups or lone
wolves. Public gatherings, the streets we walk, our work place and schools; places where we
thought were safe are no longer the case. In light of these threats our governments have been
tasked to provide order, to make our societal space safe once again, but in order to do that we
have given our governments an immense amount of autonomy in order to accomplish these
tasks.
Over the course of this project we will be examining the progression of US federal power
to combat the threat of attacks on the homeland and the possible infringement of our individual
rights granted to us; specifically our right to privacy. In the wake of the attacks of the 11 th of
September, 2001 the United States federal government has taken actions aimed at preventing
another attack of the same scale. Traditionally when it came to the role of protecting us on the
home front the FBI largely assumed this role. During the Second World War the FBI was

Chu 2

responsible for hunting down German operatives, Soviet/communist agents during the Cold War,
and terrorist from the 1980s onward. In light of the 9/11 attacks several questions arose, why
wasn't this attack prevented being chief amongst them. For some it was believed that the FBI was
bogged down by too many regulations, for others it was too small to effectively do its job.
However the creation of the Department of Homeland Security on the 25 th of November, 2002
was meant to remedy these short comings. The creation of the Department of Homeland Security
effectively expanded the scope and power of the executive branch by consolidating 22 different
agencies under one presidential cabinet. In addition to creating a new department according to an
article written by James Risen and Eric Lichtblau of the New York Times in 2005, it was reported
that in 2002 the NSA under executive order by President Bush was given permission to tap and
monitor international calls and internet usage without the need for a warrant. At the time these
measures were primarily aimed at stemming the tide of international terrorist groups like Al
Qaeda so their impact on most everyday citizens was negligible to say the least. However
recently we have seen a rise in domestic splinter groups and lone wolves, such as the Boston
Marathon bombings and Fort Hood shooting. In order to combat this rise of domestic terrorism
the measures the government have taken to protect us from these threats have placed everyday
citizens under the microscope of observation.
Initial Inquiry Question(s)
Therefore we have been presented with two possible precedents we can provide for the
future and it hinges on one chief question. In our pursuit of collective/national security, how
much are we willing to sacrifice of our individuals freedoms, rights and privacy to enable our
government to effective ensure order? If we continue to sacrifice rights for the sake of national

Chu 3

security how much potential is there for abuse of power by our government. As history has
shown us groups in the past have used the pursuit of nation security to position themselves for
power grabs by playing on the fears of the people. A prominent example of this was the rise of
the Nationalist Socialists (Nazis) in Germany; the Nazis played on the fear of a Communist
revolution in Germany. This fear of an attack culminated with the Reichstag (the German
equivalent of the US Congress) fire, an event the Nazis pinned on the communist which created
conditions in which the majority of the German people essentially willingly handed the Nazis
unlimited power on a sliver platter to stop the realization of a Communist revolt in Germany.
My Interest in this Topic
For a long time I have been interested in strategies and tactics; I don't want to just know
of an event I want to know of the working; the manipulations to create the conditions for its
success and failure. There are a number of people who want to separate the realms of politics and
war. I however have accepted the fact that the two realms intermingle; the success, failures and,
machination of one realm has a direct impact on the events of the other. Therefore I want to
examine the relationship between the measures our government takes in order to combat
terrorism and the effects on the civilian populace. I want to know if we as Americans will strike
a working balance between the rights of individuals and national security? The alternate reality is
perhaps we will continue to sacrifice individual rights to the point where we no longer need
terrorists to incite fear in the populace, but rather we would come to fear the very system what
was supposed to protect us. I have seen similar scenarios play out in history as I mentioned
earlier a similar situation occurred in Germany during the rise of the Nazis in the 1930s.
Next Steps

Chu 4

In my research I found a documentary series on PBS called Security versus Liberty: The
Other War; I intend to watch though the whole series and find materials support and present in
my project. I also plan on going over recent bills and laws attempted to expand federal power in
regards to nation security. I will also examine recent US Supreme Court cases that dealt with
government invasion of privacy and infringement on the rights of individuals while in the pursuit
of combating threats to the homeland. These are just a number steps I plan on taking over the
next few weeks. As with any plan it is subject to change according to conditions.