Interpreting the Meaning of Private
Hearing the word private, one could think of infinite meanings and uses. Some people think, for their own safety, certain people should not be private. Others believe it is their human right to have privacy, because it defines oneself. The dictionary-defined term of private has had subtle changes through the past 300 years. In the past three years, the definition of private in the US has changed to very little meaning, granting an even more important reason to find the true definition.
The pre-9/11 definitions never limit privacy to certain groups or people, and they never seem to grant more privacy to other people. In 1634, the OED defined private as “not open to the public; restricted … for … privileged persons”. The focus of this definition is the exclusive rights to view or interact with an object. As time passed, in 1913, the meaning grew to “personal property” (Webster's). More property everyday became private, as people feared a large government controlling their lives. A current definition includes seclusion “from sight, presence or intrusion of others” and focuses on a lack of knowledge of under privileged people (AHD, 2000).
Lately, the government has been passing radical laws violating many people’s privacy rights. The USA PATRIOT ACT and the USA PATRIOT ACT II critically injure many of the definitions of private. Through the acts, people residing in the United States can have meetings tapped, their personal property searched without knowledge, and followed/harassed within the confines of their own home. To many people, the word private brings forth a view of secrecy or personal belongings. Bathrooms and locker rooms, attorneys and their clients, to name a couple, are hoped to be private by most people. Privacy does not depend on the person, as privacy is a human right everyone should be granted. In Fahrenheit 9/11, Michael Moore shows a peace group who had an undercover agent infiltrate them, violating their privacy. The group was not criminals, and had not been found guilty of anything, yet big brother decided these people’s rights should be limited.
With the passing of these laws, privacy is decreasing. People may wonder what would life be without privacy? No walls in the bathroom, shared locker rooms, records of who you talked to and about what, not to mention trying to build a legal defense if charged with a crime. How could one defend him/herself against an accusation if there could be no planning involved?
Ginsborg P (1990). ‘A History of Contemporary Italy: Society and Politics: 1943-1980’ Published by Penguin; Reprint edition (27 Sep 1990).
Multiple historians have touched on the change in government during Fascist Italy’s reign in World War II. In Italian Fascism: Its Origins and Development, Alexander De Grand clarifies the many promises Benito Mussolini fabricated for the Italian people in order to get them to join his cause such as the improvement on poverty with the rise of a new Roman Empire. De Grand also gives an opposite view, with some citizens seeing Fascism as a “model of efficiency.” In Melton S. Davis’ Who Defends Rome?, t...
One of the most sacred ideas that we hold dear is our right to privacy. It a simple correlation between being free and doing what we want, legally speaking, in our own homes and lives. Unfortunately, our lives seem to become less...
...merican soil, the question remains as to how much privacy Americans really possess. Yes, security in the person and home is still at the discretion of law enforcement, but how far will the government reach in what seems to be an elaborate effort to gain total control over what the Constitution defines as a free society? This, and many other questions remain unanswered today, but it must be remembered that this is a government of, for, and by the people, not a dictatorship that it has come to be in today’s world.
How much privacy do we as the American people truly have? American Privacy is not directly guaranteed in any manner under the United States Constitution; however, by the Fourth Amendment, Americans are protected from illegal search and seizure. So then isn’t it ironic that in today’s modern world, nothing we do that it is in any way connected to the internet is guaranteed to remain discreet? A Google search, an email, a text message, or even a phone call are all at risk of being intercepted, traced, geo located, documented, and stored freely by the government under the guise of “protecting” the American people. Quite simply, the Government in order to protect us and our rights, is willing to make a hypocrite of itself and act as though our right is simply a privilege, and without any form of consent from the people, keep virtual tabs on each and every one of us. In the words of Former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis “The right to privacy is a person's right to be left alone by the government... the right most valued by civilized men." Privacy isn’t just Privilege, it is nonnegotiable right, and deserves to be treated as such.
Another great example of loss of privacy is how they can no longer talk to each other in public, I’m talking of course about Winston and Julia, a man and woman talking to each other repeatedly without others around is considered breaking the rules and we are shown this because the first few times Winston approaches Julia after getting the note he is very nervous. “He did not look at her. He unpacked his tray and promptly began eating. It was all-important to speak at once before anyone else can.” (page 94) this quote is from when Winston sees Julia in the cafeteria after she slips him the note that read “ I LOVE YOU.”
"The manner in which Mussolini and the Fascist Party gained possession of the government was regarded in most foreign circles as an illegal act of violence." (3) As the nation of Italy began to suffer great debts, Mussolini had been summoned by the King to form a government to aid in the economic needs. This marked the birth of the Fascist Party in Italy. In the beginning of his rise to the top, Mussolini was popular amongst his people. His popularity was high, and people began to trust in his judgment and ideas. (4) He was, in essence, saving the people from the turmoil that had ensued the nat...
...y afraid at first but finds out that there are many ex-slaves willing to take a stand and risk their lives to help their own. Douglass realizes that with the help from the ex-slaves he could also help his fellow slaves.
Battling for liberty through physical, mental, and spiritual crises in slavery, Frederick Douglass serves as one of the most significant and influential abolitionists in America’s history. His personal narrative provides an insightful and convincing argument against slavery and its fraudulent religious justifications. The narrative is captivating as it invokes the need to abolish slavery by telling of his struggles from infancy until young adulthood in slavery without directly calling for an abrupt end to the inhumane practice of bondage. Although Douglass did not give exact details of his self-liberation and his narrative contained grammatical and syntax errors, he achieved his purpose of exposing the American slave system and encouraging
The word “privacy” did not grow up with us throughout history, as it was already a cultural concept by our founding fathers. This term was later solidified in the nineteenth century, when the term “privacy” became a legal lexicon as Louis Brandeis (1890), former Supreme Court justice, wrote in a law review article, that, “privacy was the right to be let alone.” As previously mentioned in the introduction, the Supreme Court is the final authority on all issues between Privacy and Security. We started with the concept of our fore fathers that privacy was an agreed upon concept that became written into our legal vernacular. It is being proven that government access to individual information can intimidate the privacy that is at the very center of the association between the government and the population. The moral in...
Privacy postulates the reservation of a private space for the individual, described as the right to be let alone. The concept is founded on the autonomy of the individual. The ability of an individual to make choices lies at the core of the human personality. The Supreme Court protected the right to privacy of prostitute. The autonomy of the individual is associated over matters which can be kept private. These are concerns over which there is a legitimate expectation of privacy. Privacy has both a normative and descriptive function. At a normative level privacy sub-serves those eternal values upon which the guarantees of life, liberty and freedom are founded. At a descriptive level, privacy postulates a bundle of entitlements and interests
Although the right to privacy has been used to sway the outcome of many U.S court cases, including the famous Supreme Court ruling of Roe vs. Wade, there is still some debate over how the “right to privacy” should be viewed. For example both Judith Jarvis Thompson, and James Rachels agree that the right to privacy is indeed a right that is bestowed upon citizens, however their perception of how one is granted this right is quite different.
Years ago, personal privacy was actually quite common. People could do and say things without everybody knowing, and it seemed like most people weren’t worried about others. It was rare to hear about people feeling unsafe while using the computer or on the phone (when they had them). It was also unusual to hear of someone complaining of feeling as if they did not have enough privacy twenty years ago (although whether or not that is caused by lack of communication or lack of crime, it cannot be certain). There was never an...
It is true that the Italian dictatorship was more conservative in its application than that of Hitler’s reign of terror. But, both the fascist ideas and rulings of these two leaders proved to have some similarities worth mentioning. Both leaders left their countries with an economic and social debt to the Allies, which is still strong in the minds of many older members of the community.
All were to work for the common good, and trade unions or strikes were forbidden. Every profession had its own corporate branch, and all problems were to be solved through negotiation. This may seem very democratic or reasonable, however the fascist state controlled the issues of the negotiating sides, wages were very low and so were the living standards. Although there were many cons, some benefits Mussolini provided was through his economic policies. He started with improving road systems by building motorways,and reclaiming the Pontine Marshes, which helps provide more land prevent malaria. He began to promote the “Battle for Grain” which doubled the grain production in italy, as well as the “Battle for Births” to increase their