Wendy McElroy: Privacy is the virtue that sparked the American Revolution

Many people are under constant attack from an internal invader - their government. Fortunately, history has long known a powerful weapon against this enemy. That weapon is the right to privacy.

"An external common enemy has less chance of overthrowing freedom in America than an internal decay of principles and morals. While men are virtuous, they cannot be subdued. But when they lose their virtue, they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first foreign or domestic invader." - Samuel Adams. 

Confidentiality is a revolutionary virtue that was the reason American colonists slammed the door in the face of British officials, literally and figuratively. The Third Amendmentof the US Constitution prohibits the previously widespread practice of quartering troops in residential buildings, even during hostilities, without the consent of the owners. This amendment sounds outdated these days. However, it was placed third in the Bill of Rights, right after the First Amendment - Freedom of Speech and Religion, and the Second Amendment - The Right to Bear Arms. 

Why did they place her in third place? Потому что третья поправка закрепила право внутренней неприкосновенности жителей от вторжения правительством в их дома. This is the only clause in the Constitution that describes the relationship between citizens and the military, and which gives priority to citizens. 

The Fourth Amendmentof the Constitution also protects privacy. It reads:

"Every person has the right to be protected from unreasonable searches and seizures of himself, his home, his papers, and his effects. All warrants issued contrary to this right, as well as warrants not supported by oath or affirmation, and warrants directing an officer or agent to search a place or arrest a suspect, without specifically specifying the names of the suspects or the items sought - are void.No warrant shall be issued without following the procedure prescribed by Law." 

If we talk about cryptocurrency, the most important words here are “your papers” and “your property”. We'll come back to this later.. 

The Fifth Amendmentalso affirms the right to integrity of person, establishing the right of an individual “against self-incrimination.” 

Fifty-six colonists signed the Declaration of Independence. They knew that this would be perceived as treason, the punishment for which was death. If the revolution had failed, they would have lost their heads, their fortunes, and put their families in danger. Even with the success of the revolution, many paid a terrible price. "Five of the signers of the Declaration were captured by the British and tortured as traitors. Nine of them fought for independence on the battlefield and died from wounds or from the suffering they endured. Two lost their sons who served in the Continental Army. The homes of a dozen of these colonists were looted and burned." 

That’s how important the principles of freedom and personal integrity were to these people, who are now called the Founding Fathers!

[note: this article is mainly about the history of the United States, but the principles expressed in it are easily applicable to other peoples and cultures. Also, I am not condoning some of the horrific aspects of the American Revolution. I don't dispute the fact that loyalists were also colonists. My goal is to highlight the key role of privacy in driving the revolution.]

What Words Matter

When the government confiscates or monitors the activity on someone's smartphone, its goal is to collect personal information. In 18th-century parlance, they seized someone's “papers.” Some citizens obediently transmit information on these devices, some even support and defend such intrusion into their personal space under the guise of “security.” These people have every right to do so; it is their choice whether to share personal information or not. But they have no right at all to demand that others agree to crazy laws and bureaucracy. They are wrong to demonize those who are unwilling to reveal all the details of their personal lives. However, those who refuse gang rape of personal data look like criminals in their eyes. 

Fortunately, there is a story.. And the main lesson of history: everything used to be different from what it is now, times change.

The world is experiencing a “technological crisis in modern legal doctrine.” More specifically, the old rules do not always fit the new order of things. Rules drawn up for physical evidence cannot be applied to digital evidence, and conflicting court decisions on cryptocurrencies provide little clarity. No one knows for sure the legal status of your crypto wallet or private keys. The solution to this whole mess may be one word in the constitution that few people notice, namely“papers”. 

The Fourth Amendment states: “Every person has the right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures upon himself, his house, his papers, and his effects.”. 

The meaning of the amendment is clear. The government must prove guilt before violating privacy and searching a person's property. Although one aspect of the amendment is usually ignored. This is a conscious distinction between “papers” and “property”, that is, between “personal information, will” and “personal belongings”. Western jurisprudence has traditionally favored “papers.”

Law professor Donald A. Dripps began his groundbreaking 2013 essay, “Dearest Property,” with two questions: “Why does the Fourth Amendment clearly prioritize “papers” over “property”?” and “Do we care?”

Dripps asked these questions because he wanted to “apply Fourth Amendment rules to digital evidence,” in order to “protect the vast amount of innocent and intimate information that is forced to be revealed before a criminal case is opened.” 

Fortunately, the right path forward can be found in the past. In the 1760s, the American colonies also experienced “immense troubles and disputes due to false warrants, slander, and theft of papers.” These problems have led to the need to completely reconsider the concept of privacy. 

The question of “papers” and “property” could not be reduced to one legal decision since the very end of the Civil War. Perhaps the most telling moment was the case of Boyd v. United States... “Boyd's story,” Dripps writes, “begins with one of the laws allowing customs officials to search the personal belongings and papers of importers suspected of tax evasion.” 

Let's look at an incident that once occurred in one of the ports of New York. Customs officials seized 35 pieces of mirror glass for non-payment of import tax. The government required E.A Boyd & Sons to prepare an invoice in order to attach it to the court case. Boyd didn't do this. And in protest, he stated that forced disclosure of information is a form of self-incrimination, which is prohibited by the Constitution; Boyd was also subject to an unauthorized search and arrest. Illegally collected papers could not be used in the trial. However, when a lower court sided with the government, the case went to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court ruled in Boyd's favor. The decision said:

"The principles embodied in the Constitution go to the very essence of liberty and security. These principles apply not only to our present case. They apply to all types of intrusions on the part of the government. It is not the breaking of doors and the search of lockers that constitutes a crime, but the very violation of the inalienable rights of an individual to security, liberty, and private property, when this right has not been violated by a crime." 

The Boyd case restored greater constitutional protection for “papers” than for “property.” It is also directly related to digital “documents” or information. The protection, however, has never been absolute and has only gotten worse in recent years. Dripps writes: “In the last quarter of the twentieth century, the Supreme Court began to equate “papers” with “property.” In other words, “papers” not only lost their special status under constitutional law, but also became legally equivalent to any property.

CONCLUSION

Digital information was born in a new age of inquisition, in which privacy is considered a sin.. Dripps notes, “These days, federal agents can obtain warrants to seize entire repositories of digital information and read through all personal files one by one... what was condemned and prohibited, what no legislature had sanctioned for eighty years of independence, has now become standard procedure, which does not embarrass anyone and is widely used.” In the past, torture was used to obtain personal information, but nowadays this process is so invisible that it is easy to simply ignore it."

Don't ignore.

It was not like this before, times are changing.

The government wants people to believe that privacy is a refuge for malicious people and a danger for the innocent.

It is exactly the opposite. Confidentiality is a virtue on which freedom and privacy are built. The best protection for privacy is for the majority to understand its key role for freedom.

Do not respond to the chilling demand: “your papers!”.

According to https://news.bitcoin.com