No Encryption, No Devotion

UK Prime Minister David Cameron:

In Crisis and Leviathan, US economist Robert Higgs describes how state authorities will use high-profile current events as pretext to seize ever-greater legislative authority over the constituency. When the crisis has passed and attention is elsewhere, the "emergency" powers are almost never relinquished.

There is much to be said for analyzing politics as if it were exchange between state and citizen. Modeling state agents as anodyne, disinterested merchants is probably misleading. They are almost certainly motivated in part by a drive to provide for the common weal, but it is difficult to accept the proposition that they have no interest in dominion over subjects.

I invite my readers to indulge in a little forward induction. With what probability are you willing to post content to the Web that might be interpreted as critical of your government? Does the answer to this question change depending on who's in office? What principles of governance would you choose if you did not know beforehand what sort of people would hold the scepter of rule?

If speech, particularly political speech, is to remain free, citizens must remain vigilant against censorious intent. The free, euvoluntary flow of ideas depends on it.