If you put security before liberty you will get neither...

[Pierre Von Mondragon]

...was a great quote I read in the Guardian a couple of days ago (I will look up who came up with it), and is very pertinent in view of the governments increasingly authoritarian nature. As a natural Labour supporter I have found it a painful experience to see just how much they desire to control the headspace of the citizenry, and as for the party of 'freedom' as they will no doubt pitch themselves, I will never be able to afford their conception of freedom. So bollocks, its time to emerge as a left-libertarian who may well never vote Labour again, and to protest any further erosion of our civil liberties, as well as calling to get some new ones. No more removal of rights in the name of protection.

Yes, there is no real point to this post, Life is dull when there is a point to everything.

[Dave]

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety"-Benjamin Franklin (attrib.)

Now, the problem with that quote is that the definitions of "essential liberty" and "temporary safety" are left undefined, not to mention the context in which the quote was made is unclear. Also, it's worth remembering that Benjamin Franklin owned slaves, so his definition of liberty is pehaps a little different to that which we hold dear today.

The quote has been churned out innumerable times over the years, by pacifists and civil rights campaigners and the like, and while their goals are worthy, they do tend to forget that sometimes removing liberties in order to secure greater security and freedom in the long-term is sometimes necessary. The obvious example of this is the use of conscription and the nationalisation of factories in World War II, but there are also many others.