Official insanity
Intelligence agencies, or secret services, exist for much longer than any known nation on this planet. Having 'inside information' about a competitor makes business easier, but not necessarily fairer. The origin as proactive business insurance has been forgotten a bit, nowadays catch-all phrase 'national security' suggests a useful service provided by democratically uncontrollable 'intelligence agencies'.
History tells some vicious stories about how governments used their secret armies. In countries hated, or conquered in war, the status as force of evil of intelligence agencies is hardly denied: Gestapo, Stasi or KGB serve as examples how governments used secret services against their own population. Of course, only 'bad' nations have 'evil' secret services, and per definition, your own country cannot be bad.
Nobody with a sane mind derives a feeling of national pride from the knowledge that their country systematically commits crimes against humanity. When Australia got told off by the United Nations for their treatment of the native people in this nation, propaganda turned this crime into a virtue. Only Nazi Germany, and the Khmer Rouge committed genocide, the 'White Australia' policy, which survived as national attitude, and about two centuries of randomly killing indigenous people are blissfully ignored.
Australia's intelligence agencies have more legal rights than the Gestapo ever had. That doesn't mean that their agents act like Mini-Hitlers all the time, it just means that if they do, they get away with it. Legally. The veil of 'national security' hides the systematic waste of tax-payer's money to subvert individual freedoms, millions are currently wasted on the witch hunt for terrorists.
The stupidity and paranoia in the offices of intelligence agencies becomes more obvious, as we no longer rely solely on governmental propaganda, but can gather information ourself, and 'connect the dots'. The latest fear-making meme is about China's increase in military spending, which
ostensibly threatens the 'regional stability'.
Let's do the uncommon thing and have a rational look at this fear-mongering message. China has publicly announced in 2006 to spend about half of its actual expenditure. While $45 billion were mentioned, they spend about $90 billion. Will they start conquering the region now?
According to Wolfram Alpha, China spend less than $9 per head on the military, while each Australian pays in average nearly $900 per head for 'military protection'. If we consider China's numbers are manipulated, Australia still spend in relation 50 times more than China for its destructive forces. So who is threatening regional stability?
I admit, using facts in a political discussion seems utterly unfair. By putting numbers next to some of the inane rants of politicos and 'security experts' makes the propaganda visible. Let's just take the wars of the 21st century as example. Only so-called democracies dared to invade other countries, so a 'totalitarian' state like China is statistically unlikely as an aggressor.
Invasions are an economic nightmare for the nations involved, yet a gold mine for war profiteers. The cost of living exploded for the local survivors, yet survival became much more of an uncertainty through the random violence that accompanies any war. While the stocks and profits of the war-mongering industry soar, especially in the US, national debt is at an all-time high.
Of course, we can ignore the lessons from history that saw many 'great' nations crumble because of war expenses, and blame the US deficit budget on other factors. The jobs saved in the killing industry are nothing than a flimsy bandage on the pierced jugular of a nation. Profits have no national pride.
China's ambition to control Tibet and Taiwan belong to old news, yet the politicians of this planet happily rubbed shoulders with China during the Olympic Games. So complaining about China's increase in military spending could as well mean a chance for business. For one thing, this could be a call to increase advertising military equipment to China, and also a simple reminder to blow up Australia's vast military budget even more beyond any reason.
The world has changed, as well as political constellations. China cannot simply repeat the British strategy that founded Australia - conquer a continent and eradicate the local population. To arm against this possibility just shows the level of insanity that pervades the idea of 'national security'.
For any democracy it's much cheaper to have a 24/7 surveillance of all political representatives, instead of treating all citizens like potential terrorists. The 'intelligence' gathered by secret services constitutes an utter waste of money. This doesn't bother politicos too much, as they profit as well from the insanity they sprout.
Government act always in self-interest. Unfortunately, there's hardly any match between a government's self-interest and the interest of the population. As long as 'intelligence agencies' are taken for granted, democracy can't emerge.
