Comment by nobodyandproud
2 hours ago
I grew up in that tradition, so I can shed some light: The fear of a national ID isn’t just about tracking and privacy, but that an individual cannot participate in society or survive if the government decides to revoke the id.
Meaning, I can’t buy food; rent or buy a home; or hold any sort of job and earn and save.
What we have today isn’t better, but until recently I was hard pressed to see how such fears were even warranted.
Exactly. You do not want to hand the US government the ability to “turn off” someone’s daily life at the press of a button.
Things are already bad enough as it is, but at least it’s still possible to get by even if the system takes a dislike to you.
> Exactly. You do not want to hand the US government the ability to “turn off” someone’s daily life at the press of a button.
If you're within the borders of the US, this ability already exists, they have a monopoly on violence in the country, something the government is very eager to demonstrate this year.
There’s a lot of room between violence and financial isolation. The government has shown multiple times that it is willing to go after otherwise law-abiding citizens who take up disfavored careers, whether it’s gun dealers and payday lenders in Operation Choke Point, cannabis dispensaries in states where it was legal, or online cam girls. In all of these cases, going to cash or using alternatives to the banking system was possible and even necessary for them to survive.
1 reply →
> but that an individual cannot participate in society or survive if the government decides to revoke the id
What would happen today if your government revokes a SSN which is your de facto "personal identification number" today? Can you still rent/buy a home? Can you have a job?
Some US citizens don’t even have SSNs, believe it or not. The Amish get by just fine.
Is it generally considered that The Amish "participates in society"? I thought the whole point for them was that they're "outside of modern society", to some degree at least.
1 reply →
Before my time, but I believe SSN was and probably still is controversial in my circle. I definitely recall rumblings about it even 30 years ago.
But while cash is printed (physical currency): Not having an SSN becomes a major impediment but not impossible to make transactions and survive.
Our migrant workers—who are basically carrying white collar workers like me—are proof of this.
Isn't all of those cases then also proof that if the SSN was a government ID instead, all of those things would have been the same? The ID wouldn't "impossible to make transactions and survive", just an impediment, just like not having a SSN is today.
Point is, the US already basically have a de facto "ID card", they just don't call it as such (yet?), so claiming somehow correctly labeling this thing would make things worse or more difficult, doesn't make much sense.