issue 23// vol 46 opinions // no. 15

Does big brother really have our backs?

>» Quarantine leading to state information gathering

Matthew Fraser
Opinions Editor

 

he Chinese government has been using

its network of CCTVs to monitor the
movements of citizens—whether they
are suspected or confirmed carriers of
COVID-19. They also provided infected
citizens with a wristband that coordinated
with cellphone data to alert the police to
any movement beyond one's quarantined
area. Kind of like a house arrest anklet.
In South Korea, the government is using
cellphone location data in conjunction
with credit card records to track who went
where and whether or not they could have
infected someone else.

Coronavirus has leapt from being the
200th thing Cardi B has screamed this
month to becoming the inadvertent tool of
state surveillance. Obviously, this is a time
where individuals don’t want to get sick and
the state wants as few people as possible
rushing to healthcare facilities; however,
even if Canada is less intrusive than China,
is it actually a good idea for the government
to be able to track your movements? And if
they start tracking you now, will they really
stop once COVID-19 has run its course?

Now, as a novel virus claims lives
around the globe and every cough and
chest tickle is the subject of fear and
deep suspicion, the Quarantine Act
has made a return. At this time, it gives

our government the ability to enforce
quarantine on any returning traveller

for a mandatory 14 days. As soon as one
clears customs, they are to go straight
home without using public transit. No
stops allowed. But how exactly does the
state plan to enforce this isolation? The
house arrest necessary is supposed to be
as “unobtrusive as possible” but I see no
way for one to be properly confined by
government order without that intruding
upon normal life. At this time, at least
two women have been arrested for
breaking their quarantine in Canada. That
enforcement sounds obtrusive, and the
ability for the state apparatus to monitor
people in order to apprehend them is
clearly an intrusion.

I certainly don’t think that the
Canadian government aims to watch each
and every one of us day in and day out, yet
simultaneously, I am not pleased to hear
that a system could be put in place where
the state can use your cellphone data and
purchase history to establish yours and
everyone else's whereabouts at will. More
importantly, where will this data be stored,
who has access to it, and how much of
it can be modified by you—the provider
of this data? Will the citizen own it as
private record or will the data banks be
state property with no consultation to the
provider? Let’s not forget that every week
some company is either hacked or caught

amassing data that far exceeds the products
they are selling for your use. Between Apple
getting caught listening to conversations
and private moments or Telus getting
hacked and having its data compromised,
the less of your data that exists the better.

We also must consider government
overreach and the character of whoever
resides in the highest office. How much
power are we willing to give Trudeau and
leave on the table for whoever comes after
him? How much of our data are we willing
to put into the government’s hand to
remain long after we have died—or at least,
while the office changes hands? How much
should the government be able to lock us
down before we ask for the key back?

The problem is not “is this power
necessary now” but, “when this all ends

  

Photo by Billy Bui

will the power and the data disappear?”
The “state” is everyone from Jagmeet Singh
to the late Rob Ford—and all of his drug
and alcohol battles. The state can be Mike
Pence who wishes for creationism to be
brought into public schools or it can be
AOC who wants to prohibit the use of
gasoline powered cars and save the world
from cow farts. The state is as nefarious as
Hitler or as benevolent as Jimmy Carter.
We can never guarantee that we will
agree with everything that the state says
and aims to do, no decision is perfect, and
no leader can satisfy all of their voters.
Yet in these trying times, we must not
relinquish a power we can't get back toa
state that’s changing as fast as the people
who are governed by it.

Ill-informed partygoers during COVID-19

» The odds are against good youthful decisions in America

Matthew Fraser
Opinions Editor

 

Sm things are inevitable. You can't
stop natural disasters, you can't
stop people from acting in their own
misguided self-interests, and apparently,
you can't stop stupid. The problem is
quantifying stupid. Some instances occur
as a byproduct of ignorance and a lack of
worldly knowledge, others are the result
of inadequate foresight. Spring break
partiers in the face of a global pandemic is
certainly a case of stupid, but of what kind?
Is it just short sighted, hormone-fueled
hedonistic pursuit? Is it the bulletproof
self-confidence of youth with the self-
assured notion that whatever happens
always happens only to others?

Some people have been quick to
castigate the teens and young adults
who flocked to the beaches of Florida for
some R&R as ignorant and selfish, yet
simultaneously, the very President of the
United States of America has come forward
and said that the country must go back
to work and that basically, that we cannot
socially distance forever. If the US president
thinks we should not socially distance
(which could potentially save the lives
of those who are immunocompromised)
for the sake of General Motors, how bad
is it that your cousin goes drinking—and
ergo keeps local businesses alive? Some
observers think they were driven by
ignorance and an unhealthy disregard for

human life, yet as the death toll piled up
in China and Italy, Trump originally called
coronavirus “their new hoax” in reference
to the democrats.

It’s no small wonder that the average
American teen, fresh out of school,
released from being under mom and
dad's thumb, would rush to the beaches
for cheap tequila and good ole’ fashioned
premarital copulation. By the age of 21,
most people have seen an endless reel
of Hollywood movies depicting the joys
of spring break and its drunken fervor;
why are we surprised that bat-stew
memes bolstered the adolescent ego into
disregarding a garbled public safety plea?

Speaking of the PSA, the few
individuals who could (in the context of
America) get a clear enough message out
changed their stories daily. One day was
stock up and hunker down, then the next
day's news was to relax and not hoard.

On Tuesday everyone needed masks and
gloves, by Thursday the healthy were to
leave them alone and the unwell were to
stay put and try to do without. All the
while our dear friend Trump was here

to wave his hands and say that it was all
under control. Can we really blame the
23-year-old, nursing a recent heartbreak
and the cancellation of the March Madness
tournament, for turning to Miami beach's
entertainment?

In the presidential haste to keep the
numbers low and avoid panic, New Orleans
was not urged to cancel Mardi Gras. The
result? Hundreds of new cases directly tied

to the massive
street party and
a nationwide
ballooning

of COVID-19
cases. Poor
Brady Sluder,
the spring
breaker who
infamously
said, “If I get
corona, I get
corona. At the
end of the day,
I’m not going
to let it stop me
from partying...
We're just out
here having

a good time.
Whatever
happens,
happens.” He
never stood a
chance with

his pale face,
splotchy red cheeks, backwards hat and

all; he was doomed to poor judgement and
cursed to fall into youthful exuberance’s
vile clutches. By the time the best advice
was given to him, he had witnessed months
of misinformation and hours of disregard
sewn into his brain. He and every other
American who can’t stand to sit still at
home played a game without knowing the
rules and with the dices loaded against
them.

  

Illustration by Sonam Kaloti

It was not simple ignorance that
brought these spring breakers to the beach.
It was a mixture of too little information
sent too late to those unprepared to
understand its gravity. People can
only make good decisions with good
information; with the White House divided
between giving money to everyone and
ending social distancing practices, good
information is in critically short supply.