Is government ever justified in involving itself in the private lives and personal decisions of its citizens? Why of why not?

Yes, the government is always justified when immersing itself in the lives of its citizens, as the benefits of this practice will always outweigh its consequences. This question had a very definite answer when great men like George Washington, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, John Hancock, etc. found our great nation of America: no. Back then, it was very obvious that government should not spy on its own citizens and make decisions for them. This was actually the philosophy that the nation was based off, the Americans were tired of the British government controlling their lives, so they broke free and found the United States of America. But in today’s technologically advancing information age, the question is severely complicated with inventions like the Global Positions System, the World Wide Web, computer chips, the cellular telephone, etc. Of course, there are laws to regulate surveillance on these devices, but the invention of new technologies is passing these laws. As complicated as the question gets, I believe that the government is justified to immerse itself into the private lives and decisions of its citizens for a multitude of reasons. First, government surveillance practices can save lives, put criminals behind bars, or even find missing people, which definitely warrants the need for cellular surveillance. Another example of this justification is that measures like pat downs, body scanners, luggage scanners, and security guards at airports may be inconvenient for the passengers seeking to get on the plane, but will greatly increase the preservation of live on commercial aircraft. The last example to support this argument is in Ender’s Game. Ender had finally realized that the administrators and staff at Battle School controlled everything in his life while he was there. This pushed him to be better than ever (as seen in later in the text) and eventually defeat the Buggers. All in all, the government should have access to citizens’ lives and decisions because it is completely justified and the benefits of this will far outweigh the consequences.
Government surveillance of email and cellular devices has been a new form of surveillance that has just come into use within the last decade or so. Even though its uses and intents have been widely questioned and challenged, it has many benefits that most people don’t know about. An example of the benefits of cellular surveillance is that a student was actually kidnapped while trying to walk to school on November 16, 2011. But according to Patricia Smith (2012), “…the young woman was saved by her cell phone. Using software that tracks someone’s whereabouts by the GPS signal on their phone, police were able to intercept the truck [that had the student inside] on a remote country road…” (Page 16). This is just one of the many ways that cellular tracking can save lives and help others. Some people might say that the government will listen in on personal and intimate phone calls, thus violating their privacy. But honestly, even though the government might know what your favorite ice cream flavor is or when you are planning to propose to your girlfriend, I would think that the government doesn’t really care. They really should be focusing on subjects like where a person is going to dump a body or when someone is going to rob a bank. Unless it’s something that could incriminate you in court, the government is not going to care what you talk about with your friends over Facebook. Even if you are incriminated for something you said on Facebook that the government saw, it would still be your fault because you were the one stupid enough to say it on the internet. Cell phone tracking is a very beneficial technology that can save lives. Sure, the government might have your personal information, but they don’t really care about it until you’ve become incriminated or another instance has occurred where they would absolutely need the information. Cellular surveillance is a new technology that has many unforeseen benefits and the government is completely justified for using it.
Another example of how the government is justified for invading its citizens’ personal privacy is at airports. Ever since the 9/11 attacks implemented by the Al Qaeda terrorists, the Bush administration put in many more security protocols to prevent something as devastating as the attacks that happened on that fateful day of September 12, 2001. Patricia Smith (2011) writes, “The attacks shattered America’s sense of invulnerability and ushered in an ongoing battle with radical Islamic terrorists who…are bent on killing Americans. Washington responded with a host of measures…to protect the nation…[and] many of these security measures were authorized a month after 9/11” (page 1). Some of these measures included but are not limited to: pat downs, luggage scanners, body scanners, etc. Even though people complain about the inconvenience and the invasion of privacy that these practices create, there is something they can’t deny: it works! Ever since these protocols have been implemented, there have been no more violent disturbances to happen on commercial aircraft. Like my point in the paragraph above, these TSA agents don’t really care what color lip gloss or the kind of saxophone you have in your luggage, so even though they know what’s in your luggage, they don’t really care, unless it is an item that would violate security laws, like a knife or gun. These measures of invading privacy completely are completely validated because these measures work to prevent attacks on commercial aircraft and it really isn’t that big of a deal (the government doesn’t care about the latest fashions you have in your bag).
Finally, the last example of invasion of privacy being completely valid is in the book Ender’s Game. In this novel, the government controls just about every aspect in its citizens’ lives. The protagonist doesn’t really realize this until he is thrown into the grueling life of Battle School. Card (1991) wrote, “And the despair filled him again. Now he knew why. Now he knew what he hated so much. He had no control over his own life. They ran everything. They made all the choices…The one real thing, the one precious real thing was his memory of Valentine, the person who loved him…and they had taken her and put her on their side. She was one of them now.” (Page 107). But the “they” in the quote refers to the administrators and teachers of Battle School, but this quote is analogous to exactly what the Hegemon does to its citizens. But the benefits of controlling Ender and manipulating the ones he loved pushed him to be the best that he could be. Card (1991) writes, “‘...The last few weeks Ender’s even been, been—‘
‘Happy.’
‘Content. He’s doing well. His mind is keen, his play is excellent. Young as he is, we’ve never had a boy better prepared for command…’
‘…What kind of a man would heal a broken child of some of his hurt, just so he could throw him back into battle again.’” (Page 110). Naturally, it could be inferred that the letter from Valentine helped Ender recover from the depressive state he was in that was inflicted on by the teachers of Battle School. The letter gave him faith that his sister was with him wherever he went, thus giving him confidence to work harder and be better than already was he already was. It’s pretty obvious that the “healing” that Colonel Graff provided was the letter, and he was about to throw Ender right back into the Battle Room, pushing him towards his breaking point. Since the Battle School was analogous to the Hegemon, I believe that the tactics the Battle School employed were similar to what the Hegemon does. Even though the Hegemon restricts and invades its citizens’ lives, it’s only for the greater good. One example of this (Couldn’t find a direct quote) is the monitor that Ender has in the beginning. The Hegemon forced everyone to wear a monitor to test for Battle School. Although this is inconvenient and annoying, it is for the greater good. The ones who tested into Battle School ended up saving the earth and everyone inside. Although this measure is annoying at first, it helped determine which children were suitable candidates for Battle School. So the Hegemon gives everyone a monitor, while the Battle School administrators gave Ender a letter from Valentine. The monitors helped determine potential candidates for Battle School while the letter helped Ender become the amazing commander that defeated the Formics. Although some measures that the government, both in the story in real life, employs may seem annoying temporarily, it will be greatly beneficial in the long run.
In conclusion, the government is completely justified to involve itself in everyone one of its citizens’ lives. Although the government may seem annoying at times, implementing measures that may seem completely useless and bothersome, it will always be for the bigger picture. Would you rather have a slightly inconvenient but secure life or no life at all? You may have to experience some inconvenience some times in your life, but it is all for the greater good and for the preservation of your life. If we didn’t have any security measures in the U.S., terrorists would be running rampant in the streets, killing off multitudes of people. Our government wouldn’t be able to implement these security measures without some level of invading privacy. For example, the government needs to track your cell phone in order to know where you are in case you are kidnapped (an example of this was stated above). Sure, the government invades our privacy and knows our personal information, but for the most part, it doesn’t do anything with our personal information unless the need arises for it. The government is completely validated when it comes to the invasion of privacy of its citizens.

Works Cited

Card, Orson Scott. Ender's Game. New York: Tor, 1991. Print.
Smith, Patricia. "The 9/11 Dilemma: Freedom vs. Security." The 9/11 Dilemma. N.p., 5 Sept. 2011. Web. 26 Aug. 2012. <http://www.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=3756395>.
Smith, Patricia. "Are You Being Tracked?" Tge New York Times Upfront. N.p., 3 Sept. 2012. Web. 26 Aug. 2012.