This is an excerpt from The Breakdown newspaper. To read the full article, register.
“It is necessary for human civilization to function properly so that we can conduct large parts of our lives unsupervised.”
—Tiffany Jenkins
Hallways were the first secret technology.
In 1716, the Duchess of Marlborough consulted the architect of Blenheim Palace because of all the long, narrow rooms she planned. The architect had to explain that this was “just an illusion”. in the middle rooms.
A contemporary architect explained the purpose of the new plan: “All the rooms in this House are private; that is, there is a Passage to all the Rooms without going through any other Room.”
In other words, the hallways created a mystery.
Tiffany Jenkins writes: “It took a century for this design to become common. Strangers are intimate; The Rise and Fall of a Private Life. “But when it did, the Victorians embraced it wholeheartedly.”
Before the time of the corridors, “there was no private space completely separated, there was no part of life that others could not properly intrude on,” he explains. “Foreigners could enter into anyone’s business and were expected to do so.
On the contrary, that began to change with the Puritans, whose insistence that matters of religion and conscience were personal rights established the first obstacle that the government could not cross.
After its establishment, this non-intrusive section grew into a Victorian-style secret shelter that protected bedrooms, communications and commerce.
In 1844, the secret place was tested when the British government was caught opening the mail of political exile Giuseppe Mazzini to look at his correspondence with the Italian rebels.
Mazzini confirmed his assessment by asking friends to send him sand and poppy seeds. When the letters came up empty – the seeds fell during government surveillance – the breach of privacy outraged the nation.
Thomas Carlyle called opening a man’s mail an “insult” similar to picking his bag.
Senior counsel Thomas Duncombe said the practice “undermined public confidence that is essential to the business world.”
Most interestingly, the plots of two Charles Dickens novels – The Black House and Little Dorrit – circulated stolen letters that threatened to reveal family connections and financial transactions.
All of this proved, as Tiffany Jenkins says, that “a change in the value and respect of privacy has taken place.”
But while the Victorians were the first to accept this culture, the United States was the first to write a law – kind of.
In 1890, Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis were published Privacy Rights – An introductory essay against the “liberty of separation” written in response to the intrusion of newspaper privacy and early photography.
This was “the last moment” in secret history, Jenkins writes. But, in researching their case, the two lawyers noticed a surprising difference: There is no mention of privacy in the Constitution – not even in the Amendments.
Despite the impact of the case, the legal silence on privacy continued for many years.
In 1928, the Supreme Court upheld the government’s use of wiretapping without a license. Olmstead v United Stateswhich ruled that wiretapping does not violate the Fourth Amendment (because there was no physical trespass on the defendant’s property).
Writing on behalf of the four dissenting justices, Justice Brandeis warned that “scientific progress in providing the Government with espionage services cannot be stopped by wiretapping.
That’s exactly what happened, of course.
(Less prophetically, Brandeis also warned that “advances in the occult and related sciences may lead to ways of investigating unspeakable beliefs, ideas and concepts.”)
It wasn’t until Griswold v Connecticut in 1965 that the Supreme Court declared that the law of the state has a right to privacy. And even then it took some to create logic.
“To say that privacy is a constitutional right,” says Jenkins, “Justice Douglas said that the guarantees of the Bill of Rights contain ‘penumbras’ that, taken together, add to the right to privacy.”
Penumbras – a concept that sounds more like stars than rules – seems like a legitimate basis for mystery.
In 1967, the right to privacy increased slightly when the Supreme Court ruled Katz v United States that the Fourth Amendment not only protects land, but people, too.
This was celebrated by privacy advocates because it violated the right to privacy over property rights, ensuring that the Fourth Amendment applies in places like the phone booth where Charles Katz was illegally betting on college basketball.
However, when we think about the celebrations, it seems that it was not good because the court only wanted the government to get permission to listen.
“The decision made it possible to look at wiretapping as a tool of law and order,” says Jenkins.
For privacy advocates, things only went downhill from there.
Jenkins wrote: “Through a series of decisions, the Supreme Court narrowed the scope of warrantless searches while expanding the scope of warrant searches.”
To illustrate how vulnerable she was, Jenkins cites Monica Lewinsky, who was forced to give away her letters, gifts, and clothes because her famous reporter accused her (not even a major one).
With the government giving itself such powers, privacy is no longer a locked door at the end of the corridor – instead, it is simply a document.
Jenkins complains about this.
“It is important to have a private space protected from scrutiny by companies, the government and the public,” he concludes; “a place where we can be alone.”
But his secret history shows that, contrary to popular belief, “it is not ‘natural’ or universal to live a secret life.”
So if we want one, we have to build it.
Get news in your inbox. Check out the Blockworks blog post:
