Stasi 2.0

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Term Stasi 2.0 is the catchphrase of a civil rights campaign currently underway in Germany.

The term is a portmanteau that originated in the Blogosphere. The term combines the name of East Germany's Ministry of State Security, commonly known as the "Stasi", with the concept of software versioning as used in the popular phrase "Web 2.0". The implication is that Stasi 2.0 is the modernized, updated and contemporary successor (or "version" in the software usage) of Stasi. The campaign focuses on the proposals of Wolfgang Schäuble, the current Secretary of the Interior of Germany. Schäuble currently proposes a preemptive security strategy, which critics contend bears similarities to the practices of the Stasi, but using current technology. His most disputed ideas involve his proposals for Telecommunications data retention, his proposal to legalize military action of the Bundeswehr inside German borders, and his support for covert "online searches" of suspects' computer equipment. His latest proposal in particular has met stiff opposition from many prominent German netizens, as well as the Chaos Computer Club.

Though Schäuble claims his proposals serve to protect a "Right to Security", no such positive right is recognized under the German constitution.

[edit] Criticism

Some critics of the campaign dispute the contention that the presently proposed policies would or could lead to abuses similar to those perpetrated by the Stasi. They claim that the term is used out of proportion, and thus cheapens the historically known tangible suffering of Stasi victims. For this reason, several prominent civil rights groups have made it their official policy not to use the term, and disassociate with the campaign. Additionally, some critics claim that the ideologies targeted by Schäuble's initiatives might become more acceptable as part of the campaign, while legitimate state authority is vilified. They see any losses of privacy or freedom as acceptable collateral damage, or deny that there are or would be any such losses.

One Leipzig-based shirt printing service denied printing the trademark image of the campaign, claiming the campaign to be libelous but later did print the image.^[1]