The history of cryptography and therefore the history of IPsec and Openswan involve some level of politics.
Today, a lot of what we do is logged somewhere. Our cellphone companies keep a database of where we have been and whom we talked to. Some countries, not only totalitarian regimes or theocracies, but Western democracies as well, are implementing data retention laws to force ISPs to store a copy of everything their customers do for anything from a number of years to indefinitely. Companies gather massive amounts of data using discount cards and RFIDs, turning citizens into statistical consumers. Certain well-known companies have been known to employ the tactics of spyware and viruses, deliberately infecting customers' PCs with rootkits to monitor their activity, and even control what they can do with their own computers, all in the name of anti-piracy.
If you play the online game of World of Warcraft, every title bar your computer displays, including subjects and recipient names of your emails, will be sent to the vendor, Blizzard, to ensure you "do not cheat" in the game. Governments have made secret deals with printer vendors such as Canon, who secretly implemented a 'fingerprint' on pages produced by their color printers in almost invisible yellow dots that encode the printer's serial number, as well as the date and time the page was printed. Anonymity and privacy has never been so far away. Neighbors can easily watch what you do on your wireless network at home. We are leaving our digital footprints everywhere, for better or worse. The Big Brothers (and even more little ones) are here to stay. Everyone needs to take their precautions. They should, and now can, use strong cryptography.
However, this freedom for the good guys also means that organized crime, petty thieves, vandals, frauds, and terrorists can use cryptography. This fact is often cited by governments to justify regulations to limit the use of cryptography for private citizens and to increase surveillance. Unfortunately, the "privacy versus security" argument is a persuasive one, although it is in our opinion a fallacy at best, and a deliberate misrepresentation at worst. The argument is framed with manipulative questions such as, "Would you be willing to sacrifice some privacy to increase your security against terrorism?" However, the truth is that privacy and security are separate issues. One need not be sacrificed for the other.
We will never be able to hide the information needed for terrorists to do harm, but we can show potential terrorists what a true free world has to offer. And a free world is not one where governments and corporations look at and predict all your steps along the way so they can manipulate, intervene, or maximize profits. Privacy is essential to what makes us individuals. It is a Human Right.
Cryptography does not just provide privacy; it also provides security. Using cryptography we can ensure that we are talking to whom or what we intend, whether it is a person or an ATM machine. We can ensure that no one else is eavesdropping on us, and that no one else is pretending to be us. By encrypting data, we prevent information leakage. We protect against manipulation of our data stream. The security works both ways. We can trust them, and they can trust us. Security gives us integrity.