Comment by icelancer
12 years ago
>not all US citizens
The vast majority of citizens support these initiatives. Given the winner-take-all approach we employ, it is not a stretch to say that yes, we all share blame.
12 years ago
>not all US citizens
The vast majority of citizens support these initiatives. Given the winner-take-all approach we employ, it is not a stretch to say that yes, we all share blame.
Where did you get the idea the "vast majority of citizens support these initiatives"?
From the very start the polls have generally been against mass NSA surveillance except when the wording of the poll was misleading[1]. As more and more information has come out the polls have become more and more clearly against it[2].
Try to keep the facts straight.
Not sure why you refer to winner-take-all and how that concept could make everyone responsible. Keep in mind almost know one knew about this until very recently and we learned more even today.
[1] http://www.policymic.com/articles/53767/nsa-surveillance-sca...
[2] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/10/polls-continue-show-ma...
Now try mentioning terrorism as the tradeoff for granting civil liberties and see what people think.
That's how they view it, for better or worse.
Part of Obama's campaign was an end to warrentless wiretaps. Now, if people were paying closer attention, then maybe they would have known better than to trust him (or indeed, any American politician), but I think it is quite a stretch to say that the people are to blame when a politician is less than honest.
Furthermore, the people who are to blame for our current political system are long dead. Everyone alive today was born into this framework and told to work within the framework to modify the framework. They have not had the opportunity to shape the framework free from the constraints of the framework. The facilities the framework provides to modify itself are clumsy, inadequate, and ineffective when everything is working smoothly.
This isn't a system we chose, this is a situation that we were born into, and find ourselves unable to change.
Exactly, Obama in 2007:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAQlsS9diBs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6fnfVJzZT4
"This Administration also puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand." (...) "That means no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens. No more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime. No more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient. That is not who we are. And it is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorists."
This should be quoted much more often.
Regarding "work within the framework to modify the framework" Snowden decided not to work within it and we still don't know what will happen to him.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130726/01200123954/obama-...
> Regarding "work within the framework to modify the framework" Snowden decided not to work within it and we still don't know what will happen to him.
What we do know is that he got shit done. His voice has been heard, people are talking now, he has had an impact.
Opting to work outside the framework is often not safe, particularly when the framework includes provisions for harming those who opt to work outside of it, but sometimes that is the only effective option.