3 ms·

What amnesty means is clearly defined, as you quote from the article. I don't see why the amnesty offered by a company would be so different from that offered b

What amnesty means is clearly defined, as you quote from the article. I don't see why the amnesty offered by a company would be so different from that offered by the government. A government could similarly make your life unpleasant, just as a company, and in neither case is it customary to exhaustively enumerate things. Ultimately it is based on trust, and governments have also been known to renege on their promises. I'm not saying this promise is trustworthy though, just that the fact that it is from a company doesn't disqualify it outright.

teddyh 11y ago
As I said, an ordinary person has little interaction with the state, so there are fewer direct opportunities for harassment. Moreover, the state has little reason to harass the usual persons offered amnesty from prosecution, since those people have usually not been in direct opposition to the state itself – they are usually just criminals. However, if they had been in opposition to the state itself, it would probably be a different story. For instance, I don’t think Snowden could ever fully trust a (theoretical) offer of amnesty from the U.S. government. A similar situation (to the VW one) exists with employees of the state who continue to be employed by the state – they interact with the state more (in its role as their employer), and more interaction means more possibilities of harassment. Also, even some people who quit their jobs would be affected; these would be people who were employed by state actors which have a lot of interactions with people in general, like the IRS, the DMV or the Police. I would imagine that former employees at any of these organizations who quit their jobs and turned whistleblowers would experience trouble from their former employers. On the other hand, a whistleblowing former clerk from, say, the Department of Veterans Affairs, would probably not. What I’m saying here is that there are two factors: The degree of interaction a person has with the organization after the event, and the degree to which the person was percieved to be in direct opposition to the organization itself. The VW employees score very highly on both these factors, while the median person offered amnesty from prosecution from the state usually scores low on both.
- andreasvc 11y ago
  Ah, I see your point.

teddyh 11y ago

As I said, an ordinary person has little interaction with the state, so there are fewer direct opportunities for harassment. Moreover, the state has little reason to harass the usual persons offered amnesty from prosecution, since those people have usually not been in direct opposition to the state itself – they are usually just criminals. However, if they had been in opposition to the state itself, it would probably be a different story. For instance, I don’t think Snowden could ever fully trust a (theoretical) offer of amnesty from the U.S. government. A similar situation (to the VW one) exists with employees of the state who continue to be employed by the state – they interact with the state more (in its role as their employer), and more interaction means more possibilities of harassment. Also, even some people who quit their jobs would be affected; these would be people who were employed by state actors which have a lot of interactions with people in general, like the IRS, the DMV or the Police. I would imagine that former employees at any of these organizations who quit their jobs and turned whistleblowers would experience trouble from their former employers. On the other hand, a whistleblowing former clerk from, say, the Department of Veterans Affairs, would probably not. What I’m saying here is that there are two factors: The degree of interaction a person has with the organization after the event, and the degree to which the person was percieved to be in direct opposition to the organization itself. The VW employees score very highly on both these factors, while the median person offered amnesty from prosecution from the state usually scores low on both.

andreasvc 11y ago
Ah, I see your point.