6 ms·

And you know what's also awful? We expect neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump to pardon Snowden in the future. In this sense, Democrats and Republicans are

by k_sze 10y ago

And you know what's also awful? We expect neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump to pardon Snowden in the future. In this sense, Democrats and Republicans are not all that different. It's still all about the interest of the powerful.

zamalek 10y ago
Trump would, in all likelihood, further attempts to hunt him down - given his stance on spying on Americans.
allendoerfer 10y ago
Sure, that is bad. But on a grand scale of things the president or whether or not one man will be pardoned is not really what matters for the American people. To me it is an important issue, but things like wars, mass surveillance and so on are even more important. And you cannot fix them with a broken parliament. However the parliaments are broken, because its members are invincible [0]. Name recognition beats everything. They do not have to fear to do something wrong but for their names to not be recognized anymore. So money talks. Hard to imagine how this could be fixed. I guess you would have to restrict the amount of money to be used, but who would shoot himself in the foot? You would need shitloads of money from a source, who does not care - rare combination. Also the topic is not as sexy as "curing X". After that the even bigger problem would be to find a way to get the media to actually report on things and/or the people to actually pay attention to such reports. A glimmer of hope to me is Jon Stewart (and the group around him, especially Last Week Tonight). [0] https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/reelect.php https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/reelect.php
lettergram 10y ago
The if Hilary claimed she would pardon Snowden I'd vote for her in a heartbeat. I hate her because to me she seems to want to expand the surveillance state. I hate Trump because with a surveillance state anyone who makes fun of his hands would/could be arrested... Hence, at the moment I'm voting Gary Johnson, who I actually think is the most qualified, but also made it clear he wants to downsize the NSA
- vcarl 10y ago
  Gary Johnson wants to get rid of the Department of Education[0] and is against mandatory vaccinations[1]. [0]: https://www.johnsonweld.com/education https://www.johnsonweld.com/education [1]: https://twitter.com/govgaryjohnson/status/113419678730301440 https://twitter.com/govgaryjohnson/status/113419678730301440
  - lettergram 10y ago
    I'm not going to get into a flame war, but pretty much everything related to libertarians are freedom of choice. I strongly agree that mandatory vaccinations on a national level should not be required. As long as it does not harm me, I don't think I should disallow someone to do it. That is to say, I don't think I should, or society should pressure our beliefs on others. I would vaccinate my own children because it makes sense to, but I wouldn't force my neighbor to at gun point because that isn't going to help anyone. Which is the whole premise of the libertarian party.
    - JoeAltmaier 10y ago
      But everything affects others, especially in this ever-more-connected-and-congested world. Standards are useful for computer, and for people. Libertarianism has attractions, but idealism only goes so far. I believe the Libertarian world would collapse in flames (or disease, or hunger, or congestion).
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - jshevek 10y ago
        There are multiple approaches to structuring society consistent with the idea that violence shouldn't be used to coerce people into desired behavior. There are multiple libertarian worlds.
    - allendoerfer 10y ago
      I really like the idea of the small state. Things should be as simple as possible, but not simpler. Children have rights and when parents do not protect these rights, the state has to. There is a hierarchy of rights. The right of the child to be healthy is greater than the right of the parent to ignore scientific evidence.

by k_sze 10y ago

zamalek 10y ago

Trump would, in all likelihood, further attempts to hunt him down - given his stance on spying on Americans.

allendoerfer 10y ago

Sure, that is bad. But on a grand scale of things the president or whether or not one man will be pardoned is not really what matters for the American people. To me it is an important issue, but things like wars, mass surveillance and so on are even more important. And you cannot fix them with a broken parliament. However the parliaments are broken, because its members are invincible [0]. Name recognition beats everything. They do not have to fear to do something wrong but for their names to not be recognized anymore. So money talks. Hard to imagine how this could be fixed. I guess you would have to restrict the amount of money to be used, but who would shoot himself in the foot? You would need shitloads of money from a source, who does not care - rare combination. Also the topic is not as sexy as "curing X". After that the even bigger problem would be to find a way to get the media to actually report on things and/or the people to actually pay attention to such reports. A glimmer of hope to me is Jon Stewart (and the group around him, especially Last Week Tonight). [0] https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/reelect.php https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/reelect.php

lettergram 10y ago

The if Hilary claimed she would pardon Snowden I'd vote for her in a heartbeat. I hate her because to me she seems to want to expand the surveillance state. I hate Trump because with a surveillance state anyone who makes fun of his hands would/could be arrested... Hence, at the moment I'm voting Gary Johnson, who I actually think is the most qualified, but also made it clear he wants to downsize the NSA

vcarl 10y ago
Gary Johnson wants to get rid of the Department of Education[0] and is against mandatory vaccinations[1]. [0]: https://www.johnsonweld.com/education https://www.johnsonweld.com/education [1]: https://twitter.com/govgaryjohnson/status/113419678730301440 https://twitter.com/govgaryjohnson/status/113419678730301440
- lettergram 10y ago
  I'm not going to get into a flame war, but pretty much everything related to libertarians are freedom of choice. I strongly agree that mandatory vaccinations on a national level should not be required. As long as it does not harm me, I don't think I should disallow someone to do it. That is to say, I don't think I should, or society should pressure our beliefs on others. I would vaccinate my own children because it makes sense to, but I wouldn't force my neighbor to at gun point because that isn't going to help anyone. Which is the whole premise of the libertarian party.
  - JoeAltmaier 10y ago
    But everything affects others, especially in this ever-more-connected-and-congested world. Standards are useful for computer, and for people. Libertarianism has attractions, but idealism only goes so far. I believe the Libertarian world would collapse in flames (or disease, or hunger, or congestion).
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - jshevek 10y ago
      There are multiple approaches to structuring society consistent with the idea that violence shouldn't be used to coerce people into desired behavior. There are multiple libertarian worlds.
  - allendoerfer 10y ago
    I really like the idea of the small state. Things should be as simple as possible, but not simpler. Children have rights and when parents do not protect these rights, the state has to. There is a hierarchy of rights. The right of the child to be healthy is greater than the right of the parent to ignore scientific evidence.