4 ms·

Maybe Leaker 2.0 is inferior to 1.0. It perhaps parallels America 2.0 (indefinite detention without trial, torture, and maybe a few other crimes against humanit

• mattnewton 10y ago
  I was never a great history student but I am certain America 1.0 isn't as rosey as you paint it. I can think of genocide of indigenous people, slavery, increased use of capital punishment and mob justice tactics like tarring and feathering just off the top of my head depending on when you draw the line. I imagine the kinds of things you listed are only coming to light now. I can't see what's unique about the people in power now that makes it likely they are the first acting like this, with maybe the exception of surveillance. I think the earlier American government had less problems keeping these activities secret. However, despite that cynicism that doesn't mean Americans shouldn't fight for those improvements too!
  • eternalban 10y ago
    They are the first ones to institutionalize these actions. At what point, for example, did a President of this nation adopt torture as a legitimate tool of the state? Sure, people have been tortured in US for ages, but it was not official policy. That is the difference.
    • pvg 10y ago
      "Some people are property" was the law of the land and you could do whatever you wanted with your property. And that's just for starters. The notion that some fundamental break occurred at 'enhanced interrogation' is ahistorical.
      • mindslight 10y ago
        "Some people are property", as abhorrent as it is, is markedly different from "all people are property".
        • pvg 10y ago
          There is certainly a difference between actual chattel slavery and a glib bit of hyperbolic political sloganeering.
          • mindslight 10y ago
            While you downplay my mention as "political sloganeering", it's a core assumption of contemporary political philosophy. A specific designation ("chattel") is only required for distinguishing between different classes of people, when only one class is treated as property. Totalitarianism implicitly asserts all people are its to control, and thus needs no formal designation.
            • pvg 10y ago
              Strike as non-responsive?
              • mindslight 10y ago
                That seems more applicable to your first response to me. My exact point was that there is a difference (your labeling my phrasing as "political sloganeering" notwithstanding). It only makes sense to compare current society with historic oppression if you also equate us all with that oppressed class (eg the unoppressed class is what has vanished). I'm not saying you can't find further examples of historic government overreach against the citizenry, it's just that slavery is not one of them. edit: Actually scratch that, I see that the comparison was actually being made with torture, which is generally about non-citizens (I hope?). I was addressing the larger topic of societal surveillance, and that to me seems like a definite new phenomenon rather than something comparable to past oppression. Although I'd say it's been created by technological change rather than political change.
  • squozzer 10y ago
    I'm only comparing the political / social situations of Snowden vs. Ellsberg. Not antebellum vs. today. And it's admittedly a distortion. The article itself goes to great lengths to justify Ellsberg and condemn Snowden, mostly in terms of social contract / status - e.g. comparing Ellsberg "high-born" CV to Snowden's, or Ellsberg's adherence to the unwritten rules of leaker protocol.