3 ms·

I agree with GP that there is a dominant, mainstream line of thought in America that the lives of non-Americans don't matter as much. I don't think most America

by 3131s 10y ago

I agree with GP that there is a dominant, mainstream line of thought in America that the lives of non-Americans don't matter as much. I don't think most Americans would say as much if you asked them directly, but in their calculations of how to justify our foreign policy, for example, it is hard to see how they arrive at their conclusions without putting less weight on non-American lives. I can't tell you how many Americans oppose the war in Iraq now because a few thousand of American soldiers died, however they either don't mention or don't know that hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died. Even in the responses here there is the absurd rational that spying on non-Americans is what agencies like the NSA were created to do. That is correct of course, but it does not even start to answer whether spying on allies and enemies alike is the moral or even smart thing to do. We created those agencies, it's not like they popped out of a void, so citing there existence and their stated purpose is totally useless as a justification for their behavior.

grzm 10y ago
These are strong, contentious claims. What evidence do you to support them? Polls? Studies? And while comparisons with other governments or groups can be problematic, as the bad actions of one group don't justify the bad actions of another, there is a well-known bias against out-groups of any type, which is part of human nature. It's admirable to keep this in mind and work against this bias, though to make the claims you are, I think it's fair to ask whether this behavior is significantly different from comparable nations, and whether you're holding the USA to a different standard. A different standard is fine, as long as it's explicit. Your points about whether actions are moral or smart is well-taken. Similar arguments about claims regarding the purpose of the NSA are needed as well, however. Intelligence gathering predates the NSA, or the USA for that matter. It goes back thousands of years. The NSA is not exclusive in the world for doing this type of work. Whether or not a nation engages in intelligence gathering and to what extent is likely more an issue of resources rather than ideology. What is done with that intelligence matters as well. I'm not arguing for or against the NSA or the work it's doing. I do think a more in-depth and supported criticism is required to be truly substantive.

by 3131s 10y ago

grzm 10y ago

These are strong, contentious claims. What evidence do you to support them? Polls? Studies? And while comparisons with other governments or groups can be problematic, as the bad actions of one group don't justify the bad actions of another, there is a well-known bias against out-groups of any type, which is part of human nature. It's admirable to keep this in mind and work against this bias, though to make the claims you are, I think it's fair to ask whether this behavior is significantly different from comparable nations, and whether you're holding the USA to a different standard. A different standard is fine, as long as it's explicit. Your points about whether actions are moral or smart is well-taken. Similar arguments about claims regarding the purpose of the NSA are needed as well, however. Intelligence gathering predates the NSA, or the USA for that matter. It goes back thousands of years. The NSA is not exclusive in the world for doing this type of work. Whether or not a nation engages in intelligence gathering and to what extent is likely more an issue of resources rather than ideology. What is done with that intelligence matters as well. I'm not arguing for or against the NSA or the work it's doing. I do think a more in-depth and supported criticism is required to be truly substantive.