6 ms·
Yes. I give to the EFF and a few other select causes each year, but I just can't keep up with individual issues. I just plan on waiting it out for the next 4 ye
by 0xfeba 9y ago
Yes. I give to the EFF and a few other select causes each year, but I just can't keep up with individual issues. I just plan on waiting it out for the next 4 years.
- CWuestefeld 9y agoI just plan on waiting it out for the next 4 years. You're not thinking that if the Democrats manage to take the White House, that this situation will improve - are you? I mean, most of this damage was done when Pres. Obama was in the White House and the Congress skewed more toward Democrats. The idea that the Democrats will defend our privacy and 4th Amendment is absurd.
- archvile 9y agoExactly. Three letter agency abilities were expanded hugely under Obama. Why people can’t grasp this, I’ll never know.
- chimeracoder 9y ago> Exactly. Three letter agency abilities were expanded hugely under Obama. Why people can’t grasp this, I’ll never know. Partisanship is one hell of a drug.
- at-fates-hands 9y ago> Three letter agency abilities were expanded As well as politicized and weaponized.
- 0xfeba 9y agoThe boat was built and set sail under Bush and the GOP congress, under the super-Orwellian PATRIOT Act. I am not happy Obama expanded their powers but fail to see how the GOP would make the situation better.
- CWuestefeld 9y agoThe boat has been under construction for decades. The FISA courts were set up in 1978 (that's the Democrat Carter, and I believe that it was Democratic Congress at the time, too), but even that was only a response, trying to rein in the national surveillance apparatus that was already running wild. Reagan upped it a notch with Exec Order 12333, GWB obviously built on top of that, and Obama went hog-wild with it. There's plenty of blame to drown both parties.
- 0xfeba 9y agoObama expanded the program, yes. He did not create it. And also, many other groups I donate to are just swamping me with non-NSA stuff related to Trump and the GOP, so that's also what I meant. But still, yes, I feel democrats have a better chance of at least listening to constituent concerns about privacy. The GOP wallies about small government, except for the military and they view the NSA/FBI/CIA as the same. But even if not--I don't see it improving with another R in power either. Or do you?
- Bartweiss 9y agoI think this misrepresents the split. Trump's views on privacy are obvious and awful, yes - he has Sessions as AG. But Dianne Feinstein is one of the fiercest surveillance advocates in Congress. Hillary Clinton had vastly more support from intelligence agencies than Trump did, and refused to condemn what was described in the Snowden releases. Meanwhile, Rand Paul ended bulk phone record collection for a few hours in 2015, defying much of both parties to do so. He filibustered over drone strikes, and promised to restrict NSA searches if he was elected. There's a lot to dislike about Rand Paul, and libertarians aren't the only people opposing surveillance - Bernie Sanders made similar promises from the far opposite end of the spectrum. But I think framing this as "bad under Democrats, hopeless under Republicans" makes it harder to address the problem. The mainstream of both parties are similarly awful, even if the Democrats talk a bit more softly about it, while the fringes of both parties are often strong surveillance opponents.
- mindslight 9y ago> Rand Paul ... Bernie Sanders made similar promises from the far opposite end of the spectrum. Referring to Libertarian and left-libertarian as opposite ends of the spectrum is a grave disservice, and feeds directly into our contemporary fallacious polarization. Either view it as a two-dimensional circle, or just ignore the secondary "Left"-"Right" marketing and analyze the primary characteristic of libertarian-authoritarian.
- Bartweiss 9y ago