5 ms·

Obama 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

by 0xfeba 9y ago

Obama 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 ago
I 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
    I chose 'spectrum' since the comment I was referring to was starting from a "which party" question - the spectrum I was envisioning was "fringe to mainstream" within a given party. I certainly agree that framing political beliefs themselves as linear is misleading, though. I should have been clearer about that.
wu-ikkyu 9y ago
This is a false dichotomy which is enabling to the surveillance state.
- 0xfeba 9y ago
  When was the last time a 3rd party candidate won?
  - CaptSpify 9y ago
    Why does that matter? There's a lot of distrust for both parties, from both sides at the moment. That seems like a good time for a 3rd party to come on in.
  - Bartweiss 9y ago
    I'm tired and bitter, but: there's no rule saying good outcomes are possible. It's entirely possible to say "this is a false dichotomy, both parties are fundamentally hopeless on this issue" and also say "third party candidates are completely unelectable". I'm not entirely fatalistic; I think "a major party greatly realigns its views on privacy" is possible, if hard and unlikely. I mentioned Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders as contrarian voices each pulling their party away from bulk surveillance, and I hope we'll see more such voices in the future. A realignment looks increasingly possible, and increasingly necessary. But I honestly don't think "third parties are powerless" should be seen as a reason to have any hope at all for our existing options.

by 0xfeba 9y ago

Bartweiss 9y ago

I 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
  I chose 'spectrum' since the comment I was referring to was starting from a "which party" question - the spectrum I was envisioning was "fringe to mainstream" within a given party. I certainly agree that framing political beliefs themselves as linear is misleading, though. I should have been clearer about that.

wu-ikkyu 9y ago

This is a false dichotomy which is enabling to the surveillance state.

0xfeba 9y ago
When was the last time a 3rd party candidate won?
- CaptSpify 9y ago
  Why does that matter? There's a lot of distrust for both parties, from both sides at the moment. That seems like a good time for a 3rd party to come on in.
- Bartweiss 9y ago
  I'm tired and bitter, but: there's no rule saying good outcomes are possible. It's entirely possible to say "this is a false dichotomy, both parties are fundamentally hopeless on this issue" and also say "third party candidates are completely unelectable". I'm not entirely fatalistic; I think "a major party greatly realigns its views on privacy" is possible, if hard and unlikely. I mentioned Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders as contrarian voices each pulling their party away from bulk surveillance, and I hope we'll see more such voices in the future. A realignment looks increasingly possible, and increasingly necessary. But I honestly don't think "third parties are powerless" should be seen as a reason to have any hope at all for our existing options.