5 ms·

Welcome to Fascism, ladies and gentlemen. No rights, no respect for due process, nobody to call for help. "Papers, please" was an invasion back in WWII, and h

Welcome to Fascism, ladies and gentlemen. No rights, no respect for due process, nobody to call for help. "Papers, please" was an invasion back in WWII, and here we are being scrutinized in every modern-conceivable way. Nobody bats an eye?

iamnotacrook 7y ago
Security/safety trade-off. You read a lot here about rights, intrusion etc but this site doesn't cater for people who are representative of most people. Most people aren't the least bit concerned about the authorities checking their id, scanning their bags etc at the airport.
- krageon 7y ago
  It's not a trade-off because there isn't a shred of proof that it makes things safer. We have a term called "security theater" for a reason, and that reason is this.
  - iamnotacrook 7y ago
    X-raying belongings and scanning for guns/knives and swabbing luggage for explosives is absolutely not security theatre and provides a non-zero chance of detecting bad actors.
    - krageon 7y ago
      This isn't a response to what I said, but if you do have something to contribute to that I would love to hear it. It would be very interesting.
    - ElFitz 7y ago
      Sure. When it's done well. I once got on a plane with a folded tv antenna as my carry on (it was aluminum and I worried it would get bent if checked) Sure it was wrapped in luggage plastic film. But it still was a meter long tv antenna. And I clearly asked at every step. Another guy apparently accidentally went onto a plane with a loaded gun (https://abcnews.go.com/US/tsa-lets-loaded-guns-past-security-planes/story?id=17358872 https://abcnews.go.com/US/tsa-lets-loaded-guns-past-security...) And don't get me started on the security guys pretending to check backpacks at big public places.
    - joshocar 7y ago
      I have kept a cheap pocket knife in my backpack for the last three years of traveling and TSA has yet to find it. I don't do anything special, it's just sitting my my bag, and I fly maybe 10-20 times a year, domestic and international. It's definitely theater to a certain extent. Is there a nonzero chance of catching a bad actor? Sure, but it's not much higher than zero. They did find and confiscate a 3/8" driver socket wrench though because it was longer than 6". Thank God they kept that off the plane...
      - devtul 7y ago
        Funny to read that, I forgot my folding knife which has a reasonably big blade inside my backpack. Went through the security of 3 different countries, no one found it, was mortified myself to find that huge blade when I arrived.
      - craftyguy 7y ago
        On the other hand, they are extremely good at finding bottles of water and taking those away. Either the TSA agents are always dehydrated, or they figured out that all terrorists drink water.
    - Terretta 7y ago
      TSA’s tests show 95% failure rate. If it’s the non-zero chance vs. privacy trade off you’re interested in, strip everyone naked at TSA, and get your clothes back at baggage claim at the other end, that’s better odds. If you disagree with that, then you also don’t think safety beats privacy. You just have a different line.
      - ryanmercer 7y ago
        >TSA’s tests show 95% failure rate. Yet in 2018 they - Discovered 4,239 firearms, 3,656 of which were loaded - Smoke grenades - An inert grenade - Lighter fluid - Fireworks - Five replica mortar shells https://www.tsa.gov/blog/2019/02/07/tsa-year-review-record-setting-2018 https://www.tsa.gov/blog/2019/02/07/tsa-year-review-record-s... In 2015 TSA seized knives from just ONE airport. 22,044 'dangerous items' total at U.S. airports that year. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/how-many-weapons-did-the_b_11306286 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/how-many-weapons-did-the_b_11... Yes stuff is going to slip through but uh, 3656 loaded firearms last year... I'd call that a victory. I'm very, very, pro 2a. I am very, very, very against people carrying loaded firearms on a thin aluminum can at altitude.
        gowld 7y ago
        5% detection rate means: If I get shot 20 times, I won't be happy if my bulletproof vest stopped one of the bullets, and that happening 5000 times won't make me happier.
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
        nostrademons 7y ago
        That's not very much. There are close to a billion air travelers per year in the U.S. alone. If they discovered 22,000 dangerous items, that either means that only 0.0022% of passengers are carrying a dangerous item, or they're letting a large number of dangerous items through. It's perfectly consistent for them to have a 95% failure rate and still have < 0.05% of travelers actually carry a dangerous weapon. A more likely reason why we we haven't had any air incidents since 9/11 is that most people have little interest in blowing themselves up (let alone other people) at altitude.
    - NowThenGoodBad 7y ago
      Just going to leave this here: https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2015/02/27/ex-delta-employee-indicted-in-firearms-trafficking.html https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2015/02/27/ex-delta... I'm an advocate for security screening. I'm even fine with a bag swab or pat down. I've been flying all 30 years of my life to many parts of the globe. What's going on in this article, if true, is not ok, it is not productive, and it is spreading a culture of fear and surveillance TO OUR OWN CITIZENS. We are not China, Russia, or any other country that would create such a situation, but we are letting it happen. I don't think people are against the accepted forms of surveillance you are mentioning, I think we're against the excessive stuff that's been going on.
  - subjectsigma 7y ago
    "We" don't have a shred of proof because that information is highly sensitive and not shared with the general public. I see a lot of people linking articles in the thread: the numbers range from 30% effectiveness in tests to 5% effectiveness based off of vague statements made in a closed press meeting. Every article reported a different one... from the same meeting? The MSM is full of arrogant morons desperate for clicks, hating the government is popular, reporting on classified programs is hard, and the TSA has every incentive not to release accurate information - I would bet good money those numbers are wrong. The government does a lot of dumb things but I do not think the entire TSA would exist if it was only 5% effective.
    - cr0sh 7y ago
      > The government does a lot of dumb things but I do not think the entire TSA would exist if it was only 5% effective. What if it's 95% effective at providing jobs and funnelling money from the government to private enterprises (who just so also happen to lobby for more laws and such that just so happens to also support the expansion of the TSA, or purchasing, or hiring, or...). Basically - you assume that the purpose of the TSA is about security. You also make the assumption that, even if it were about security and everything was on the up-and-up (yeah, right) - that if it were only 5% effective that it would be shut down. I am almost 100% certain that there are and have been many, many programs in the past that have lasted for a far longer period of time than the TSA has so far, which were/are less than or equal to 5% effectiveness for their supposed purpose. Again - likely because their primary purpose has no connection to their actual purpose, which is the funnelling of money from the public coffers to the private sector.
      - subjectsigma 7y ago
        What a wild assumption, that the Transport Security Agency's purpose is security... > I am almost 100% certain that there are and have been many, many programs in the past that have lasted for a far longer period of time than the TSA has so far, which were/are less than or equal to 5% effectiveness for their supposed purpose. Why is it OK to make this assumption but not assume that the TSA is trying to to their job, even if their success is disputed?
- Crinus 7y ago
  Fun fact: often the same people here who are concerned about rights, intrusion, privacy, etc in meatspace are not concerned when this happens in their turf (software) with modern practices taking control away from users in the name of security in giving it to developers and big companies.
- dumpsterdiver 7y ago
  Right. You want to see my papers? I'm flattered, here you go. Oh, I don't have them? Then I'll just throw a hissy-fit like any self-respecting American would and then move along my way.
- papito 7y ago
  Oh. Since full body scanners are now everywhere, why do we still need to take our goddamn shoes off?
justaguyhere 7y ago
These things happen slowly, over a period of time. People will be up in arms if it happened overnight, but since it is happening (relatively) slowly, people often don't take notice, and if they do notice, they kinda brush it off. There is also the mentality of "I did nothing wrong, it won't happen to me ever" Also, most people are just trying to survive, with their mediocre pay and boring jobs. It is not like the 50s and 60s where people had the time and energy to protest
- codesushi42 7y ago
  >It is not like the 50s and 60s where people had the time and energy to protest It has more to do with the lack of education than free time. We live in a society obsessed with entertainment, and completely ignorant of basic civics and logical/scientific reasoning.
  - A2017U1 7y ago
    Straight out of Confuscian textbook on governing the masses.
    - the_seraphim 7y ago
      Shhhhh, here's a video of a cat doing a funny thing...
ataturk 7y ago
Yeah, I don't know why we bothered to fight two world wars against crap like this if we were just going to adopt it wholesale. Makes no sense at all. Sick of it. I've noticed the cops now use unmarked or very lightly marked police cars so they can blend in better and thereby better protect and serve you. Oh wait, that's just Gestapo tactics. My bad.
pasabagi 7y ago
Alternatively, liberal democracy was never really so liberal or democratic as it was supposed to be. People look at local suspensions of rights, and see it as fascism, but I feel like the truth is a bit more subtle. It can be fascism. The Nazis extensively used 'exceptions' to persecute their enemies. On the other hand, it's really hard to imagine a functioning capitalist society where all of the rights people have in theory were actually upheld in all cases. Federal or local agencies blithely ignoring the law when it suits them is absolutely not new. The FBI disregard for privacy under Hoover, for example, extended to wiretapping a sitting president. (Also after Hoover, but that's another story). I think realistically, there's no clear divide between fascism and liberal democracy. People like Orban, Duterte, etc, live in the middle ground. Fascism is what capitalist states do when they are threatened. Sometimes that's on the micro level, when a police officer who's job is basically to harass homeless people is more brutal than strictly required by the job. Sometimes that's on the macro level, when we decide felons shouldn't have voting rights, or that privacy is an alienable and even occasional right.

iamnotacrook 7y ago

Security/safety trade-off. You read a lot here about rights, intrusion etc but this site doesn't cater for people who are representative of most people. Most people aren't the least bit concerned about the authorities checking their id, scanning their bags etc at the airport.

krageon 7y ago
It's not a trade-off because there isn't a shred of proof that it makes things safer. We have a term called "security theater" for a reason, and that reason is this.
- iamnotacrook 7y ago
  X-raying belongings and scanning for guns/knives and swabbing luggage for explosives is absolutely not security theatre and provides a non-zero chance of detecting bad actors.
  - krageon 7y ago
    This isn't a response to what I said, but if you do have something to contribute to that I would love to hear it. It would be very interesting.
  - ElFitz 7y ago
    Sure. When it's done well. I once got on a plane with a folded tv antenna as my carry on (it was aluminum and I worried it would get bent if checked) Sure it was wrapped in luggage plastic film. But it still was a meter long tv antenna. And I clearly asked at every step. Another guy apparently accidentally went onto a plane with a loaded gun (https://abcnews.go.com/US/tsa-lets-loaded-guns-past-security-planes/story?id=17358872 https://abcnews.go.com/US/tsa-lets-loaded-guns-past-security...) And don't get me started on the security guys pretending to check backpacks at big public places.
  - joshocar 7y ago
    I have kept a cheap pocket knife in my backpack for the last three years of traveling and TSA has yet to find it. I don't do anything special, it's just sitting my my bag, and I fly maybe 10-20 times a year, domestic and international. It's definitely theater to a certain extent. Is there a nonzero chance of catching a bad actor? Sure, but it's not much higher than zero. They did find and confiscate a 3/8" driver socket wrench though because it was longer than 6". Thank God they kept that off the plane...
    - devtul 7y ago
      Funny to read that, I forgot my folding knife which has a reasonably big blade inside my backpack. Went through the security of 3 different countries, no one found it, was mortified myself to find that huge blade when I arrived.
    - craftyguy 7y ago
      On the other hand, they are extremely good at finding bottles of water and taking those away. Either the TSA agents are always dehydrated, or they figured out that all terrorists drink water.
  - Terretta 7y ago
    TSA’s tests show 95% failure rate. If it’s the non-zero chance vs. privacy trade off you’re interested in, strip everyone naked at TSA, and get your clothes back at baggage claim at the other end, that’s better odds. If you disagree with that, then you also don’t think safety beats privacy. You just have a different line.
    - ryanmercer 7y ago
      >TSA’s tests show 95% failure rate. Yet in 2018 they - Discovered 4,239 firearms, 3,656 of which were loaded - Smoke grenades - An inert grenade - Lighter fluid - Fireworks - Five replica mortar shells https://www.tsa.gov/blog/2019/02/07/tsa-year-review-record-setting-2018 https://www.tsa.gov/blog/2019/02/07/tsa-year-review-record-s... In 2015 TSA seized knives from just ONE airport. 22,044 'dangerous items' total at U.S. airports that year. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/how-many-weapons-did-the_b_11306286 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/how-many-weapons-did-the_b_11... Yes stuff is going to slip through but uh, 3656 loaded firearms last year... I'd call that a victory. I'm very, very, pro 2a. I am very, very, very against people carrying loaded firearms on a thin aluminum can at altitude.
      - gowld 7y ago
        5% detection rate means: If I get shot 20 times, I won't be happy if my bulletproof vest stopped one of the bullets, and that happening 5000 times won't make me happier.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - nostrademons 7y ago
        That's not very much. There are close to a billion air travelers per year in the U.S. alone. If they discovered 22,000 dangerous items, that either means that only 0.0022% of passengers are carrying a dangerous item, or they're letting a large number of dangerous items through. It's perfectly consistent for them to have a 95% failure rate and still have < 0.05% of travelers actually carry a dangerous weapon. A more likely reason why we we haven't had any air incidents since 9/11 is that most people have little interest in blowing themselves up (let alone other people) at altitude.
  - NowThenGoodBad 7y ago
    Just going to leave this here: https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2015/02/27/ex-delta-employee-indicted-in-firearms-trafficking.html https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2015/02/27/ex-delta... I'm an advocate for security screening. I'm even fine with a bag swab or pat down. I've been flying all 30 years of my life to many parts of the globe. What's going on in this article, if true, is not ok, it is not productive, and it is spreading a culture of fear and surveillance TO OUR OWN CITIZENS. We are not China, Russia, or any other country that would create such a situation, but we are letting it happen. I don't think people are against the accepted forms of surveillance you are mentioning, I think we're against the excessive stuff that's been going on.
- subjectsigma 7y ago
  "We" don't have a shred of proof because that information is highly sensitive and not shared with the general public. I see a lot of people linking articles in the thread: the numbers range from 30% effectiveness in tests to 5% effectiveness based off of vague statements made in a closed press meeting. Every article reported a different one... from the same meeting? The MSM is full of arrogant morons desperate for clicks, hating the government is popular, reporting on classified programs is hard, and the TSA has every incentive not to release accurate information - I would bet good money those numbers are wrong. The government does a lot of dumb things but I do not think the entire TSA would exist if it was only 5% effective.
  - cr0sh 7y ago
    > The government does a lot of dumb things but I do not think the entire TSA would exist if it was only 5% effective. What if it's 95% effective at providing jobs and funnelling money from the government to private enterprises (who just so also happen to lobby for more laws and such that just so happens to also support the expansion of the TSA, or purchasing, or hiring, or...). Basically - you assume that the purpose of the TSA is about security. You also make the assumption that, even if it were about security and everything was on the up-and-up (yeah, right) - that if it were only 5% effective that it would be shut down. I am almost 100% certain that there are and have been many, many programs in the past that have lasted for a far longer period of time than the TSA has so far, which were/are less than or equal to 5% effectiveness for their supposed purpose. Again - likely because their primary purpose has no connection to their actual purpose, which is the funnelling of money from the public coffers to the private sector.
    - subjectsigma 7y ago
      What a wild assumption, that the Transport Security Agency's purpose is security... > I am almost 100% certain that there are and have been many, many programs in the past that have lasted for a far longer period of time than the TSA has so far, which were/are less than or equal to 5% effectiveness for their supposed purpose. Why is it OK to make this assumption but not assume that the TSA is trying to to their job, even if their success is disputed?
Crinus 7y ago
Fun fact: often the same people here who are concerned about rights, intrusion, privacy, etc in meatspace are not concerned when this happens in their turf (software) with modern practices taking control away from users in the name of security in giving it to developers and big companies.
dumpsterdiver 7y ago
Right. You want to see my papers? I'm flattered, here you go. Oh, I don't have them? Then I'll just throw a hissy-fit like any self-respecting American would and then move along my way.
papito 7y ago
Oh. Since full body scanners are now everywhere, why do we still need to take our goddamn shoes off?

justaguyhere 7y ago

These things happen slowly, over a period of time. People will be up in arms if it happened overnight, but since it is happening (relatively) slowly, people often don't take notice, and if they do notice, they kinda brush it off. There is also the mentality of "I did nothing wrong, it won't happen to me ever" Also, most people are just trying to survive, with their mediocre pay and boring jobs. It is not like the 50s and 60s where people had the time and energy to protest

codesushi42 7y ago
>It is not like the 50s and 60s where people had the time and energy to protest It has more to do with the lack of education than free time. We live in a society obsessed with entertainment, and completely ignorant of basic civics and logical/scientific reasoning.
- A2017U1 7y ago
  Straight out of Confuscian textbook on governing the masses.
  - the_seraphim 7y ago
    Shhhhh, here's a video of a cat doing a funny thing...

ataturk 7y ago

Yeah, I don't know why we bothered to fight two world wars against crap like this if we were just going to adopt it wholesale. Makes no sense at all. Sick of it. I've noticed the cops now use unmarked or very lightly marked police cars so they can blend in better and thereby better protect and serve you. Oh wait, that's just Gestapo tactics. My bad.

pasabagi 7y ago

Alternatively, liberal democracy was never really so liberal or democratic as it was supposed to be. People look at local suspensions of rights, and see it as fascism, but I feel like the truth is a bit more subtle. It can be fascism. The Nazis extensively used 'exceptions' to persecute their enemies. On the other hand, it's really hard to imagine a functioning capitalist society where all of the rights people have in theory were actually upheld in all cases. Federal or local agencies blithely ignoring the law when it suits them is absolutely not new. The FBI disregard for privacy under Hoover, for example, extended to wiretapping a sitting president. (Also after Hoover, but that's another story). I think realistically, there's no clear divide between fascism and liberal democracy. People like Orban, Duterte, etc, live in the middle ground. Fascism is what capitalist states do when they are threatened. Sometimes that's on the micro level, when a police officer who's job is basically to harass homeless people is more brutal than strictly required by the job. Sometimes that's on the macro level, when we decide felons shouldn't have voting rights, or that privacy is an alienable and even occasional right.