3 ms·

Something being bad doesn't have to have a material impact on you to be bad you should be against it simply because in principal it's a bad thing. Government ov

by Grimm1 6y ago

Something being bad doesn't have to have a material impact on you to be bad you should be against it simply because in principal it's a bad thing. Government over reach is a slippery slope and is bad therefor spying via overreach is bad. I'm not your personal savior I don't really care what you believe and I wasn't here to convince anyone of anything let alone you, I stated my personal beliefs. Edit: I'll also leave off with where if your beliefs don't include government spying being bad you and I likely are coming from very ideologically different starting points and I have no intention of trying to spend my time walking you from A to B I'll leave that for the evangelists I have other things to fill my time.

slg 6y ago
You can reread my comments and you will see I am not against you on this. I started my first comment with "If we...". I am including myself in with the people who are failing. I believe we need to get better at explaining this issue. We need people who are "trying to spend [their] time walking you from A to B" because flatly saying "you should be against it simply because in principal it's a bad thing" is not going to motivate any political change.
- Grimm1 6y ago
  To be honest the entire thread sat weirdly with me, not sure why. That said I just disagree with you that the masses typically are motivated about anything not just government spying I think action and change will come from a small group of people with vested interest, at least initially. Everyone has that personal issue but it turns out that everyone's "I want this to change" issue is typically pretty different from one another so finding that similar group and banding together there to fix the problem I expect to be better than finding some key to ignite the masses. And FWIW if the argument from the government is "See these people don't care about it so it can't be bad" is in itself a super weak argument. People and the government haven't cared about plenty of things that, at least in my set of morals, turned out to be super bad even if only a small set of people initially protested so.

by Grimm1 6y ago

slg 6y ago

You can reread my comments and you will see I am not against you on this. I started my first comment with "If we...". I am including myself in with the people who are failing. I believe we need to get better at explaining this issue. We need people who are "trying to spend [their] time walking you from A to B" because flatly saying "you should be against it simply because in principal it's a bad thing" is not going to motivate any political change.

Grimm1 6y ago
To be honest the entire thread sat weirdly with me, not sure why. That said I just disagree with you that the masses typically are motivated about anything not just government spying I think action and change will come from a small group of people with vested interest, at least initially. Everyone has that personal issue but it turns out that everyone's "I want this to change" issue is typically pretty different from one another so finding that similar group and banding together there to fix the problem I expect to be better than finding some key to ignite the masses. And FWIW if the argument from the government is "See these people don't care about it so it can't be bad" is in itself a super weak argument. People and the government haven't cared about plenty of things that, at least in my set of morals, turned out to be super bad even if only a small set of people initially protested so.