3 ms·

We have a real issue with partisan politics in the US and one of the pieces of fallout is that making a statement like that doesn't end your career. Laws on th

by munk-a 6y ago

We have a real issue with partisan politics in the US and one of the pieces of fallout is that making a statement like that doesn't end your career. Laws on the public record exist to serve the general good and skirting them is indicative of taking actions you know will be met with general criticism and can't be justified.

thaumasiotes 6y ago
> Laws on the public record exist to serve the general good and skirting them is indicative of taking actions you know will be met with general criticism and can't be justified. Well, the counterargument is that it's indicative of taking actions that you know will be met with general criticism and can be justified.
- munk-a 6y ago
  Hrm - I'll have a go at being less vague. By actions met by general criticism and can't be justified I meant actions that would both be met with criticism and, given enough surrounding information, wouldn't remove the majority of criticism. National security positions will need to execute actions that are pretty opaque and distasteful to the general public but, with that additional information in hand, would be reasonable to most people. So arresting some fellow who looks like a family man but was actually organizing an attack would be generally criticized but justifiable - on the other hand most forms of torture tend to be ineffective at information gathering and cause excessive pain and suffering and are less justifiable. For politicians I'm going to guess that a lot of stuff they don't want on record is specifically related to their self-betterment by somehow (even minorly) compromising their duty.
amalcon 6y ago
To be fair, we also have an epidemic of partial statements being taken out of context and used against their speaker. Often, when contextualized, the quote most likely means the opposite of what it's being used to claim. I can easily think of examples of this being done to politicians of both major US political parties, and a handful of foreign politicians as well. A policy of staying off-record by default is not an unreasonable countermeasure to that problem.

by munk-a 6y ago

thaumasiotes 6y ago

> Laws on the public record exist to serve the general good and skirting them is indicative of taking actions you know will be met with general criticism and can't be justified. Well, the counterargument is that it's indicative of taking actions that you know will be met with general criticism and can be justified.

munk-a 6y ago
Hrm - I'll have a go at being less vague. By actions met by general criticism and can't be justified I meant actions that would both be met with criticism and, given enough surrounding information, wouldn't remove the majority of criticism. National security positions will need to execute actions that are pretty opaque and distasteful to the general public but, with that additional information in hand, would be reasonable to most people. So arresting some fellow who looks like a family man but was actually organizing an attack would be generally criticized but justifiable - on the other hand most forms of torture tend to be ineffective at information gathering and cause excessive pain and suffering and are less justifiable. For politicians I'm going to guess that a lot of stuff they don't want on record is specifically related to their self-betterment by somehow (even minorly) compromising their duty.

amalcon 6y ago

To be fair, we also have an epidemic of partial statements being taken out of context and used against their speaker. Often, when contextualized, the quote most likely means the opposite of what it's being used to claim. I can easily think of examples of this being done to politicians of both major US political parties, and a handful of foreign politicians as well. A policy of staying off-record by default is not an unreasonable countermeasure to that problem.