4 ms·

temporarily...almost always those measures stay in place much longer

by digitalbase 5y ago

oblio 5y ago
Based on what examples?
- kongin 5y ago
  WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, the war on drugs, the war on terror, now the war on covid.
  - oblio 5y ago
    I'm trying super hard to decipher your message. Post WW1 didn't erode rights, it actually increased them. Post WW2, the same. Korea and Vietnam didn't leave behind any long term repression that I remember. War on drugs and terror, ok. Covid is a disease. We have vaccines, we'll have treatment. Just get vaccinated. We've had pandemics before, they always end and I can't remember any rights still taken away abusively after the Spanish Flu or SARS or HIV.
    - kongin 5y ago
      You are mistaking extending special rights to minority groups with citizens rights. We have been increasing minority rights as fast as possible with removing all the protections from dictatorships in the name of, I don't even know what. >Post WW1 didn't erode rights, it actually increased them. Post https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition_Act_of_1918 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition_Act_of_1918 >Post WW2, the same. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_Act And on and on. There are libraries written about this, but no one cares because there has been a bi-partisan consensus that citizen's rights need to be curtailed.
      - oblio 5y ago
        Do you even read your own links? > As part of a sweeping repeal of wartime laws, Congress repealed the Sedition Act on December 13, 1920 The second wasn't a wartime act and even that was repealed. Talk about cherry picking.
        Clubber 5y ago
        He meant the Espionage Act, which is currently being used to seek prosecution of Snowden and Assange, among others. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917
        kongin 5y ago
        Yes, it's hard to keep track of which act was used to curtail what freedoms. The Sedition Act was used to silence opposition to conscription and gave us the immortal quote of "The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States Of course the 'fire' in that case was this letter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States#/media/File:Schenck_v._United_States_Leaflet_(Obverse).jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States#/medi... Which seems like an extremely level headed question about conscription in the US given that involuntary servitude should only be a punishment for a crime.
- 9qlGq9aGgQMgaax 5y ago
  15 days to slow the spread
  - oblio 5y ago
    And what would have done instead? Said 900 days to stop the spread? :-)
    - 9qlGq9aGgQMgaax 5y ago
      So, you are saying they were internationally lying and it was a good thing? Boiled frogs?

temporarily...almost always those measures stay in place much longer

oblio 5y ago

Based on what examples?

kongin 5y ago
WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, the war on drugs, the war on terror, now the war on covid.
- oblio 5y ago
  I'm trying super hard to decipher your message. Post WW1 didn't erode rights, it actually increased them. Post WW2, the same. Korea and Vietnam didn't leave behind any long term repression that I remember. War on drugs and terror, ok. Covid is a disease. We have vaccines, we'll have treatment. Just get vaccinated. We've had pandemics before, they always end and I can't remember any rights still taken away abusively after the Spanish Flu or SARS or HIV.
  - kongin 5y ago
    You are mistaking extending special rights to minority groups with citizens rights. We have been increasing minority rights as fast as possible with removing all the protections from dictatorships in the name of, I don't even know what. >Post WW1 didn't erode rights, it actually increased them. Post https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition_Act_of_1918 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition_Act_of_1918 >Post WW2, the same. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_Act And on and on. There are libraries written about this, but no one cares because there has been a bi-partisan consensus that citizen's rights need to be curtailed.
    - oblio 5y ago
      Do you even read your own links? > As part of a sweeping repeal of wartime laws, Congress repealed the Sedition Act on December 13, 1920 The second wasn't a wartime act and even that was repealed. Talk about cherry picking.
      - Clubber 5y ago
        He meant the Espionage Act, which is currently being used to seek prosecution of Snowden and Assange, among others. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917
        kongin 5y ago
        Yes, it's hard to keep track of which act was used to curtail what freedoms. The Sedition Act was used to silence opposition to conscription and gave us the immortal quote of "The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States Of course the 'fire' in that case was this letter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States#/media/File:Schenck_v._United_States_Leaflet_(Obverse).jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States#/medi... Which seems like an extremely level headed question about conscription in the US given that involuntary servitude should only be a punishment for a crime.
9qlGq9aGgQMgaax 5y ago
15 days to slow the spread
- oblio 5y ago
  And what would have done instead? Said 900 days to stop the spread? :-)
  - 9qlGq9aGgQMgaax 5y ago
    So, you are saying they were internationally lying and it was a good thing? Boiled frogs?