5 ms·

I'm getting tired of these comments that normalize being in the middle of the slippery slope as if it is merely the same as being at the top of the slippery slo

I'm getting tired of these comments that normalize being in the middle of the slippery slope as if it is merely the same as being at the top of the slippery slope was. They may not have been "good" times, but they were certainly better times when government agencies at least aimed to carry out their roles in good faith rather than minmaxing the rules to cause the most damage to enemies of the Party. Applying judgement while exercising delegated authority is exactly why these agencies were given wide leeway in the first place. And while we can say this was naive, it is even more naive to normalize the current behavior.

worik 9mo ago
No. The difference now is the number of people feeling effected It always been thus for people at the margins
- mindslight 9mo ago
  So we agree, including that there is a difference.
  - shevy-java 9mo ago
    But did you not disagree before? The "I am getting tired" statement kind of implies that.
    - mindslight 9mo ago
      Different commenter and different statement.
  - bigbadfeline 9mo ago
    > So we agree, including that there is a difference. No, that's a distinction without a difference. I mean, it doesn't matter in the slightest if at some point in time certain powers weren't abused, if they're being abused now the situation cannot be tolerated. Arguing about how it's possible not to abuse the system is a waste of time at best and a diversion at worst.
    - mindslight 9mo ago
      I'm not arguing that it's possible to not abuse the system. I've recognized abuses for quite some time, regardless of which political team has been in power. The point is that we need to avoid normalizing our current situation by pointing to previous abuses.
- try_the_bass 9mo ago
  > It always been thus for people at the margins It's worth pointing out that "criminals" are generally "people at the margins"... If for no other reason than to point out that pithy comments like this are often so vague as to be worthless, or even counter-productive! It's also a good thing that antisocial behavior is often isolated to "the margins", so your statement can even be considered a good thing, by the same metric! TL;DR: Twitterisms like this are stupid.
themaninthedark 9mo ago
No. Full stop. Laws are supposed to be crafted to be as applied by anyone, anywhere and at any time. This is why lawyers and politicians are supposed to have foresight and be prudent. You look at prior events and see them as justified due to the people involved and situations. If the US government can, for example investigate Richard Spencer or some other extremist figure based on a web post, then they can do the same for someone else on the other end of the spectrum. But even more terrifying is that they can do the same for someone not in the extremes. When my friends on the left held power and used it to quash the speech of my friends on the right, I spoke up. When my friends on the right are doing the same, I also speak up. The sad irony is that those not in power protest only when it is not their side.
- ses1984 9mo ago
  From my point of view it looks like the right only protests when it’s not their side. That’s why Al franken resigned for a dumb photo, meanwhile republicans protect pedophile traffickers.
  - themaninthedark 9mo ago
    I would say that both sides have that view. Most people are in a bubble and are unaware of what their tribe is doing. I may be wrong but I think there have been Republicans who have resigned for extra-marital sex. While we are screaming about the current POTS and his relation with Jeffery, we gave Bill Clinton a platform to speak during the 2024 Convention. When I bring that up, I get told "It's important that we beat Trump." The Epstein was arrested in 2019, the files have been in the hands of both Democrats and Republicans. Neither group really looks like they want to prosecute anyone further; only use accusations that their opponents are in there to galvanize their base.
    - direwolf20 9mo ago
      Who is Bill Clinton today? Some nobody with secret service protection? A bit less relevant than the current president, don't you think? I'm not convinced that people really liked Bill Clinton while he was president. Democrats seem to want the files about him to be released.
chaps 9mo ago
And I'm getting tired of these comments that normalize the awfulness of the past. We can be pragmatic in recognizing that "our guys" also did bad things. Less bad than awful is still bad. If we choose not to recognize our own foibles then we just fall down our old patterns of "it's someone else's problem". Because otherwise, better than what we have now is an abysmal target and we should aim for better.
- mindslight 9mo ago
  > We can be pragmatic in recognizing that "our guys" also did bad things What do you mean "our guys" ? I don't have guys. I consider myself a libertarian, was both sidesing up until June of 2020, and had never voted for a major party in a national election until 2020 when I voted for Biden - which I view as me getting older and more conservative - aka valuing our societal institutions and values after seeing how much Trump openly trashed them instead of showing an ounce of leadership during Covid. Even with this perspective, I still think it is foolish to write off the current administration as if it's just another iteration of back and forth corruption rather than a shameless wholesale kicking over of the apple cart.
  - chaps 9mo ago
    > I still think it is foolish to write off the current administration as if it's just another iteration of back and forth corruption You are deeply, deeply misunderstanding my point if this is what you got from my post. "Our guys" was tongue in cheek.
    - mindslight 9mo ago
      Care to elaborate on your point then? Reading what you have written, I do agree with the abstract thrust of where you're coming from. But I have also observed that the destructionists appeal to similar lofty ideas to justify what is currently going on - eg accelerationism. (I also don't know what difference "tongue in cheek" makes. I've never looked at the government and thought anything like "these people represent me and work for my interest". I know a lot of people seemingly have, but that's not me. But I did look at the Biden administration, which I voted for, and think "this is the stable predictable evil I (and the rest of American society) already know how to cope with".)

worik 9mo ago

No. The difference now is the number of people feeling effected It always been thus for people at the margins

mindslight 9mo ago
So we agree, including that there is a difference.
- shevy-java 9mo ago
  But did you not disagree before? The "I am getting tired" statement kind of implies that.
  - mindslight 9mo ago
    Different commenter and different statement.
- bigbadfeline 9mo ago
  > So we agree, including that there is a difference. No, that's a distinction without a difference. I mean, it doesn't matter in the slightest if at some point in time certain powers weren't abused, if they're being abused now the situation cannot be tolerated. Arguing about how it's possible not to abuse the system is a waste of time at best and a diversion at worst.
  - mindslight 9mo ago
    I'm not arguing that it's possible to not abuse the system. I've recognized abuses for quite some time, regardless of which political team has been in power. The point is that we need to avoid normalizing our current situation by pointing to previous abuses.
try_the_bass 9mo ago
> It always been thus for people at the margins It's worth pointing out that "criminals" are generally "people at the margins"... If for no other reason than to point out that pithy comments like this are often so vague as to be worthless, or even counter-productive! It's also a good thing that antisocial behavior is often isolated to "the margins", so your statement can even be considered a good thing, by the same metric! TL;DR: Twitterisms like this are stupid.

themaninthedark 9mo ago

No. Full stop. Laws are supposed to be crafted to be as applied by anyone, anywhere and at any time. This is why lawyers and politicians are supposed to have foresight and be prudent. You look at prior events and see them as justified due to the people involved and situations. If the US government can, for example investigate Richard Spencer or some other extremist figure based on a web post, then they can do the same for someone else on the other end of the spectrum. But even more terrifying is that they can do the same for someone not in the extremes. When my friends on the left held power and used it to quash the speech of my friends on the right, I spoke up. When my friends on the right are doing the same, I also speak up. The sad irony is that those not in power protest only when it is not their side.

ses1984 9mo ago
From my point of view it looks like the right only protests when it’s not their side. That’s why Al franken resigned for a dumb photo, meanwhile republicans protect pedophile traffickers.
- themaninthedark 9mo ago
  I would say that both sides have that view. Most people are in a bubble and are unaware of what their tribe is doing. I may be wrong but I think there have been Republicans who have resigned for extra-marital sex. While we are screaming about the current POTS and his relation with Jeffery, we gave Bill Clinton a platform to speak during the 2024 Convention. When I bring that up, I get told "It's important that we beat Trump." The Epstein was arrested in 2019, the files have been in the hands of both Democrats and Republicans. Neither group really looks like they want to prosecute anyone further; only use accusations that their opponents are in there to galvanize their base.
  - direwolf20 9mo ago
    Who is Bill Clinton today? Some nobody with secret service protection? A bit less relevant than the current president, don't you think? I'm not convinced that people really liked Bill Clinton while he was president. Democrats seem to want the files about him to be released.

chaps 9mo ago

And I'm getting tired of these comments that normalize the awfulness of the past. We can be pragmatic in recognizing that "our guys" also did bad things. Less bad than awful is still bad. If we choose not to recognize our own foibles then we just fall down our old patterns of "it's someone else's problem". Because otherwise, better than what we have now is an abysmal target and we should aim for better.

mindslight 9mo ago
> We can be pragmatic in recognizing that "our guys" also did bad things What do you mean "our guys" ? I don't have guys. I consider myself a libertarian, was both sidesing up until June of 2020, and had never voted for a major party in a national election until 2020 when I voted for Biden - which I view as me getting older and more conservative - aka valuing our societal institutions and values after seeing how much Trump openly trashed them instead of showing an ounce of leadership during Covid. Even with this perspective, I still think it is foolish to write off the current administration as if it's just another iteration of back and forth corruption rather than a shameless wholesale kicking over of the apple cart.
- chaps 9mo ago
  > I still think it is foolish to write off the current administration as if it's just another iteration of back and forth corruption You are deeply, deeply misunderstanding my point if this is what you got from my post. "Our guys" was tongue in cheek.
  - mindslight 9mo ago
    Care to elaborate on your point then? Reading what you have written, I do agree with the abstract thrust of where you're coming from. But I have also observed that the destructionists appeal to similar lofty ideas to justify what is currently going on - eg accelerationism. (I also don't know what difference "tongue in cheek" makes. I've never looked at the government and thought anything like "these people represent me and work for my interest". I know a lot of people seemingly have, but that's not me. But I did look at the Biden administration, which I voted for, and think "this is the stable predictable evil I (and the rest of American society) already know how to cope with".)