4 ms·

>"As I said at the time of Swartz’s arrest, his actions were foolish and some punishment was probably appropriate. " Bullshit. No punishment is appropriate. A

>"As I said at the time of Swartz’s arrest, his actions were foolish and some punishment was probably appropriate. " Bullshit. No punishment is appropriate. A system that punishes someone for standing up for justice does not deserve to continue its existence. Aaron deserved a medal, not a fine or a prison sentence. Here is my take on it: http://jacobexmachina.blogspot.com/2013/01/aaron-swartz-freedom-fighters-death.html http://jacobexmachina.blogspot.com/2013/01/aaron-swartz-free...

streptomycin 14y ago
Aaron's crime is theft in precisely the way that a member of the underground railroad was an accomplice in theft. Really?
- jacoblyles 14y ago
  Yes. Really.
  - streptomycin 14y ago
    Really? Keep in mind how accessible those documents were before the non-profit JSTOR library opened, and whether those documents would exist in digital format at all if JSTOR didn't have the ability to sell access to them so they can pay their owners to license them. And then you really want to compare trying to break that system with trying to free slaves? The analogy would only very tenuously hold if you thought the slavers were helping blacks by taking them from Africa and enslaving them.
colinplamondon 14y ago
That's not how civil disobedience usually works- there's generally some kind of punishment, and the person taking part in the disobedience takes on some risk. Here, though, the punishment was so utterly, utterly disgustingly disproportionate, that it boggles the mind. It wasn't "6 months in jail"- a bad, bad sentence, but not the end of one's life. It was years and years. In a just system, the system will go out of its way to bend, and all the individuals in the chain, from the prosecutor to the judge to the jury, will do the legal minimum- and then push for change. In the best system, the citizens will take part in jury nullification, and save the defendant. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification_in_the_Unite...
devcpp 14y ago
I find it singificant that you used the word "justice" against the judicial system. The very concept of law started as a need for order and justice, preventing grave crimes. Now, controlled by the powerful, it stands as a way to reduce justice, and to increase injustice.
- tripzilch 14y ago
  Yes and in particular, it's not the other way around: "justice" is not defined as "that which a judicial system purports to implement". Just like "good" is not synonymous with "legal".

streptomycin 14y ago

Aaron's crime is theft in precisely the way that a member of the underground railroad was an accomplice in theft. Really?

jacoblyles 14y ago
Yes. Really.
- streptomycin 14y ago
  Really? Keep in mind how accessible those documents were before the non-profit JSTOR library opened, and whether those documents would exist in digital format at all if JSTOR didn't have the ability to sell access to them so they can pay their owners to license them. And then you really want to compare trying to break that system with trying to free slaves? The analogy would only very tenuously hold if you thought the slavers were helping blacks by taking them from Africa and enslaving them.

colinplamondon 14y ago

That's not how civil disobedience usually works- there's generally some kind of punishment, and the person taking part in the disobedience takes on some risk. Here, though, the punishment was so utterly, utterly disgustingly disproportionate, that it boggles the mind. It wasn't "6 months in jail"- a bad, bad sentence, but not the end of one's life. It was years and years. In a just system, the system will go out of its way to bend, and all the individuals in the chain, from the prosecutor to the judge to the jury, will do the legal minimum- and then push for change. In the best system, the citizens will take part in jury nullification, and save the defendant. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification_in_the_Unite...

devcpp 14y ago

I find it singificant that you used the word "justice" against the judicial system. The very concept of law started as a need for order and justice, preventing grave crimes. Now, controlled by the powerful, it stands as a way to reduce justice, and to increase injustice.

tripzilch 14y ago
Yes and in particular, it's not the other way around: "justice" is not defined as "that which a judicial system purports to implement". Just like "good" is not synonymous with "legal".