7 ms·

The government is chosen through a political process and so everything it does is political. The DOJ's actions were heavy-handed in a way that has freaked out

The government is chosen through a political process and so everything it does is political. The DOJ's actions were heavy-handed in a way that has freaked out a lot of people who evidently never realized that the government was like this. Anyone who has ever gotten a letter from the IRS or has been pulled over by a surly police officer knows well that even though there are laws which apply to everyone fairly, the way those laws are enforced is mostly left up to the discretion of whoever is enforcing them. Try being an immigrant and dealing with INS officers or a traveler dealing with TSA. Our government has created all kinds of thugs whose job it is to put on a big show of force to intimidate people. Why are government buildings so big and grand? To create a show of force and make our government seem formidable. Why are there so many ceremonies involving soldiers, government officials, marching, etc. Simply to put on a show and create the impression of solemnity, gravity, and importance. Governments must continually act to keep the power they have achieved. They do this mostly through propaganda and PR efforts. Every white gloved soldier in a ceremony is a PR stunt. Every wood paneled room, dramatic monument, motorcade, marble building, podium, flag and seal are part of the PR show. The world is full of greedy people who seek power over others. Whether it's an ambitious Carmen Ortiz or an up-and-coming young congressman or a mild mannered traffic cop. Each seeks to control others as a very significant portion of his/her motivation and life's goal. Most people who do startups just want to build something and work with interesting technology and so we often forget just what government is. We must wake up and realize that it's about control and force, and now and then the victim of this control and excess is a fellow hacker and we start to take it seriously for a few minutes before we forget about it again. Don't assume that you won't be the target, don't adopt that conservative worldview.

kristenlee 14y ago
I find it overreaching to conclude that every individual who is employed by the government in a law enforcement capacity chose their job out of a need to control other people. The world is not black and white and there are shades of gray. The police officers you despise hunt down the murderers, rapists, and child molesters that harm society, the soldiers fight against genocidal sociopaths like Adolf Hitler & Sadaam Hussein, and the congressmen you despise fight for things like universal healthcare. With regards to startups the primary motivation for most entrepreneurs, but not all, is to make money, not some noble goal of making the world a better place. Apple, Facebook, Twitter, Foursquare and the like do little or nothing to solve the world's most serious problems, they're just toys for upper middle class people with money and time to burn. Finally no reputable news source has reported on this story because everything is based on hearsay on what a "DOJ representative" allegedly said which fails to pass the credibility test for reputable news outfits such as the NY Times, Reuters, Washington Post, CNN, with reporting standards. Before you act on the word, consider the source.
- Wintamute 14y ago
  But he didn't conclude that "every individual who is employed by the government ... chose their job out of a need to control other people", you put those words in his mouth. Neither did he say he "despised" anybody, you put that word in his mouth too. He didn't claim that startups weren't in it for the money, and neither were any of his statements predicated on any new information in the "unreputable" linked article. I'm not sure why you've chosen to attack his comment on these spurious grounds. It'd be more interesting to discuss why it engendered an emotional response from you, or perhaps if you disagree with it then make a coherent criticism of his main point: that there exists a formidable power structure in our society and many of us chose to remain unaware of it.
  - antoko 14y ago
    He said this: The world is full of greedy people who seek power over others. Whether it's an ambitious Carmen Ortiz or an up-and-coming young congressman or a mild mannered traffic cop. Each seeks to control others as a very significant portion of his/her motivation and life's goal. That does imply that everyone who ends up in a position of government power does so in order to control other people. That's the problem when someone uses such strident language and paints with such a broad brush - its very easy to just call them out on their lack of nuance and over-generalization
    - king_jester 14y ago
      It doesn't imply that every person in those jobs or roles does so for power, but rather that those that do seek out that kind of power end up in those jobs and roles.
    - tammer 14y ago
      "The world is full of..." is not a totalizing phrase. "Each," refers back to this clause. The semantics leave space for people in power to work against that power. It does not imply what you believe it does. You seem to take issue with questioning power at all.
redm 14y ago
It's a good thing that Aaron wasn't around to 'unlock' his phone from his cell carrier; they would have really gotten him then. :D
graycat 14y ago
I took the statements by grandalf as meaning 'some' or 'many' and not literally 'all'. But notice http://www.businessinsider.com/a-third-of-people-manipulate-others-2012-12 http://www.businessinsider.com/a-third-of-people-manipulate-... with About A Third Of People Have A Fundamental Desire To Manipulate Others Max Nisen | Dec. 4, 2012, 7:07 PM So if there is 1/3rd in the general population, the fraction in 'fitting' parts of gumment might be much higher, still not 100% but high enough to underline the grandalf theme.
rayiner 14y ago
You've hit the nail on the head, but come to the wrong conclusion. Signals of the authority of government are good things, within reason. We are merely tribes of monkeys--without authority we'd do whatever the hell we wanted and that's not how civilization happens. The alternative to living under government authority isn't just peacefully building things and working with interesting technology. It's living under the authority of different thugs. Thugs we don't vote for, thugs we don't pay the salaries of, thugs we don't have any influence over. My family comes from a country where the government has little authority (Bangladesh). It's not a good thing. People don't respect the law, and it's a deep moral failing of the country. It's a contemptible characteristic of the people. It's a hindrance to collective prosperity. I note with some amusement that tons of people like my father got the hell out of Bangladesh and moved to a country where he paid much more taxes, where there was much more regulation, much more oversight of society by government. Yet, not very many people seem to want to do the opposite.
- grandalf 14y ago
  While I agree with your overarching point that it's a good thing when institutions gain legitimacy and authority, I think it's also important to appreciate the corrupting influences that exist within organizations. In the corporate world we have watchdog groups, regulatory agencies, etc. But for governments there are few checks and balances. The US Government has conducted a war on whistleblowers and watchdog groups. In my view, the government is just the gang that drove out all the rival gangs and got rich enough to start laundering its reputation, rewriting history, etc. Even in 2013, the atrocities committed by the US government are worse than those of nearly any criminal gang in the world. Consider rendition. Consider drone attacks on children.
  - wtracy 14y ago
    "Even in 2013, the atrocities committed by the US government are worse than those of nearly any criminal gang in the world." I think you are greatly underestimating the criminal organizations of this world. Look into the Zetas cartel in Mexico, for example. Sure, American military strikes kill civilians, but we don't have a policy of targeting innocent civilians.
Shivetya 14y ago
the thuggery starts at the top and because of that it becomes accepted behavior by those within. Look at the mindset these people have, what we see playing out with the budget games in Washington I have seen the same at the local level. They play the thug, always threatening their own constituents with less services, longer lines, less safety, and if all that doesn't work they go after your freedoms. The insinuate, they investigate, they intimidate. To use a favorite term of the political class but in a different way, we have a government too big to fail.
dyno12345 14y ago
One of mankind's greatest insights in the past few thousand years was the idea of not seeing all phenomena as caused by human motives, jealousies of gods, etc.
jen_h 14y ago
I don't disagree wholly on substance here, but will point out that, according to the WBUR investigation, many of the issues coming out of Ortiz' office were not because she sought to control others, but that she didn't wield enough and let others control her: http://www.wbur.org/2013/02/20/carmen-ortiz-investigation http://www.wbur.org/2013/02/20/carmen-ortiz-investigation (Seriously worth a read; even if you skim, be sure to read the case descriptions in full. They're pretty shocking.)

kristenlee 14y ago

I find it overreaching to conclude that every individual who is employed by the government in a law enforcement capacity chose their job out of a need to control other people. The world is not black and white and there are shades of gray. The police officers you despise hunt down the murderers, rapists, and child molesters that harm society, the soldiers fight against genocidal sociopaths like Adolf Hitler & Sadaam Hussein, and the congressmen you despise fight for things like universal healthcare. With regards to startups the primary motivation for most entrepreneurs, but not all, is to make money, not some noble goal of making the world a better place. Apple, Facebook, Twitter, Foursquare and the like do little or nothing to solve the world's most serious problems, they're just toys for upper middle class people with money and time to burn. Finally no reputable news source has reported on this story because everything is based on hearsay on what a "DOJ representative" allegedly said which fails to pass the credibility test for reputable news outfits such as the NY Times, Reuters, Washington Post, CNN, with reporting standards. Before you act on the word, consider the source.

Wintamute 14y ago
But he didn't conclude that "every individual who is employed by the government ... chose their job out of a need to control other people", you put those words in his mouth. Neither did he say he "despised" anybody, you put that word in his mouth too. He didn't claim that startups weren't in it for the money, and neither were any of his statements predicated on any new information in the "unreputable" linked article. I'm not sure why you've chosen to attack his comment on these spurious grounds. It'd be more interesting to discuss why it engendered an emotional response from you, or perhaps if you disagree with it then make a coherent criticism of his main point: that there exists a formidable power structure in our society and many of us chose to remain unaware of it.
- antoko 14y ago
  He said this: The world is full of greedy people who seek power over others. Whether it's an ambitious Carmen Ortiz or an up-and-coming young congressman or a mild mannered traffic cop. Each seeks to control others as a very significant portion of his/her motivation and life's goal. That does imply that everyone who ends up in a position of government power does so in order to control other people. That's the problem when someone uses such strident language and paints with such a broad brush - its very easy to just call them out on their lack of nuance and over-generalization
  - king_jester 14y ago
    It doesn't imply that every person in those jobs or roles does so for power, but rather that those that do seek out that kind of power end up in those jobs and roles.
  - tammer 14y ago
    "The world is full of..." is not a totalizing phrase. "Each," refers back to this clause. The semantics leave space for people in power to work against that power. It does not imply what you believe it does. You seem to take issue with questioning power at all.

redm 14y ago

It's a good thing that Aaron wasn't around to 'unlock' his phone from his cell carrier; they would have really gotten him then. :D

graycat 14y ago

I took the statements by grandalf as meaning 'some' or 'many' and not literally 'all'. But notice http://www.businessinsider.com/a-third-of-people-manipulate-others-2012-12 http://www.businessinsider.com/a-third-of-people-manipulate-... with About A Third Of People Have A Fundamental Desire To Manipulate Others Max Nisen | Dec. 4, 2012, 7:07 PM So if there is 1/3rd in the general population, the fraction in 'fitting' parts of gumment might be much higher, still not 100% but high enough to underline the grandalf theme.

rayiner 14y ago

You've hit the nail on the head, but come to the wrong conclusion. Signals of the authority of government are good things, within reason. We are merely tribes of monkeys--without authority we'd do whatever the hell we wanted and that's not how civilization happens. The alternative to living under government authority isn't just peacefully building things and working with interesting technology. It's living under the authority of different thugs. Thugs we don't vote for, thugs we don't pay the salaries of, thugs we don't have any influence over. My family comes from a country where the government has little authority (Bangladesh). It's not a good thing. People don't respect the law, and it's a deep moral failing of the country. It's a contemptible characteristic of the people. It's a hindrance to collective prosperity. I note with some amusement that tons of people like my father got the hell out of Bangladesh and moved to a country where he paid much more taxes, where there was much more regulation, much more oversight of society by government. Yet, not very many people seem to want to do the opposite.

grandalf 14y ago
While I agree with your overarching point that it's a good thing when institutions gain legitimacy and authority, I think it's also important to appreciate the corrupting influences that exist within organizations. In the corporate world we have watchdog groups, regulatory agencies, etc. But for governments there are few checks and balances. The US Government has conducted a war on whistleblowers and watchdog groups. In my view, the government is just the gang that drove out all the rival gangs and got rich enough to start laundering its reputation, rewriting history, etc. Even in 2013, the atrocities committed by the US government are worse than those of nearly any criminal gang in the world. Consider rendition. Consider drone attacks on children.
- wtracy 14y ago
  "Even in 2013, the atrocities committed by the US government are worse than those of nearly any criminal gang in the world." I think you are greatly underestimating the criminal organizations of this world. Look into the Zetas cartel in Mexico, for example. Sure, American military strikes kill civilians, but we don't have a policy of targeting innocent civilians.

Shivetya 14y ago

the thuggery starts at the top and because of that it becomes accepted behavior by those within. Look at the mindset these people have, what we see playing out with the budget games in Washington I have seen the same at the local level. They play the thug, always threatening their own constituents with less services, longer lines, less safety, and if all that doesn't work they go after your freedoms. The insinuate, they investigate, they intimidate. To use a favorite term of the political class but in a different way, we have a government too big to fail.

dyno12345 14y ago

One of mankind's greatest insights in the past few thousand years was the idea of not seeing all phenomena as caused by human motives, jealousies of gods, etc.

jen_h 14y ago

I don't disagree wholly on substance here, but will point out that, according to the WBUR investigation, many of the issues coming out of Ortiz' office were not because she sought to control others, but that she didn't wield enough and let others control her: http://www.wbur.org/2013/02/20/carmen-ortiz-investigation http://www.wbur.org/2013/02/20/carmen-ortiz-investigation (Seriously worth a read; even if you skim, be sure to read the case descriptions in full. They're pretty shocking.)