5 ms·

That raises the question: who is US after all? Is it the officials or is it the people?

hga 13y ago
If there isn't a significant change in the country's direction within the next few years, say, perhaps by the end of the decade or a little after, we'll know the answer is cemented as the former.
- crististm 13y ago
  What I see now as US is a very different place from the one I imagined only 20 years ago. In this very short time span it went from THE place to go to in terms of Freedom to "are you nuts? - it's communist Russia in disguise". I've heard there are "no-fly" secret lists which you can't challenge because, you know, they are secret. That can't be true, right? grin
  - hga 13y ago
    You can challenge them, e.g. ask the TSA or whomever to reconsider, but you won't be told why your name was put on it ... which is not at all insane if you think about it. The existence of the list(s), and their many false positives, e.g. the late Senator Teddy Kennedy, is no secret at all, just their contents and methods.
    - crististm 13y ago
      You see the problem here? These are tactics of a police state. In a free world there is no secret police doing secret stuff that I have to jump through hoops to challenge. The moment people get used to this shit - they have won.
      - hga 13y ago
        We're Americans, I assure you however much we're "used to it" there's a smoldering anger that is getting hotter and hotter as this goes on. The TEA Party et. al. are part of that, which is of course why it was imperative to suppress them. As the organs of the state continue in this ... well, it isn't going to end well.
    - bobwaycott 13y ago
      Not being told why your name is on a secret no-fly list is insane if you think about it. Either sufficient evidence of criminal activity exists--at which point the accused has protected rights to know the charges and confront the accusers thanks to the 6th Amendment--or sufficient evidence of criminal activity does not exist and the person should not be on a no-fly list. That is not even including the insanity or illegality of having a no-fly list to begin with.
      - hga 13y ago
        I mean the purpose of the list will be defeated if the methods by which it was created are disclosed. Which says nothing about the desirably of such a list or this use of it. (For that matter, the gun grabbers keep campaigning to deny gun ownership to anyone on it, can't have guns in "terrorist hands"....)
        bobwaycott 13y ago
        Ah, gotcha. It certainly didn't parse that way.
        hga 13y ago
        Yeah, I guess it isn't clear, when I say "if you think about it" that generally includes "put yourself in the shoes of the people doing this".
        bobwaycott 13y ago
        Nah, it was my mistake and misunderstanding.
    - philwelch 13y ago
      > The existence of the list(s), and their many false positives, e.g. the late Senator Teddy Kennedy Are you sure they weren't just worried he'd get drunk and fly the plane into the water?
  - fixxer 13y ago
    They are just trying to keep us safe. ;) Personally, I'd rather be vulnerable to a few nuts than vulnerable to the system.
    - senjmccarthy 13y ago
      Amen. Especially when the system is itself nuts and many of those who prop it up are nuts. "Freedom", by my definition, is thinking from a place of 1. personal responsibility and 2. let's fix the problem, not from one of 1. "I am a victim, or a potential one. Protect me." or 2. "There has been an accident. Who is to blame? Find who is guilty and make them pay." But I guess many Americans continue to believe they are the most free of all the world's citizens.
dpeck 13y ago
Ive tried to stop myself from forming opinions of the residents of other countries by the actions and rhetoric of their political leaders, whether elected or otherwise. I would hope others do the same and don't believe the actions of DC to be anything more than an exaggerated and often inaccurate caricature of the American people.
- chez17 13y ago
  I've quickly changed my mind about this sort of thinking. It's a nice little "get out of jail free" card for everyone. We should be held responsible for our government's actions, at least to some degree (especially in a democracy). How many of us really sacrifice significant resources and time to causes that would make the country/world better? How many here spend more at the bar than they do in charity every month? How many spend hours consuming media but don't take the time to keep educated about politics? What's the turnout at major primaries? Ten percent? Twenty? It's easy to say, we shouldn't judge the people of the country because it feels good to us and, in reality, most people are rather decent. However, I think it should be the opposite, we should all be ashamed of ourselves for letting ourselves get bought off for a little convenience and comfort. We're all guilty to varying degrees. We should step up and accept that. The first step towards recovery is admitting you have a problem.
  - dpeck 13y ago
    I can see your point, but at the same time I have to look at the situation most people are in. Sometimes people are truly in the minority, say for instance a gay man in Jamaica. He could essentially sacrifice his life to try to move the needle on his countries tolerance level, or he could be discrete and live his life. I'll be the first to cheer on the former, but I don't believe that its my place to judge the latter for inaction. I don't believe that its right to hold people responsible for their governments actions while much of the world lacks freedom of movement, and those in power have nearly all the tools at their disposal to hold onto that power.

hga 13y ago

If there isn't a significant change in the country's direction within the next few years, say, perhaps by the end of the decade or a little after, we'll know the answer is cemented as the former.

crististm 13y ago
What I see now as US is a very different place from the one I imagined only 20 years ago. In this very short time span it went from THE place to go to in terms of Freedom to "are you nuts? - it's communist Russia in disguise". I've heard there are "no-fly" secret lists which you can't challenge because, you know, they are secret. That can't be true, right? grin
- hga 13y ago
  You can challenge them, e.g. ask the TSA or whomever to reconsider, but you won't be told why your name was put on it ... which is not at all insane if you think about it. The existence of the list(s), and their many false positives, e.g. the late Senator Teddy Kennedy, is no secret at all, just their contents and methods.
  - crististm 13y ago
    You see the problem here? These are tactics of a police state. In a free world there is no secret police doing secret stuff that I have to jump through hoops to challenge. The moment people get used to this shit - they have won.
    - hga 13y ago
      We're Americans, I assure you however much we're "used to it" there's a smoldering anger that is getting hotter and hotter as this goes on. The TEA Party et. al. are part of that, which is of course why it was imperative to suppress them. As the organs of the state continue in this ... well, it isn't going to end well.
  - bobwaycott 13y ago
    Not being told why your name is on a secret no-fly list is insane if you think about it. Either sufficient evidence of criminal activity exists--at which point the accused has protected rights to know the charges and confront the accusers thanks to the 6th Amendment--or sufficient evidence of criminal activity does not exist and the person should not be on a no-fly list. That is not even including the insanity or illegality of having a no-fly list to begin with.
    - hga 13y ago
      I mean the purpose of the list will be defeated if the methods by which it was created are disclosed. Which says nothing about the desirably of such a list or this use of it. (For that matter, the gun grabbers keep campaigning to deny gun ownership to anyone on it, can't have guns in "terrorist hands"....)
      - bobwaycott 13y ago
        Ah, gotcha. It certainly didn't parse that way.
        hga 13y ago
        Yeah, I guess it isn't clear, when I say "if you think about it" that generally includes "put yourself in the shoes of the people doing this".
        bobwaycott 13y ago
        Nah, it was my mistake and misunderstanding.
  - philwelch 13y ago
    > The existence of the list(s), and their many false positives, e.g. the late Senator Teddy Kennedy Are you sure they weren't just worried he'd get drunk and fly the plane into the water?
- fixxer 13y ago
  They are just trying to keep us safe. ;) Personally, I'd rather be vulnerable to a few nuts than vulnerable to the system.
  - senjmccarthy 13y ago
    Amen. Especially when the system is itself nuts and many of those who prop it up are nuts. "Freedom", by my definition, is thinking from a place of 1. personal responsibility and 2. let's fix the problem, not from one of 1. "I am a victim, or a potential one. Protect me." or 2. "There has been an accident. Who is to blame? Find who is guilty and make them pay." But I guess many Americans continue to believe they are the most free of all the world's citizens.

dpeck 13y ago

Ive tried to stop myself from forming opinions of the residents of other countries by the actions and rhetoric of their political leaders, whether elected or otherwise. I would hope others do the same and don't believe the actions of DC to be anything more than an exaggerated and often inaccurate caricature of the American people.

chez17 13y ago
I've quickly changed my mind about this sort of thinking. It's a nice little "get out of jail free" card for everyone. We should be held responsible for our government's actions, at least to some degree (especially in a democracy). How many of us really sacrifice significant resources and time to causes that would make the country/world better? How many here spend more at the bar than they do in charity every month? How many spend hours consuming media but don't take the time to keep educated about politics? What's the turnout at major primaries? Ten percent? Twenty? It's easy to say, we shouldn't judge the people of the country because it feels good to us and, in reality, most people are rather decent. However, I think it should be the opposite, we should all be ashamed of ourselves for letting ourselves get bought off for a little convenience and comfort. We're all guilty to varying degrees. We should step up and accept that. The first step towards recovery is admitting you have a problem.
- dpeck 13y ago
  I can see your point, but at the same time I have to look at the situation most people are in. Sometimes people are truly in the minority, say for instance a gay man in Jamaica. He could essentially sacrifice his life to try to move the needle on his countries tolerance level, or he could be discrete and live his life. I'll be the first to cheer on the former, but I don't believe that its my place to judge the latter for inaction. I don't believe that its right to hold people responsible for their governments actions while much of the world lacks freedom of movement, and those in power have nearly all the tools at their disposal to hold onto that power.