4 ms·

As I said, reasonable to point out the inaccuracy of the statement, but then there's a lot of substance to discuss after that. I think this article adds to the

As I said, reasonable to point out the inaccuracy of the statement, but then there's a lot of substance to discuss after that. I think this article adds to the thesis that the NSA apparatus is not a product of democracy. While you can trace its origin to a law the people approved, it's no longer controlled by democracy. At least it wouldn't be if our leaders had their way, and people like Snowden and Ellsberg were silenced.

tptacek 13y ago
The FISC apparatus is a product of Congress. Democracy produced an outcome we (myself included) don't like. The majority of US citizens are more concerned about {the Soviets,Terrorism} than they are about NSA "accidentally" reading their emails. Appeals to "democracy" in discussions like these tend to have a whiff of "No True Scotsman" to them, where "democracy" is defined as the form of government which is subject to the will of the majority but that cannot be captured by any interest we disapprove of. In reality, democracies do insane things all the time.
- pvnick 13y ago
  >The majority of US citizens are more concerned about {the Soviets,Terrorism} than they are about NSA "accidentally" reading their emails. As somebody that's been on the ground passing out fliers for my town's restore the 4th rally that I helped organize yesterday, I've seen this apathy manifest itself not only in terms of disinterest, but also in outright anger that I would be so reckless and dangerous as to try and put pressure on our leaders to abide by the rule of law. I've been cussed out, called a communist by a military veteran, told to "get a job" (I actually have a great job), etc. It seems that if an issue does not directly affect the lives of the masses negatively, such as the food shortage and economic instability that catalyzed the popular military coup in Egypt, the docile public will support whatever it is the powers that be tell them to. Here's to hoping some of the remaining leaked documents provide evidence of just that...
  - tptacek 13y ago
    I actually don't blame them. I believe we need better checks and more carefully written rules for NSA surveillance, but I feel like I'm pretty well educated on these issues and I don't believe NSA is deliberately abusing their power right now. Rather, I think the potential for abuse in the future has become too great. Large groups of people aren't great at at dealing with issues way out in the future like this.
  - larrys 13y ago
    "It seems that if an issue does not directly affect the lives of the masses negatively" While that certainly could be the case, I think you are ignoring the fact that there are many citizens who perhaps have been around long than you have that have decided that it really isn't a problem from their perspective and that it's a necessary evil. Things can't be perfect. And that they have given it some thought and are willing to put a certain amount of trust in the system to produce the right outcome.
    - pvnick 13y ago
      Yeah if that's the case then they should really just find a different country to live in that doesn't explicitly provide constitutional protection against this kind of stuff instead of supporting the illegal violation of ours. Too many people have died for these protections to let fear-based mindsets water down those accomplishments. I'm not even joking. If you aren't brave enough to live in a free society then you are free to leave and live in any number of nanny states.
      - tptacek 13y ago
        First, when you have to structure an argument around "they should just find a different country to live in", you know you're in the weeds. Second, when you're talking about the majority of Americans finding a new country to live in, you're not just in the weeds, but also howling at the moon from them. Third, it is fallacious to presume that people who don't have a problem with what NSA is doing now don't respect the 4th Amendment. It's right there in the text of the Constitution: searches must be reasonable. The Constitution punts on what "reasonable" means; that's why they used that word. There's no absolute for you to fall back on here. I happen to agree with you that omnibus metadata collection is dangerous and should be further checked by the law, but I can also see both sides of the issue, and you can't, and I think you should try.

tptacek 13y ago

The FISC apparatus is a product of Congress. Democracy produced an outcome we (myself included) don't like. The majority of US citizens are more concerned about {the Soviets,Terrorism} than they are about NSA "accidentally" reading their emails. Appeals to "democracy" in discussions like these tend to have a whiff of "No True Scotsman" to them, where "democracy" is defined as the form of government which is subject to the will of the majority but that cannot be captured by any interest we disapprove of. In reality, democracies do insane things all the time.

pvnick 13y ago
>The majority of US citizens are more concerned about {the Soviets,Terrorism} than they are about NSA "accidentally" reading their emails. As somebody that's been on the ground passing out fliers for my town's restore the 4th rally that I helped organize yesterday, I've seen this apathy manifest itself not only in terms of disinterest, but also in outright anger that I would be so reckless and dangerous as to try and put pressure on our leaders to abide by the rule of law. I've been cussed out, called a communist by a military veteran, told to "get a job" (I actually have a great job), etc. It seems that if an issue does not directly affect the lives of the masses negatively, such as the food shortage and economic instability that catalyzed the popular military coup in Egypt, the docile public will support whatever it is the powers that be tell them to. Here's to hoping some of the remaining leaked documents provide evidence of just that...
- tptacek 13y ago
  I actually don't blame them. I believe we need better checks and more carefully written rules for NSA surveillance, but I feel like I'm pretty well educated on these issues and I don't believe NSA is deliberately abusing their power right now. Rather, I think the potential for abuse in the future has become too great. Large groups of people aren't great at at dealing with issues way out in the future like this.
- larrys 13y ago
  "It seems that if an issue does not directly affect the lives of the masses negatively" While that certainly could be the case, I think you are ignoring the fact that there are many citizens who perhaps have been around long than you have that have decided that it really isn't a problem from their perspective and that it's a necessary evil. Things can't be perfect. And that they have given it some thought and are willing to put a certain amount of trust in the system to produce the right outcome.
  - pvnick 13y ago
    Yeah if that's the case then they should really just find a different country to live in that doesn't explicitly provide constitutional protection against this kind of stuff instead of supporting the illegal violation of ours. Too many people have died for these protections to let fear-based mindsets water down those accomplishments. I'm not even joking. If you aren't brave enough to live in a free society then you are free to leave and live in any number of nanny states.
    - tptacek 13y ago
      First, when you have to structure an argument around "they should just find a different country to live in", you know you're in the weeds. Second, when you're talking about the majority of Americans finding a new country to live in, you're not just in the weeds, but also howling at the moon from them. Third, it is fallacious to presume that people who don't have a problem with what NSA is doing now don't respect the 4th Amendment. It's right there in the text of the Constitution: searches must be reasonable. The Constitution punts on what "reasonable" means; that's why they used that word. There's no absolute for you to fall back on here. I happen to agree with you that omnibus metadata collection is dangerous and should be further checked by the law, but I can also see both sides of the issue, and you can't, and I think you should try.