5 ms·

I hate to phrase it this way, but the moral high ground would seem to be a relative place. The revelation that everyone spies doesn't necessarily mean that eve

I hate to phrase it this way, but the moral high ground would seem to be a relative place. The revelation that everyone spies doesn't necessarily mean that everyone spies in the same way or for the same reason. The motivation in particular seems important when talking about the moral high ground. While I'm sure there is overlap between spying motivations of China, Russia and western democracies (most large countries have similar interests in what other large countries are doing), there are also reasons China and Russia spy that are not shared by the US or the EU. There is little to suggest that the US or EU are using spying to suppress political dissent, for example. And the differences in the laws governing spying in the US and Russia seem unlikely to be "subtle" ones, the claim made in the article aside.

vidarh 13y ago
Oh, please. The US has a well documented history of spying on and infiltrating political organizations domestically and internationally ranging back to the labor movement of the mid 1800's (at least) and up to modern day, as well as suppressing dissent with methods ranging from assassinations and economic destabilization to assisting coups d'etat and invasions. Why should we believe that has stopped? I don't know about the extent of spying to deal with political dissent in the EU, but I know quite a few people who were subjected to rather intense illegal surveillance in Norway, that was often clearly intended to intimidate (when top level people in the security services start conversations with you on the street about the argument you had with your wife, in your living room, the other night, it is pretty clear what the purpose is). When this monitoring was rolled up, it eventually was revealed that the leader of the parliamentary commission investigating the illegal surveillance had been put under illegal surveillance while he was investigating the illegal surveillance... Given that this level of surveillance was happening in Norway relatively recently, I find it highly improbably that there's no extensive politically motivated spying in other European countries too, to this day, whether legal or illegal. There is difference - sure. It is not politically acceptable to be seen to interfere with political parties at home in Europe or the US, so there may be less blatant interference these days, other than with fringe groups that are easier to find ways to label that makes them tolerable targets.
- rtpg 13y ago
  Europe is not a homogeneous ball within which everyone acts the same.
- anon1385 13y ago
  >I don't know about the extent of spying to deal with political dissent in the EU Some links from recent UK cases to get you started: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/aug/12/met-chief-briefed-spying-lawrence-campaign http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/aug/12/met-chief-bri... Steven Lawrence was a black teenager murdered in a racially motived attack in 1993. The racist police force bungled the investigation. This was a big scandal and there was eventually a public inquiry. Recently it has emerged that the police used undercover police officers to infiltrate and undermine the campaign by the family to get justice and expose the racism in the police force. The police neglected to mention this during the public enquiry. http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jun/24/undercover-officers-police-chief-met http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jun/24/undercover-officer... Over the course of several decades dozens of under cover police officers stole the identities of dead children and infiltrated environmental protest groups and were encouraged to enter into sexual relationships with women in the groups they were targeting. In some cases even fathering children with the women they were deceiving. All while still being married in their real lives, which they returned to once the assignments ended.

vidarh 13y ago

Oh, please. The US has a well documented history of spying on and infiltrating political organizations domestically and internationally ranging back to the labor movement of the mid 1800's (at least) and up to modern day, as well as suppressing dissent with methods ranging from assassinations and economic destabilization to assisting coups d'etat and invasions. Why should we believe that has stopped? I don't know about the extent of spying to deal with political dissent in the EU, but I know quite a few people who were subjected to rather intense illegal surveillance in Norway, that was often clearly intended to intimidate (when top level people in the security services start conversations with you on the street about the argument you had with your wife, in your living room, the other night, it is pretty clear what the purpose is). When this monitoring was rolled up, it eventually was revealed that the leader of the parliamentary commission investigating the illegal surveillance had been put under illegal surveillance while he was investigating the illegal surveillance... Given that this level of surveillance was happening in Norway relatively recently, I find it highly improbably that there's no extensive politically motivated spying in other European countries too, to this day, whether legal or illegal. There is difference - sure. It is not politically acceptable to be seen to interfere with political parties at home in Europe or the US, so there may be less blatant interference these days, other than with fringe groups that are easier to find ways to label that makes them tolerable targets.

rtpg 13y ago
Europe is not a homogeneous ball within which everyone acts the same.
anon1385 13y ago
>I don't know about the extent of spying to deal with political dissent in the EU Some links from recent UK cases to get you started: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/aug/12/met-chief-briefed-spying-lawrence-campaign http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/aug/12/met-chief-bri... Steven Lawrence was a black teenager murdered in a racially motived attack in 1993. The racist police force bungled the investigation. This was a big scandal and there was eventually a public inquiry. Recently it has emerged that the police used undercover police officers to infiltrate and undermine the campaign by the family to get justice and expose the racism in the police force. The police neglected to mention this during the public enquiry. http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jun/24/undercover-officers-police-chief-met http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jun/24/undercover-officer... Over the course of several decades dozens of under cover police officers stole the identities of dead children and infiltrated environmental protest groups and were encouraged to enter into sexual relationships with women in the groups they were targeting. In some cases even fathering children with the women they were deceiving. All while still being married in their real lives, which they returned to once the assignments ended.