4 ms·
The difference is, in the OP's argument, the people whose job it is to stop these bad things are also the ones who are benefitting from it. Normally, it is the
by guptaneil 13y ago
The difference is, in the OP's argument, the people whose job it is to stop these bad things are also the ones who are benefitting from it. Normally, it is the police's job to stop child abuse. However, if the police force happens to be running the child abuse ring, they are not going to do anything to stop it themselves. In such a situation, there is no incentive for these things to stop.
(Note: I'm not convinced war profiteering is the driving motivator for the NSA, just pointing out the fallacy in your argument.)
- refurb 13y agoSure it still work... let's look at my list: securities fraud - all those jobs at the SEC would disappear if they ended securities fraud, therefore they must not really want to stop it child abuse - the cops, social workers and judges would lose their jobs if child abuse stopped, therefore they must not really want to stop it cancer - oncologists would have no job if cancer was cured, therefore they must not really want to stop it money laundering - DOJ would lose their jobs if there was no money laundering, therefore they must not really want to stop it murder - cops would lose their jobs if there was no murder, therefore they must not really want to stop it And you can't say those people I noted above are not a part of the power structure...