6 ms·

I don't really understand - if use of the technique (and similar) is why the Stasi is as maligned as it is, then surely using the technique does put you on par?

• themodelplumber 13y ago
  > if use of the technique (and similar) is why the Stasi is as maligned as it is, then surely using the technique does put you on par? So, if the Stasi does something, and it is the reason they are maligned, and I do the same thing at all to any degree, you're saying I'm on par with the Stasi? Please help me understand your sentence. >What would it take to put you on par then? Well, let's back up and look at the sport of golf, where the term "par" is commonly used. If I play the game, I'm golfing. Does that put me on par with Tiger Woods? No. In order to be on par with Tiger Woods, I need to be right up there matching Tiger Woods. The argument that the _use of a technique_ puts the invaders (whoever they are) on par with the Stasi is fallacious. If you want to use hyperbole, go ahead. But don't claim it's logical just because it feels good.
  • Crito 13y ago
    Are you saying that harassment like this is not one of the reasons the Stasi are maligned? Of course it is...
    • PavlovsCat 13y ago
      Well, to be fair, the STASI was more extreme in many respects. Kinda hard to beat them, with there being informants basically everywhere, and a literal wall around the country. It's like being spied on and harrassed while in a prison. Maybe North Korea might be similar, I have no idea. On the other hand we are stuck in this gravity well, with an adversary with unlimited reach and electronic eyes and ears everywhere. So the comparison may be much less far fetched than we'd like to believe. After all, the GDR had people who just "went along" and didn't mind any of the STASI stuff either; how is our situation any different? Some people not currently directly affected care, but I would guess all that don't, are not currently directly affected... because once this stuff turns on you, you're not in Kansas anymore, I bet you.
      • Crito 13y ago
        > Well, to be fair, the STASI was more extreme in many respects. Sure, we are talking about one of many components of why the Stasi are maligned. Basically this is not a "Hitler was a vegetarian; you're a vegetarian" type of scenario. Rather this is a "Hitler wrote a book blaming Jews for everything; you wrote a book blaming Jews for everything" scenario. Yes, writing an anti-semitic book is by no means Hitler's greatest crime, it barely even ranks on that list; but you can be sure it is very central to the reasons that he is maligned. In other words, harassment by the Stasi is not an incidental attribute of the Stasi. It is one of many defining attributes of what the Stasi were.
      • StavrosK 13y ago
        Sure, the Stasi were more extreme in some respects. However, they'd piss their pants if they had the surveillance capabilities the NSA is using now.
  • rhizome 13y ago
    If you use the technique, you become associated with others who use that technique. The use of "Stasi" here is comparable to saying a band sounds like The Beatles. As for "par," you're using two different senses of the word. Your analogy could work by acknowledging that par in golf is a comparison to the estimate made by the course designers, not to other golfers. In this way, "on par with the Stasi" is a comparison to the behavior (née "estimate") of that group. Two mathematicians in different disciplines are both mathematicians, even though their motivations and training are not exactly the same.