4 ms·

“I am proud of the fact that despite the dramatic protestations of intelligence chiefs, no evidence has been shown by any government that the revelations of the

“I am proud of the fact that despite the dramatic protestations of intelligence chiefs, no evidence has been shown by any government that the revelations of the last year have caused any specific harm,” he added. “My motivation is to improve government, not to bring it down.” I think this goes against the grain for a lot of HN.

SoftwareMaven 13y ago
I disagree. I've seen very few arguments on HN for anarchy. I have seen many libertarian posts, but that is a very different thing. Anarchy is about removing the government; libertarianism is about keeping it tightly constrained. The NSA is a great example of government not kept constrained.
- happyscrappy 13y ago
  Not anarchy, diminishing the power of the US.
  - Zigurd 13y ago
    How does a secret treaty that enables us to spy on everyone in Austria actually enhance our power? It diminishes the sovereignty of Austrians. It makes us a global spook. It didn't prevent a single bit of terrorism. Activity like this only enhances power to the short-sighted and self-important. There is a lot we should simply stop doing, and stop paying for it to be done, and spend that on things that make the lives of Americans better, because we rate poorly on quality of life measures. Power comes from a strong, productive economy. Putting ourselves in a panopticon is not productive.
- w_t_payne 13y ago
  Personally, I just want effective government. I happen to believe that it will be more effective if it is smaller (in manpower terms, at least) ... but constraining & minimising government is a means to an end, not the end itself.
dmix 13y ago
What? Even most hardcore libertarians don't want to bring down the government. And HN discussions rarely have anything more than moderate anti-government stances. Despite common perception, almost all libertarians are "minarchists" not anarchists. They want to minimize government, not have no government. An agency such as the NSA could actually fit into that model of governance if it had a defensive focus instead of an offensive one (ie. protecting citizens interests first instead of the state).

SoftwareMaven 13y ago

I disagree. I've seen very few arguments on HN for anarchy. I have seen many libertarian posts, but that is a very different thing. Anarchy is about removing the government; libertarianism is about keeping it tightly constrained. The NSA is a great example of government not kept constrained.

happyscrappy 13y ago
Not anarchy, diminishing the power of the US.
- Zigurd 13y ago
  How does a secret treaty that enables us to spy on everyone in Austria actually enhance our power? It diminishes the sovereignty of Austrians. It makes us a global spook. It didn't prevent a single bit of terrorism. Activity like this only enhances power to the short-sighted and self-important. There is a lot we should simply stop doing, and stop paying for it to be done, and spend that on things that make the lives of Americans better, because we rate poorly on quality of life measures. Power comes from a strong, productive economy. Putting ourselves in a panopticon is not productive.
w_t_payne 13y ago
Personally, I just want effective government. I happen to believe that it will be more effective if it is smaller (in manpower terms, at least) ... but constraining & minimising government is a means to an end, not the end itself.

dmix 13y ago

What? Even most hardcore libertarians don't want to bring down the government. And HN discussions rarely have anything more than moderate anti-government stances. Despite common perception, almost all libertarians are "minarchists" not anarchists. They want to minimize government, not have no government. An agency such as the NSA could actually fit into that model of governance if it had a defensive focus instead of an offensive one (ie. protecting citizens interests first instead of the state).