4 ms·
Who are "civil libertarians"? People who value their civil liberties? People who are willing to do something to protect them? Whatever they are, you say you're
by jsteele 17y ago
Who are "civil libertarians"? People who value their civil liberties? People who are willing to do something to protect them? Whatever they are, you say you're not one. Interesting.
- patio11 17y agoWho are "civil libertarians"? People who value their civil liberties? People who value civil liberties are civil libertarians in the same sense that people who value women are feminists. Whatever they are, you say you're not one. Correct. I am also not a feminist.
- calcnerd256 17y agoThat analogy is so right, as far as I can tell. I think there is a big difference between falling under a label and self-identifying as it.
- jsteele 17y agoYou didn't answer the question.
- Semiapies 17y agoThere's no intention of answering it, just demonizing "civil libertarians" - i.e., anyone who disagrees with him and thinks this violates civil liberties - in order to pretend to have the high ground.
- calcnerd256 17y agoWhile posting another reply, I just saw that the abortion-stance euphemisms make the same appropriate analogy here as the analogy you chose. People who value life are pro-life in the same sense that people who value choice are pro-choice in the same sense that people who value civil liberties are civil libertarians in the same sense that people who value women are feminists.
- calcnerd256 17y agoI think the label suggests that they self-identify about it in an obnoxious way. Kind of like how "card-carrying member of the ACLU" is sometimes used as an insult, even though everyone wants their own civil liberties defended.
- jsteele 17y agoExactly. And I find it lazy to use such loaded terms to denigrate an argument one doesn't agree with instead of confronting its (lack of) merits. Obnoxious != wrong. Actually, I find it strange that the initial commenter only suspects that "civil libertarians" might have a problem with the surveillance that s/he thinks is fine. The sentence seems to me a gratuitous pot shot at people who might think of themselves as "civil libertarians". Why? HN deserves better rhetoric. Otherwise, there's always Slashdot.
- Semiapies 17y agoBecause parking an armored camera-truck in front of the place darker-skinned people not accused of any crime live doesn't involve the "civil liberties" a lot of HN commentors care about. It's not about DRM, the GPL, when stuff goes out of copyright, or whether whitehouse.gov uses tracking cookies - the "big stuff". It's just some people, somewhere, seeing a big-ass police vehicle parked in front of their home with cameras pointed directly at them. To a lot of HN folks, that doesn't seem terribly important; after all, they're probably drug dealers - at least, the police say so!
- calcnerd256 17y agoThere's a difference between all-else-equal and uber-alles when it comes to a positive thing. This is why the abortion debate has cute euphemisms that are both pro-something-the-other-side-is-also-in-favor-of.