5 ms·

I'm not sure what to say. Mostly I'm just frightened for the future. It's very disheartening to watch civil liberties be dismantled so rapidly. When you combin

by codyb 12y ago

I'm not sure what to say. Mostly I'm just frightened for the future. It's very disheartening to watch civil liberties be dismantled so rapidly. When you combine this with the secret transatlantic talks for the proliferation of extremely large multinational corporations and the rapid militarization of the police, it almost feels as if there might be a coup being slowly but silently executed right under our noses. And no one cares. I did my first stand up set and had a joke about going to an ACLU meeting, and no one even knows what the ACLU is. As scary as it, I certainly understand, that it is not as bad here as many places, but that doesn't mean I can't be concerned with the recent developments. I just hope the American spirit will shine through one day and turn all of this around. The house passing to defund back door NSA research is heartening at least. Lets see what happens in the Senate.

nickff 12y ago
The corporations are not the problem here, it would be much simpler if they were. Elected and appointed government officials seem to have a strong desire to create their vision of a pleasant and orderly society, whatever the costs. These people generally appear to believe that so long as 'enlightened' people (such as themselves) are in charge, nothing bad can result.
- themartorana 12y ago
  I think it's quite interesting that - perhaps to my tinfoil-hat side - we're ending up somewhere between Orwell and Huxley. - Orwell feared the truth would be actively concealed. Check. - Huxley feared distractions would be so great that no one (or very few people) would care to seek the truth. Check. - Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Check. - Huxley feared we would become obsessed with consumerism and preoccupied with distraction. Check. - Orwell assumed we would be controlled by inflicting pain. Check (foreign policy). - Huxley assumed we would be controlled by inflicting pleasure. Check (domestic news cycle, reality TV, lack of education.) Both had valid points and we're seeing both approaches being used. So where we end up, I have no idea... where we are isn't great. Talking points from this great comic strip: "Amusing Ourselves to Death" by Stuart McMillen, from 2009: http://flycl.ps/SXHdFP http://flycl.ps/SXHdFP Edit: formatting.
  - GHFigs 12y ago
    this great comic strip Talking points from this great book: "Amusing Ourselves to Death" by Neil Postman, from 1985: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amusing_ourselves_to_death http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amusing_ourselves_to_death
  - MaysonL 12y ago
    Not to speak of perpetual war... [1984] And divide and conquer politics [Animal Farm]
sparkman55 12y ago
It's very easy to join or donate to the ACLU ($35), and it's (marginally) better than the "let's see what happens" attitude most of us have on this matter. https://www.aclunc.org/donate/become-a-member https://www.aclunc.org/donate/become-a-member
- mxiia 12y ago
  You linked to the Northern California branch. It'd be better to donate to the main entity. https://www.aclu.org/donate/join-renew-give?ms=web_footer_donate https://www.aclu.org/donate/join-renew-give?ms=web_footer_do...
opendais 12y ago
I don't think this is really a coup of some kind. It is more a consolidation of power by the oligarchy into a handful of politically powerful, wealthy groups. I think the reason this is working so well is the marketing. Almost no one goes out and admits that the domestic usage is partially to catch people violating "social norm" laws [marijuana bad; alcohol good], and keep an eye on things that are highly political [e.g. Occupy Wall Street]. I think the average person assumes "because MURICA" that doesn't happen.
- codyb 12y ago
  I think thats semantics. What is a coup but a transfer and consolidation of power? The only difference I can think of is the time span. This seems to be a long haul kind of game as opposed to the traditional military coups of past (and present).
  - opendais 12y ago
    Keyword: transfer I'm disagreeing about their being a transfer of power at this stage. There is no power transfer. The basic power blocks already existed in their current form, were the primary source of money for politicians, etc. since the 1980s [at the latest]. Transfer implies they are taking power away from people. They aren't. They are merely utilizing the power they already have to tighten their hold on it to make it harder to transfer power away from them. I don't think this is even truly a new phenomena. It is just with Globalization, Internet, etc. the power blocks are so large that they span the entire world rather than just a single country.
    - hga 12y ago
      "The basic power blocks already existed in their current form, were the primary source of money for politicians, etc. since the 1980s [at the latest]." I didn't notice any changes in this after the post-Watergate "reforms", which happened not long after I became politically aware. Globalization is ancient in American economic history, was very big in the 19th Century, and e.g. for the world, it didn't return to pre-WWI levels until a frighteningly later time, I can't remember when, but within my lifetime (which I suppose I should point out started when Eisenhower was president (barely)). And I agree, this is a consolidation period. But I believe it's build on a foundation of sand, e.g. there is not an infinite hunger for US government debt at negative real interest rates, we're just the "least worst" place to put your money for the foreseeable future.
jqm 12y ago
Probably not much will be done by the general public as long as the milk and honey keep flowing..... This is the real trick for our leaders (or usurpers or whoever they are). Keeping a chicken in every pot and two cars in each garage. They start failing at this and suddenly the citizenry might miraculously become concerned about "rights" and "liberty". And... I might point out, in spite of NSA, in spite of a possibly doctored political process, in spite of police departments with tanks... an unhappy and hungry citizenry, especially one that can still vote, has never been good for those in charge of society.
- MaysonL 12y ago
  I wonder what the current percentage of the electorate who are dissatisfied with their own Congressional representative is? Last I heard, with national dissatisfaction at Congress as a whole about 90%, that number was at its high point ever, about 35%.

by codyb 12y ago

nickff 12y ago

The corporations are not the problem here, it would be much simpler if they were. Elected and appointed government officials seem to have a strong desire to create their vision of a pleasant and orderly society, whatever the costs. These people generally appear to believe that so long as 'enlightened' people (such as themselves) are in charge, nothing bad can result.

themartorana 12y ago
I think it's quite interesting that - perhaps to my tinfoil-hat side - we're ending up somewhere between Orwell and Huxley. - Orwell feared the truth would be actively concealed. Check. - Huxley feared distractions would be so great that no one (or very few people) would care to seek the truth. Check. - Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Check. - Huxley feared we would become obsessed with consumerism and preoccupied with distraction. Check. - Orwell assumed we would be controlled by inflicting pain. Check (foreign policy). - Huxley assumed we would be controlled by inflicting pleasure. Check (domestic news cycle, reality TV, lack of education.) Both had valid points and we're seeing both approaches being used. So where we end up, I have no idea... where we are isn't great. Talking points from this great comic strip: "Amusing Ourselves to Death" by Stuart McMillen, from 2009: http://flycl.ps/SXHdFP http://flycl.ps/SXHdFP Edit: formatting.
- GHFigs 12y ago
  this great comic strip Talking points from this great book: "Amusing Ourselves to Death" by Neil Postman, from 1985: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amusing_ourselves_to_death http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amusing_ourselves_to_death
- MaysonL 12y ago
  Not to speak of perpetual war... [1984] And divide and conquer politics [Animal Farm]

sparkman55 12y ago

It's very easy to join or donate to the ACLU ($35), and it's (marginally) better than the "let's see what happens" attitude most of us have on this matter. https://www.aclunc.org/donate/become-a-member https://www.aclunc.org/donate/become-a-member

mxiia 12y ago
You linked to the Northern California branch. It'd be better to donate to the main entity. https://www.aclu.org/donate/join-renew-give?ms=web_footer_donate https://www.aclu.org/donate/join-renew-give?ms=web_footer_do...

opendais 12y ago

I don't think this is really a coup of some kind. It is more a consolidation of power by the oligarchy into a handful of politically powerful, wealthy groups. I think the reason this is working so well is the marketing. Almost no one goes out and admits that the domestic usage is partially to catch people violating "social norm" laws [marijuana bad; alcohol good], and keep an eye on things that are highly political [e.g. Occupy Wall Street]. I think the average person assumes "because MURICA" that doesn't happen.

codyb 12y ago
I think thats semantics. What is a coup but a transfer and consolidation of power? The only difference I can think of is the time span. This seems to be a long haul kind of game as opposed to the traditional military coups of past (and present).
- opendais 12y ago
  Keyword: transfer I'm disagreeing about their being a transfer of power at this stage. There is no power transfer. The basic power blocks already existed in their current form, were the primary source of money for politicians, etc. since the 1980s [at the latest]. Transfer implies they are taking power away from people. They aren't. They are merely utilizing the power they already have to tighten their hold on it to make it harder to transfer power away from them. I don't think this is even truly a new phenomena. It is just with Globalization, Internet, etc. the power blocks are so large that they span the entire world rather than just a single country.
  - hga 12y ago
    "The basic power blocks already existed in their current form, were the primary source of money for politicians, etc. since the 1980s [at the latest]." I didn't notice any changes in this after the post-Watergate "reforms", which happened not long after I became politically aware. Globalization is ancient in American economic history, was very big in the 19th Century, and e.g. for the world, it didn't return to pre-WWI levels until a frighteningly later time, I can't remember when, but within my lifetime (which I suppose I should point out started when Eisenhower was president (barely)). And I agree, this is a consolidation period. But I believe it's build on a foundation of sand, e.g. there is not an infinite hunger for US government debt at negative real interest rates, we're just the "least worst" place to put your money for the foreseeable future.

jqm 12y ago

Probably not much will be done by the general public as long as the milk and honey keep flowing..... This is the real trick for our leaders (or usurpers or whoever they are). Keeping a chicken in every pot and two cars in each garage. They start failing at this and suddenly the citizenry might miraculously become concerned about "rights" and "liberty". And... I might point out, in spite of NSA, in spite of a possibly doctored political process, in spite of police departments with tanks... an unhappy and hungry citizenry, especially one that can still vote, has never been good for those in charge of society.

MaysonL 12y ago
I wonder what the current percentage of the electorate who are dissatisfied with their own Congressional representative is? Last I heard, with national dissatisfaction at Congress as a whole about 90%, that number was at its high point ever, about 35%.