3 ms·
But they're wrong. The United States is, whether you like it or not, a democracy. Voters can be influenced, but they still decide the outcome. Everything backen
by tedks 12y ago
But they're wrong. The United States is, whether you like it or not, a democracy. Voters can be influenced, but they still decide the outcome. Everything backends to them.
If you disagree with that, there are legal avenues. This is an example of an extralegal avenue of political change.
- Zigurd 12y agoGilens and Page think they have shown that's only true for trivial matters: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/princeton-scholar-demise-of-democracy-america-tpm-interview http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/princeton-scholar-demise-of-... People vote all the time in all kinds of undemocratic systems. Are you seriously saying strong encryption is, or should be illegal?
- tedks 12y agoThe interview you link to points out numerous problems with that study, but beyond that, the very existence and success of activist groups disproves that premise. If the United States was truly an oligarchy, gay marriage or marijuana legalization would never have happened. Lawrence Lessig is making serious progress with his Rootstrikers group, and the fact that he's doing so proves that ordinary citizens do have political influence. Battles aren't won overnight, but >Are you seriously saying strong encryption is, or should be illegal? Do you think I'm saying this? If so, where? Or are you asking leading questions in order to put words in my mouth? In which case, are you seriously saying that democracy is an idea we should totally abandon in order to embrace the rule of whoever-can-summon-the-most-technological-power?
- Zigurd 12y agoThe oligrachs have little or no money to lose on those issues. You used the word "extralegal." What does that apply to if not the use of encryption in mobile devices?