3 ms·

I know it's fashionable to bash NSA, but as someone who grew up in a communist state in the Cold War, such comparison is really an insult. Forget about living

by jryle70 12y ago

I know it's fashionable to bash NSA, but as someone who grew up in a communist state in the Cold War, such comparison is really an insult. Forget about living condition, corruption or censorship, let's talk about police state. First, you couldn't just choose where you wanted to live, you needed to get government approval for it. Spending a few nights at your relatives? Had to register with the local police department. Talking about local police, there was usually an officer responsible for a given residential area. He/she knew every member of every families living there. People, usually one per family, were "encouraged" to attend monthly meeting where they were reminded that there were "evil" forces who did everything to undermine the party and the government, and that was everyone's responsibility to report any suspicious activities (I did hear that a lot post 9/11 in the US, but only at public places, for unattended packages. Still it provokes a lot of memory). Promotion at work? well, you'd need a recommendation from the head of the block where you lived. Make sure to be on good terms with him. Wanted to visit another country? You couldn't, unless on official business. As the result no one could have a passport until their first trip abroad. The sad thing is, most people considered all of that as normal, if annoying, facts of life. No one cared about police listening to phone conversation or checking (snail) mail. Because that was their job, of course. In fact, where I lived such policies were overwhelmingly supported. When the Berlin wall was demolished, I remember asking my dad why Soviet Red Army let such thing happen. Why not invade and crush "the enemies". You got brainwashed since very early years. Where were the Snowdens you might ask? none existed, and if they did, there'd be no NYT or Washington Post or the Guardian to report on it. Newspapers closed up shop for much less serious incidents. So bashing NSA all you want, they're hardly angels -- never broke any law evar! but the next time you try to pull a smart-ass, be damn sure you know what you're talking about.

stefantalpalaru 12y ago
> such comparison is really an insult Not really. The means were much more brutal, but the effect was the same: stifling opposition, containing criticism, controlling the population through fear of an external enemy and internal traitors, etc. > Had to register with the local police department. Every visitor to the U.S. needs to inform the authorities where s/he will reside for the duration. With the exact address, not something vague like state or city. > and that was everyone's responsibility to report any suspicious activities Have you heard about neighborhood watch? They even have menacing signs all over the area that they patrol, reporting any suspicious activity, calling the cops on you if you linger and look around. Lately the public appeals to rat suspicious strangers intensified. About 3 years ago, in Boston's subway I was hearing a PSA with a friendly fireman telling us to be vigilant and report any suspicious individual to the local authorities. I did not have the courage to pull out my camera and take photos of the station. I was suspicious enough already. > Promotion at work? well, you'd need a recommendation from the head of the block where you lived. It was worse than that. You needed to be a member of the one true Party in order to get ahead. But it wasn't much different in the States at one point: you had to be proven innocent from accusations of un-american activities if you wanted to keep your job. Even today, people have to register as democrats, republicans or independents before voting. Can you guess how many of them get to keep their political affiliation a secret? > No one cared about police listening to phone conversation or checking (snail) mail. Of course they did. Those brave enough to seek information from external propaganda sources like Voice of America and Radio Free Europe were taking a serious risk. So were those who told jokes that mocked the regime. Or those trading in banned books. Or those practicing religion in an atheist state. Or those secretly passing manuscripts to foreign visitors so they can be published abroad. Or those dealing with abortions in a state that forbid them categorically because it needed as many new citizens as it could get. Etc. If you didn't guess already, this was not the communist block's cushy poster state. This was Romania.
- jryle70 12y ago
  > Every visitor to the U.S. needs to inform the authorities where s/he will reside for the duration. With the exact address, not something vague like state or city. You're talking about foreign visitors. That's very common in other countries as well. Obviously not a shining example of a freedom country. Still, I was talking about residents. In your own country. > Have you heard about neighborhood watch? They even have menacing signs all over the area that they patrol, reporting any suspicious activity, calling the cops on you if you linger and look around. I've never lived in one so I can't tell how it works in reality, but apparently as of early 1980s 12% of population was involved in a neighborhood watch: http://www.ncpc.org/topics/home-and-neighborhood-safety/neighborhood-watch http://www.ncpc.org/topics/home-and-neighborhood-safety/neig... Still, that's no where near as prevalent as what I described. Not even close. Also I figure neighborhood watch resonates well with Americans and their take-matter-into-my-own-hands, government-distrust mentality. To be fair, I only experienced the last few year of the Cold War. I was young, my family didn't suffer from any hardship, and I still love the place and go back whenever I can.
- A_COMPUTER 12y ago
  >Have you heard about neighborhood watch? They even have menacing signs all over the area that they patrol, reporting any suspicious activity, calling the cops on you if you linger and look around. It is beyond me why you think this is menacing. These things weren't set up to catch reds or terrists, they were set up to prevent burglaries and child kidnappings, which are real, regular occurrences. 99% of the time there's not even really a watch, it's just a sign to deter burglars.
pastProlog 12y ago
> such comparison is really an insult. > Forget about living condition, corruption or censorship, let's talk about police state. Here's a recent photo taken in Ferguson, Missouri: http://static6.businessinsider.com/image/53f10e8decad046f3d4213cf-1200-924/ferguson-missouri-29.jpg http://static6.businessinsider.com/image/53f10e8decad046f3d4...
- grkvlt 12y ago
  I'm not sure what you're trying to show with this photograph (it's of a deployed SWAT-style police team, with armoured vehicle) though? That there are incidents in the US that require armed response teams? The fact that you had to obtain a picture from a national news source, taken during an on-going crowd-control/rioting incident means this is an unusual situation, not indicitave of 'Police State America', and is just compunding the insulting comparision. Try looking at photographs of city streets taken during a normal working day, and note the absence of APCs and riot police. A police state is a very different thing to the situation in the USA or the UK.
  - pastProlog 12y ago
    > an on-going crowd-control/rioting incident means this is an unusual situation You mean like Budapest in 1956? Prague in 1968? Riots like those? Or are those rioters worthy of their aspirations, while the rioters in Ferguson are unworthy of their aspirations? > Try looking at photographs of city streets taken during a normal working day, and note the absence of APCs and riot police. There weren't many riot police regularly tromping around Moscow or Bucharest or Kiev or Sofia during the 1970s either.

by jryle70 12y ago

stefantalpalaru 12y ago

> such comparison is really an insult Not really. The means were much more brutal, but the effect was the same: stifling opposition, containing criticism, controlling the population through fear of an external enemy and internal traitors, etc. > Had to register with the local police department. Every visitor to the U.S. needs to inform the authorities where s/he will reside for the duration. With the exact address, not something vague like state or city. > and that was everyone's responsibility to report any suspicious activities Have you heard about neighborhood watch? They even have menacing signs all over the area that they patrol, reporting any suspicious activity, calling the cops on you if you linger and look around. Lately the public appeals to rat suspicious strangers intensified. About 3 years ago, in Boston's subway I was hearing a PSA with a friendly fireman telling us to be vigilant and report any suspicious individual to the local authorities. I did not have the courage to pull out my camera and take photos of the station. I was suspicious enough already. > Promotion at work? well, you'd need a recommendation from the head of the block where you lived. It was worse than that. You needed to be a member of the one true Party in order to get ahead. But it wasn't much different in the States at one point: you had to be proven innocent from accusations of un-american activities if you wanted to keep your job. Even today, people have to register as democrats, republicans or independents before voting. Can you guess how many of them get to keep their political affiliation a secret? > No one cared about police listening to phone conversation or checking (snail) mail. Of course they did. Those brave enough to seek information from external propaganda sources like Voice of America and Radio Free Europe were taking a serious risk. So were those who told jokes that mocked the regime. Or those trading in banned books. Or those practicing religion in an atheist state. Or those secretly passing manuscripts to foreign visitors so they can be published abroad. Or those dealing with abortions in a state that forbid them categorically because it needed as many new citizens as it could get. Etc. If you didn't guess already, this was not the communist block's cushy poster state. This was Romania.

jryle70 12y ago
> Every visitor to the U.S. needs to inform the authorities where s/he will reside for the duration. With the exact address, not something vague like state or city. You're talking about foreign visitors. That's very common in other countries as well. Obviously not a shining example of a freedom country. Still, I was talking about residents. In your own country. > Have you heard about neighborhood watch? They even have menacing signs all over the area that they patrol, reporting any suspicious activity, calling the cops on you if you linger and look around. I've never lived in one so I can't tell how it works in reality, but apparently as of early 1980s 12% of population was involved in a neighborhood watch: http://www.ncpc.org/topics/home-and-neighborhood-safety/neighborhood-watch http://www.ncpc.org/topics/home-and-neighborhood-safety/neig... Still, that's no where near as prevalent as what I described. Not even close. Also I figure neighborhood watch resonates well with Americans and their take-matter-into-my-own-hands, government-distrust mentality. To be fair, I only experienced the last few year of the Cold War. I was young, my family didn't suffer from any hardship, and I still love the place and go back whenever I can.
A_COMPUTER 12y ago
>Have you heard about neighborhood watch? They even have menacing signs all over the area that they patrol, reporting any suspicious activity, calling the cops on you if you linger and look around. It is beyond me why you think this is menacing. These things weren't set up to catch reds or terrists, they were set up to prevent burglaries and child kidnappings, which are real, regular occurrences. 99% of the time there's not even really a watch, it's just a sign to deter burglars.

pastProlog 12y ago

> such comparison is really an insult. > Forget about living condition, corruption or censorship, let's talk about police state. Here's a recent photo taken in Ferguson, Missouri: http://static6.businessinsider.com/image/53f10e8decad046f3d4213cf-1200-924/ferguson-missouri-29.jpg http://static6.businessinsider.com/image/53f10e8decad046f3d4...

grkvlt 12y ago
I'm not sure what you're trying to show with this photograph (it's of a deployed SWAT-style police team, with armoured vehicle) though? That there are incidents in the US that require armed response teams? The fact that you had to obtain a picture from a national news source, taken during an on-going crowd-control/rioting incident means this is an unusual situation, not indicitave of 'Police State America', and is just compunding the insulting comparision. Try looking at photographs of city streets taken during a normal working day, and note the absence of APCs and riot police. A police state is a very different thing to the situation in the USA or the UK.
- pastProlog 12y ago
  > an on-going crowd-control/rioting incident means this is an unusual situation You mean like Budapest in 1956? Prague in 1968? Riots like those? Or are those rioters worthy of their aspirations, while the rioters in Ferguson are unworthy of their aspirations? > Try looking at photographs of city streets taken during a normal working day, and note the absence of APCs and riot police. There weren't many riot police regularly tromping around Moscow or Bucharest or Kiev or Sofia during the 1970s either.