Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor

blog.sfgate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 359 posts

Re: NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor

#261

Post by davidw »

ekianjo wrote: post #250
aheilbut wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that security is a precondition to enjoying all of the freedoms you list. There are trade-offs to make between freedom and security, and neither the freedoms nor the security are absolute, and they never have been.

Since where Security is a precondition to Freedom ? I wonder where you conceived that strange idea. We never had as much security as we have now (compared to the hundreds of generations before us) yet we are losing our liberties at an alarming speed.

> Since where Security is a precondition to Freedom ?

If you have zero physical security, that means that anyone can come up and just knock you down and take your things, your woman, whatever... Not my idea of "freedom".

I think that it follows that you do need some security in order to live a free life. Does that justify secret government spying programs? Probably not!

People here seem to have awfully black and white thoughts about some aspects of life.

> yet we are losing our liberties at an alarming speed.

Except for minorities (at least for some things, like, say, being able to vote in Alabama), gays, people who consume marijuana in Washington and Colorado, and various others who have gained rights recently. It's not black and white.

Re: NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor

#262

Post by flyinRyan »

twoodfin wrote: post #255
flyinRyan wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no middle ground. As soon as you give the government the right to secrets (and even if you don't!) they're going to use it to build things like NSA and hide them from you.

This is a bizarre claim when phrased as an absolute: Eisenhower should have published the Normandy invasion plans?

This is different and you know it. The Normandy invasion is one specific operation of one specific group. Cops doing a raid would be a similar thing. In both cases, their activities are isolated to that one specific area and they only need be secret for a relatively short period of time.

Contrast this with things like NSA: no end date, literally global scope, etc. Surely you can see how these things are different.

Re: NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor

#264

Post by TelmoMenezes »

davidw wrote: post #261
ekianjo wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since where Security is a precondition to Freedom ? I wonder where you conceived that strange idea. We never had as much security as we have now (compared to the hundreds of generations before us) yet we are losing our liberties at an alarming speed.

> Since where Security is a precondition to Freedom ? If you have zero physical security, that means that anyone can come up and just knock you down and take your things, your woman, whatever... Not my idea of "freedom". I think that it follows that you do need some security in order to live a free life. Does that justify secret government spying programs? Probably not! People here seem to have awfully black and whit…

> If you have zero physical security, that means that anyone can come up and just knock you down and take your things, your woman, whatever... Not my idea of "freedom".

These are orthogonal issues. There are strong reasons to believe that the modern stability that we enjoy is maintained by networks of mutual self-interest, soft social norms and overall cultural sophistication. The idea that we are being protected by the state is just a fairy-tale and there is no scientific evidence of this whatsoever.

Saying that something is not "black and white" sounds clever, but can be used as a way to disguise unscientific, mushy ideas.

Re: NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor

#265

Post by icebraining »

baddox wrote: post #239
icebraining wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, actually all genocides were carried on by people (part of a government or not), so maybe we should eliminate people. Either that or not make broad generalizations.

Most people cannot fund a military via taxation. That's unique to government.

That's a tautology, since a tax is by definition imposed by a government. Bullets bought with private money kill just as well, though, and can and have been used to create new governments.

Re: NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor

#266

Post by fexl »

aheilbut wrote: post #205
fexl wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"All of the freedoms that we enjoy in Western democracies were hard-won and continue to be backed up by guns, bombs, codes, and secrets. It's not pretty, but that's how things are." That's the official story. In reality, those things are used to enslave people and keep them happy on the modern plantation, looking to the master to keep them safe. Freedom is the absence of coercion, and those things have utterly failed…

No, really, that's not just the official story. The reality is that tens of millions of people were killed in wars and genocides in just the 20th century. The most basic role of government is to protect its own citizens against that , and it is not an abstract threat. And despite their many flaws, and the many wrong things that they have done, the US and its allies remain the most open, free societies and a positive,…

The reality is that approximately 200 million people were killed by people in government in the 20th century. If the basic role of government is to protect "its" own citizens against that, then not only have they utterly failed in that role, they have actively opposed it.

I do have an extreme philosophical position: that relations among people should be by mutual consent, or not at all. It is compromise that is dangerous.

Re: NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor

#267

Post by davidw »

TelmoMenezes wrote: post #264
davidw wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Since where Security is a precondition to Freedom ? If you have zero physical security, that means that anyone can come up and just knock you down and take your things, your woman, whatever... Not my idea of "freedom". I think that it follows that you do need some security in order to live a free life. Does that justify secret government spying programs? Probably not! People here seem to have awfully black and whit…

> If you have zero physical security, that means that anyone can come up and just knock you down and take your things, your woman, whatever... Not my idea of "freedom". These are orthogonal issues. There are strong reasons to believe that the modern stability that we enjoy is maintained by networks of mutual self-interest, soft social norms and overall cultural sophistication. The idea that we are being protected by…

> unscientific, mushy ideas.

Uh, most things involving people are kind of mushy, because you can't experiment on them like you would with rats. And they tend to behave oddly at times. Also, there are a tremendous number of things that bear on their behavior - isolating them is not easy.

> modern stability that we enjoy is maintained

Could it be that the modern stability also exists because most of us feel relatively safe in our persons?

It's not as if the only thing preventing most of us from running amok is the presence of police, but some kind of security force does act as a backstop for those individuals who do not care about your self-interest, social norms, or whatever.

Once again: not trying to justify the NSA stuff, but I think the idea that no security at all is needed for one to live in freedom is handwavy bullshit.

Re: NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor

#268

Post by fexl »

baddox wrote: post #239
icebraining wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, actually all genocides were carried on by people (part of a government or not), so maybe we should eliminate people. Either that or not make broad generalizations.

Most people cannot fund a military via taxation. That's unique to government.

Even governments cannot rely on taxation to fund armies or anything else they do. For centuries, they have relied instead on seizing monopoly control of money and then debasing it. This has the effect of stealing people's savings and the benefits they would otherwise obtain by increased productivity, and it is much harder to detect than blatant taxation.

(By all means read "Creature from Jekyll Island" to learn the details of that deliciously evil story. :)

Re: NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor

#269

Post by rayiner »

ekianjo wrote: post #168
rayiner wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because we subsidize world peace ( http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-01-22/india... ). Maybe it's a business we need to get out of, but at the moment, the reason Europe, etc, get away with spending so little on defense is that they can count on NATO, and the U.S. basically carries NATO.

NATO's record to keep the world safe and peaceful is nothing short of a disaster. Arriving too late with too little is often how NATO's interventions can be described. Laughable at best, and in return people end up hating NATO for their lack of timely action to save lives.

The purpose of NATO isn't to keep the world safe. The purpose of NATO is for Europe to outsource its collective defense to the U.S., specifically to protect Europe from the Soviet Union. It worked, at tremendous cost to the U.S.

Re: NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor

#270

Post by irishloop »

baddox wrote: post #237
aheilbut wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that security is a precondition to enjoying all of the freedoms you list. There are trade-offs to make between freedom and security, and neither the freedoms nor the security are absolute, and they never have been.

You're doubly wrong. Security is not a precondition of freedom, and security does not have to come at a loss of freedom.

Not at all. The moment someone points a gun at you and tells you what to do, your freedom has been usurped. Without the security to make your own choices, you do not have freedom. Thus, it's important to restrict certain actions (i.e., your ability to point a gun at someone and make demands) in order to protect the freedom of others.
Post reply on HN