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

Administration Using the Full Power of the Surveillance State on Whistleblowers

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 140 posts

Re: Administration Using the Full Power of the Surveillance State on Whistleblowers

#61

Post by monocasa »

arkades wrote: post #12
ISL wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One can argue that those representatives who claim to be fiscally conservative but vote for unfunded liabilities are not, in fact, fiscally conservative.

It's a political party. If people that identify X vote for you, who identifies X and votes in a block with other people that identify X for matters that attract Identity X voters to said party... then you don't get to pull the No True Scotsman. You are the party of X, whether or not some arbitrary philosophy party X is supposed to uphold is consistent with the party's actions.

The party is Republican. Fiscal conservatism is absolutely a specific policy which someone can be said to be following or not.

Re: Administration Using the Full Power of the Surveillance State on Whistleblowers

#62

Post by s_y_n_t_a_x »

jacobwilliamroy wrote: post #57
komali2 wrote: post #17

> with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States There are two versions of the United States. 1. The People of. The ones that benefit from whistleblowers. They are not injured when classified information is distributed - they get valuable insight they don't normally get into the doings of their employees (government officials that take their salary from taxes). The ones upon…

How are whistleblowers a threat? People like Donald Rumsfeld ought to be tried for war crimes. The "annexation" of Hawaii was both a war crime and a violation of the constitution (read: crime). All of these are common knowledge, well documented, yet there are very few people who are actually doing anything about it.

A bit strange to be focused on an event from 126 years ago.

Re: Administration Using the Full Power of the Surveillance State on Whistleblowers

#63

Post by buboard »

Arubis wrote: post #16
ralusek wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Patriot Act and the NDAA are nails in the coffin of a free society.

This does strike true. A useful inquiry would be: what can we do about it? The technological sidestepping game seems to be running out of steam.

Maybe convince presidential candidates to start talking about the pressing issues before distant future measures like UBI

Re: Administration Using the Full Power of the Surveillance State on Whistleblowers

#64

Post by coding123 »

jrieo02n wrote: post #42
komali2 wrote: post #17

> with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States There are two versions of the United States. 1. The People of. The ones that benefit from whistleblowers. They are not injured when classified information is distributed - they get valuable insight they don't normally get into the doings of their employees (government officials that take their salary from taxes). The ones upon…

There are two versions of people in the United States: statists who manipulate public opinion to empower centralized authority (#2, commonly using “failure in much debated framework will be end of nation!” These days its neoliberal economics, used to be religion) and those who want more freedom from such manipulations of our agency. Not saying either is right or wrong, but I def align personally with the “more freedo…

> We’re actively instigating anxiety, mindless resource exhaustion

Not replying to all you said, but definitely agree - I don't see people as being excited about the limits of our abilities. It's more like people are excited about getting a new Mustang or whichever Ghettoblaster vehicle and annoying others because they are bored and have nothing existential to think about during the day. I don't know how often I just think about humanity or the mind's limits or exploring other times and places growing up - just utter fascination. Now it's just when is the next GTA coming out.

Re: Administration Using the Full Power of the Surveillance State on Whistleblowers

#65

Post by ceejayoz »

monocasa wrote: post #60
ceejayoz wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One can argue that's a logical fallacy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

You can't say "you're not a scotsman because I don't like your actions or opinions". You can say "you're not a scotsman because you're neither from scotland, nor have any particular tie to it." Similarly fiscal conservatism has an actual definition, and it's totally vaild to say "you don't adhere to the definition", as long as you're not applying spurious constraints.

> Similarly fiscal conservatism has an actual definition...

A vague one, making it easy to play the Scotsman game with.

Re: Administration Using the Full Power of the Surveillance State on Whistleblowers

#66

Post by bo1024 »

maximente wrote: post #55
Arubis wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This does strike true. A useful inquiry would be: what can we do about it? The technological sidestepping game seems to be running out of steam.

one thing i've been thinking about is one issue political parties. "our mission, once elected, is to..." US example: thinking about medical care here: what if a political party came out and said, "we don't care about marijuana, gay marriage, federal debt, ...: only getting medical care for all. you'll say, well that's impossible, people won't vote for them without knowing e.g. what their stance on abortion is. but...…

You'd be interested in alternative voting systems, for example direct democracy or liquid democracy, proportional representation, ....

Re: Administration Using the Full Power of the Surveillance State on Whistleblowers

#67

Post by js2 »

merpnderp wrote: post #40
vkou wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most unelected bureaucrats only have a job at the whims of elected representatives. Your vote for the bureaucrats, via proxy of your representative. I'm not sure why people have a hard time grasping this concept, when they grasp the concept of representative democracy (Where you vote for new legislature, or for supreme court appointments, or for executive actions, via proxy of voting for a representative of congress,…

This has been on a trend of less and less true as Congress continues to abdicate its responsibilities to bureaucrats in the Executive office. It doesn't matter which party they vote for as much of the day to day lives of citizens is determined by people who never stood for election, and barely answer to someone who did.

Congress is 535 people and is filled with relatively little expertise[1]. The United States has a population of 330M and is the largest and most advanced economy in the world. Of course Congress has to delegate to executive agencies. This is not abdication.

Abdication is letting lobbyists and "model legislation" outfits author the laws which legislators have been known to almost literally just rubber stamp.

[1] Just to pick on one representative, because I'm familiar with him, this guy has no college degree past an AA, and his career experience is running a restaurant and real estate development. I would hope he'd delegate running the country to someone more experienced than himself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Meadows_(North_Carolina_p...

Re: Administration Using the Full Power of the Surveillance State on Whistleblowers

#68

Post by ceejayoz »

js2 wrote: post #67
merpnderp wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has been on a trend of less and less true as Congress continues to abdicate its responsibilities to bureaucrats in the Executive office. It doesn't matter which party they vote for as much of the day to day lives of citizens is determined by people who never stood for election, and barely answer to someone who did.

Congress is 535 people and is filled with relatively little expertise[1]. The United States has a population of 330M and is the largest and most advanced economy in the world. Of course Congress has to delegate to executive agencies. This is not abdication. Abdication is letting lobbyists and "model legislation" outfits author the laws which legislators have been known to almost literally just rubber stamp. [1] Just…

> Congress is 535 people and is filled with relatively little expertise.

That's like calling the Executive Branch one person (currently filled by someone with extremely little expertise).

Congress includes bureaucratic organizations staffed by career experts like the Government Accountability Office. They used to have the Office of Technology Assessment until it was killed off by ideologues. They also enjoy ready access to experts from the various agencies.

> Of course Congress has to delegate to executive agencies. This is not abdication.

They've very clearly abdicated their responsibilities to the Executive in things like war powers and surveillance oversight. They are supposed to serve as a co-equal branch of government and as a check on Executive power.

Re: Administration Using the Full Power of the Surveillance State on Whistleblowers

#69

Post by js2 »

ceejayoz wrote: post #68
js2 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Congress is 535 people and is filled with relatively little expertise[1]. The United States has a population of 330M and is the largest and most advanced economy in the world. Of course Congress has to delegate to executive agencies. This is not abdication. Abdication is letting lobbyists and "model legislation" outfits author the laws which legislators have been known to almost literally just rubber stamp. [1] Just…

> Congress is 535 people and is filled with relatively little expertise. That's like calling the Executive Branch one person (currently filled by someone with extremely little expertise). Congress includes bureaucratic organizations staffed by career experts like the Government Accountability Office. They used to have the Office of Technology Assessment until it was killed off by ideologues. They also enjoy ready acc…

Fair enough and I don't disagree at all on your last point, but I was really addressing the delegation to executive agencies to write regulations as part of executing the laws passed by congress. I do not consider that abdication.

Re: Administration Using the Full Power of the Surveillance State on Whistleblowers

#70

Post by jacobwilliamroy »

s_y_n_t_a_x wrote: post #62
jacobwilliamroy wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are whistleblowers a threat? People like Donald Rumsfeld ought to be tried for war crimes. The "annexation" of Hawaii was both a war crime and a violation of the constitution (read: crime). All of these are common knowledge, well documented, yet there are very few people who are actually doing anything about it.

A bit strange to be focused on an event from 126 years ago.

An event which laid the foundation for many of the economic issues facing Hawaii today. Resolving this issue would enrich the lives of many people currently living in Hawaii.
Post reply on HN