TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

Nov 2023 Mod notice:


There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.

If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.

Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.

If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules when posting here.


In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.

Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM

GlennMagusHarvey Since: Jan, 2001
#56401: Jun 12th 2013 at 5:36:02 AM

When did PRISM start?

Because I'm trying to evaluate the devil's-advocate side of this statement:

We're implementing excessively invasive Orwellian shit to supposedly provide a slight edge against a threat that has a lower death toll on US soil than bathtubs, mountain goats, bees, pet dogs, and falling off the roof while installing solar panels.
Basically, what if the risk of terror attack actually is significantly reduced by such programs? Correct me if this is untrue, of course.

Greenmantle V from Greater Wessex, Britannia Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Hiding
V
#56402: Jun 12th 2013 at 6:28:31 AM

[up] 2007, replacing the Terrorist Surveillance Program which started after 9/11.

Remember, it is not just US Communications going through PRISM — a large proportion of the world's internet traffic is going through it too.

Keep Rolling On
NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#56403: Jun 12th 2013 at 6:33:08 AM

People in charge of Prism beholden to Political Interest X. They use Prism against civilians who oppose X and are likely to gather support.
They can't, because (as I've pointed out) they do need a warrant to actually use the information gathered by Prism. So, say a random Congressman approaches the NSA and says "I want dirt on anyone rabblerousing about X." Even assuming that the NSA says "sure!" instead of "um, no, that's patently illegal" (which is far from a given), they'd still have to go through FISC to get permission to actually look for the information being requested.

Yes, because saying voting for neither party will fix the problem means that we'll do nothing.
I said "if you're pissed that they're doing something that isn't against the rules but you think is wrong, then what you need to do is get the rules changed, not bitch that they're doing something they're allowed to do". He said "yeah, because that's going to happen with the two political parties we have". So we have the expression of skepticism about the current system's willingness to deal with the problem, and no alternative course of action proposed. What am I supposed to think he was saying?

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
demarquis (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#56405: Jun 12th 2013 at 10:55:40 AM

Shouldn't you guys be having this conversation in the thread for that purpose?

I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#56407: Jun 12th 2013 at 11:19:35 AM

I'm pretty sure it's in their standard blurb about What Not To Say. The problem is that their people can't keep their tongues in their heads any more than they apparently can keep their dicks in their pants.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Meklar from Milky Way Since: Dec, 2012 Relationship Status: RelationshipOutOfBoundsException: 1
#56408: Jun 12th 2013 at 3:22:23 PM

Words cannot express how much I loathe this attitude. If you want to make a change, then fight for that change, don't just say "I FEEL SUPER STRONGLY ABOUT THIS!! Oh, but actually doing anything about it is hard, so whatever."
Doing things about it is hard. What Snowden did was hard. However, doing things about it and following all the rules is more than hard; it's completely unrealistic, so long as the badguys get to change the rules and you don't. Pick one or the other.

And which of those gazillion ways involves Prism?
Have you ever heard the proverb 'knowledge is power'? Even if politicians can't actually log on to the NSA computers and get the statistics for their own use (and most of them probably can't), there are people who can access and make use of the statistics, people who have many carrots (and probably some sticks, in case the carrots don't work) to use on politicians in order to ensure that decisions are made in their favor. A lot of these people's jobs don't depend on winning the favor of the public, but do depend on winning the favor of the legislators.

We know perfectly well that the money being spent on 'stopping terrorism' is ridiculously disproportionate. We know perfectly well that legal manipulation and secret surveillance are tools used by authoritarians for their benefit at the expense of the public; the 20th century gave us more than enough examples of that. What other conclusion are we supposed to come to?

Unless you can give me something about Prism specifically being misused to give someone a personal advantage somehow
We didn't even know the system existed until a few days ago. Do you think all the various connections involved with it are somehow going to be less secret than that?

When did PRISM start?
The documents said 2007, didn't they?

Interestingly, according to this page, the death rate from terrorism on american soil has actually been higher from 2008 to 2013 than it was from 2003 to 2007. Clearly all this new surveillance has been working really darn well.

Shouldn't you guys be having this conversation in the thread for that purpose?
Eh, probably. I have no idea what the protocols for thread-jumping are on this forum, though. :\

edited 12th Jun '13 3:23:00 PM by Meklar

Join my forum game!
NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#56409: Jun 12th 2013 at 6:06:03 PM

However, doing things about it and following all the rules is more than hard; it's completely unrealistic, so long as the badguys get to change the rules and you don't. Pick one or the other.
I reject that categorically. With the exception of civil rights movement style mass civil disobedience, breaking the rules in support of a cause does nothing but get you branded as a criminal and damage the reputation of your cause by association. Look at what happened to Bradley Manning and Wikileaks, or Anonymous and Lulz Sec.

Have you ever heard the proverb 'knowledge is power'?
Since you're apparently unwilling or unable to come up with anything concrete, I'm just going to stop asking.

Do you think all the various connections involved with it are somehow going to be less secret than that?
I didn't mean an actual real-life example, I meant a hypothetical. We know that all branches of government were aware of Prism. We know that there was both judicial and legislative oversight of the program. It's not like this was a super black ops for-your-eyes-only thing being run out of some NSA basement to keep anyone not directly involved in running it from knowing that it even existed. If it had been, then I'd be nervous. As it is, accountability is built into the system. Maybe not public accountability, but revealing intelligence information publicly is inherently self-defeating. I'm comfortable with the existence of classified programs as long as there's oversight on some level, which there undoubtedly is with Prism.

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
DevilTakeMe Coin Operator from Wild Wasteland Since: Jan, 2010
Coin Operator
#56411: Jun 12th 2013 at 11:27:23 PM

Not a fan of Chris Matthews. He's the sort of person that's put on TV because he yells a lot, and if he can yell over other people in a conversation, then he 'wins' by default.

I'm not the biggest fan of Ted Cruz, but likening him to the past like that is a huge stretch.

Glove and Boots is good for Blog!
Meklar from Milky Way Since: Dec, 2012 Relationship Status: RelationshipOutOfBoundsException: 1
#56412: Jun 12th 2013 at 11:42:05 PM

With the exception of civil rights movement style mass civil disobedience, breaking the rules in support of a cause does nothing but get you branded as a criminal and damage the reputation of your cause by association. Look at what happened to Bradley Manning and Wikileaks, or Anonymous and Lulz Sec.
LulzSec only really did random crap for their own amusement. They were making statements on computer security, but not so much on the wider social and political situation.

The other three, however, I think will eventually be seen as, if not heroes, then at least forerunners of a culture with a more mature set of views, standards and policies on information and human freedom. Bradley Manning and Anonymous may have done it partly for the attention, but their rejection of authoritarian trends still stands. All three already have many supporters, and are only demonized by those who either fear the idea of an open society, or are too stupid to know any better.

Since you're apparently unwilling or unable to come up with anything concrete, I'm just going to stop asking.
I don't want to invent an example and then have it either dismissed as 'a very specific circumstance that probably never really happened' or 'too specific to be an adequate basis on its own for condemning the entire surveillance project'. I'm trying to get across that PRISM is not a problem because of any particular single bad event that can be traced back to it, but that it is a bad kind of thing, a tool of authoritarianism with an endless number of bad uses and no substantial benefit for the public.

As has been mentioned before, what's disturbing is the asymmetry of the whole thing. The american government is telling its people that it doesn't trust them enough to not snoop through everything they do and say across wires, yet demands that they trust it not to abuse that power, and to somehow sustain 'democracy' without, you know, telling them what issues the people they're voting for are actually going to be making decisions on.

Maybe not public accountability
Isn't that the kind there's supposed to be in a democratic society?

Join my forum game!
SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#56413: Jun 12th 2013 at 11:55:41 PM

Hmm...are you all talking about PRISM or about its effects on American politics? Because we have a thread for surveillance in general.

On other news, the immigration reform bill's going better than expected, apparently. It got cloture with 82-15 votes.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Enkufka Wandering Student ಠ_ಠ from Bay of White fish Since: Dec, 2009
Wandering Student ಠ_ಠ
#56415: Jun 13th 2013 at 1:15:10 AM

shut the fuck up, Rand Paul. You signed off on the fucking thing, or perhaps conveniently didn't read any of the memos about it?

Very big Daydream Believer. "That's not knowledge, that's a crapshoot!" -Al Murray "Welcome to QI" -Stephen Fry
deathpigeon Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: One True Dodecahedron
#56417: Jun 13th 2013 at 3:14:48 AM

With the exception of civil rights movement style mass civil disobedience, breaking the rules in support of a cause does nothing but get you branded as a criminal and damage the reputation of your cause by association. Look at what happened to Bradley Manning and Wikileaks, or Anonymous and Lulz Sec.

The abolitionists helped bring slaves to safety when that was illegal. The unionists organized and went on strike when those were illegal. The gays and us bis had hot gay sex when that was illegal. The anti-Vietnam protesters burned draft cards. Many important events in many movements, from Stonewall for the LGBT rights movement to the Kent State Shootings for the anti-Vietnam movement, involved breaking the law. Do those actions marr the movements? No. Most of them are seen as acts of heroism or triumph. Civil disobedience has been successfully used by almost every major progressive movement I can think of with great success.

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#56418: Jun 13th 2013 at 6:50:39 AM

Hmm...are you all talking about PRISM or about its effects on American politics? Because we have a thread for surveillance in general.
True. I've brought my comments on Prism specifically over there. Melkar (or anyone), feel free to reply in that thread.

Civil disobedience has been successfully used by almost every major progressive movement I can think of with great success.
Did you even read the sentence you quoted? I specifically said that I wasn't referring to mass civil disobedience movements like the civil rights movement (or Vietnam protestors, or abolitionists, or unionists, etc). I was talking about lone individuals (like Manning, or Snowden) who essentially say "I'm breaking the law, but I don't care, it's for A CAUSE!"

edited 13th Jun '13 6:51:02 AM by NativeJovian

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
Medinoc from France (Before Recorded History)
#56419: Jun 13th 2013 at 7:10:06 AM

The problem is, there isn't enough material for "mass" civil disobedience in the NSA. I don't think intelligence/surveillance agencies try to recruit people based on moral standards, rather than propensity for obedience.

"And as long as a sack of shit is not a good thing to be, chivalry will never die."
deathpigeon Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: One True Dodecahedron
#56420: Jun 13th 2013 at 11:43:29 AM

I was talking about lone individuals (like Manning, or Snowden) who essentially say "I'm breaking the law, but I don't care, it's for A CAUSE!"

...Do you need to be reminded of what civil disobedience is? Cause that's exactly what it is. Also, you brought up groups, such as Anonymous, who most certainly aren't lone individuals.

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#56421: Jun 13th 2013 at 12:11:46 PM

[up][up]That's true, but I don't think civil disobedience is the right way to deal with things like Prism anyway.

[up]There's a huge difference between a mass movement collectively breaking the law (thus forcing change by overwhelming the justice system, making it impossible to enforce the law being broken through sheer numbers) and a single person or small group doing something illegal to make a point. When I said "mass civil disobedience", I was trying to specify the former rather than the latter.

As far as Anonymous goes, yes it's a fairly large group, but the vast majority of the actual illegal activity (ie, hacks and such) were performed by a tiny handful of people, most of whom have already been arrested and prosecuted at this point.

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#56422: Jun 13th 2013 at 12:18:38 PM

How would you even "civilly disobey" PRISM, anyway? Not use the Internet? The concept is meaningless. What these leakers are doing is intentionally bringing a secret issue into the public arena. Whether they do this out of moral outrage, self-aggrandizement, personal gain, anger, boredom, or whatever is irrelevant in the long run.

Whether Snowden's actions were right or wrong will be determined eventually. I can appreciate both sides' arguments but I don't have a strong personal opinion in the matter.

What I do have an opinion on is people getting outraged over "government intrusion". Or rather, that they suddenly are getting all hyper about it now, considering that this program was authorized by PATRIOT, which enjoyed wide bipartisan support both at its creation and at its reauthorization.

Our duly elected representatives have told us that the government can access our records without a warrant, and to my knowledge the Supreme Court has agreed. So at this point our only recourse is to vote out the schmucks who did that and put in people who won't surrender our freedoms in the name of security, if that's what you care about.

edited 13th Jun '13 12:19:46 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
deathpigeon Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: One True Dodecahedron
#56423: Jun 13th 2013 at 12:27:43 PM

How would you even "civilly disobey" PRISM, anyway?

...By breaking the confidentiality on it. Like Snowden did. Or, I dunno, DDoS attacks on the PRISM servers.

IConfuseMe from Washington, DC Since: Jan, 2010
#56424: Jun 13th 2013 at 12:31:31 PM

[up][up][up]

That's true, but I don't think civil disobedience is the right way to deal with things like Prism anyway.

Then how should it have been addressed? The program was secret. Had it not been for whistle blowing, it would have remained secret. Had it remained secret, no one would have been able to utilize appropriate avenues to address it.

This is a a democracy. Our representatives cannot claim to be enacting the public's will if the public's will on a matter is never expressed and it cannot be expressed if the public is unaware.

There's a huge difference between a mass movement collectively breaking the law (thus forcing change by overwhelming the justice system, making it impossible to enforce the law being broken through sheer numbers) and a single person or small group doing something illegal to make a point. When I said "mass civil disobedience", I was trying to specify the former rather than the latter.

I disagree. Mass movements are often a coagulation of smaller groups. The smaller groups take preliminary action that garners enough attention and outrage to provide the manpower to mobilize larger groups. Just because a protest starts small, or even solitary doesn't mean it will stay that way. Depending on what's being protested, the fear of more widespread dissent might invoke concessions.

I think you're underestimating the potential for a ripple to become a wave. Mohamed Bouazizi's self-immolation, that is to say one man setting himself on fire, is often used as the starting date for the entire Arab Spring.

edited 13th Jun '13 12:31:54 PM by IConfuseMe

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#56425: Jun 13th 2013 at 12:49:35 PM

By breaking the confidentiality on it. Like Snowden did.
That's not civil disobedience of PRISM, that's civil disobedience of the Espionage Act.

Or, I dunno, DDoS attacks on the PRISM servers.
That's not civil disobedience, that's internet vigilantism, which is illegal and should be prosecuted. Anyway, good luck taking down the NSA.

edited 13th Jun '13 12:49:54 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Total posts: 417,856
Top