4/27/2009 10:07 PM
JG wrote:
Sadly, I believe what we now know as big brother is on its way to becoming vastly amplified. Maybe our think tank can coin the term for this "new" big brother. How about bigger brother, or big big brother? Reply to this
4/28/2009 7:08 PM
Ryan wrote:
It somewhat depends on what you mean as "big brother." If you mean increased government intervention into the economy and increased federal share of GDP, then "big brother" will be incresed. If you are referring to increased police powers and violations of civil liberties, I think big brother will be significantly weakened. A mild example of this concerns drug laws; the Bush Justice Department frequently raided drug dispensarys in California and other states with some level of legal medical marijuana. The new Justice Department says it will not raid anyone operating within state law, even if the existence of these businesses violates federal law. And if you are talking about "big brother" in the sense of the book 1984, (an omnipresent authority figure choosen by the Party to be the face of a leadership that engages in Newspeak/Doublethink, constant military conflict against enemies substituted at random, and the use of torture in the "Minsitryof Love"), then I'd disagree. I was worried about that type of Big Brother when the President and almost all republicans (except those like Ron Paul) embraced the right of the executive to seize individuals, including US citizens, detain them indefinitely, and torture them in order to extract potentially false confessions (while most democrats just stood by mute or approved it as well). And then some of these torture confessions were used as a pretext to start another war (our only enemey is, and always has been, Eurasia! Our only enemy, is, and always has been, Eastasia!).
If you want to look at Orwell's thoughts on it, compared to modern politicians, this post seems fairly on target to me.
But if we are going to have a strong defense of liberty and the rights of man, then the all the warantles governmental surveillence supports and torture cheerleaders need to be the first to go. At least less of them are in power now than 6 months ago. Reply to this
Sorry, Ryan, you are going to have to explain to me how to post links in comments without posting them first...I don't know how without posting and then editing,.. Reply to this
4/28/2009 11:43 PM
Aaron wrote:
if youre gonna use the relaxation of federal dope laws in the cali as an example of kinder gentler policing then i say it is you that has the sampling bias of which you accused me. man, that was a cool rant but i just couldnt let it go out over the intertubes. Reply to this
4/29/2009 12:05 AM
Ryan wrote:
It's actually the only example I can even think of for a slight relaxation of the civil liberties horror show that has been the drug "war" lately. I don't really expect much else from the current admin on that front. I believe that the current folks wouldn't actively fight to keep the current drug laws (a slight improvement over the last admin), but they aren't going to make any efforts at reform on their own. Barney Frank in the house keeps pushing for drug war relaxation (and a repeal of the anti-internet gambling laws), and Webb is going to make a move in the Senate. But I don't think they'll get enough votes to change anything or significantly reform that aspect of the police state.
As for posting links, when making a comment (talkin to you huffdaddy), highlight the word you want to be the link then hit the far right button in the toolbar (looks like an orb and a chain link, I guess to represent a link to the world wide web?) There's also a shortcut key: highlight the word you want to be the link, then hit ctrl-k
So then you can post things like: What happens when state governments relax the drug laws? A hippie/techno freak out!
Sadly, I believe what we now know as big brother is on its way to becoming vastly amplified. Maybe our think tank can coin the term for this "new" big brother. How about bigger brother, or big big brother?
Reply to this
It somewhat depends on what you mean as "big brother." If you mean increased government intervention into the economy and increased federal share of GDP, then "big brother" will be incresed.
If you are referring to increased police powers and violations of civil liberties, I think big brother will be significantly weakened. A mild example of this concerns drug laws; the Bush Justice Department frequently raided drug dispensarys in California and other states with some level of legal medical marijuana. The new Justice Department says it will not raid anyone operating within state law, even if the existence of these businesses violates federal law.
And if you are talking about "big brother" in the sense of the book 1984, (an omnipresent authority figure choosen by the Party to be the face of a leadership that engages in Newspeak/Doublethink, constant military conflict against enemies substituted at random, and the use of torture in the "Minsitryof Love"), then I'd disagree.
I was worried about that type of Big Brother when the President and almost all republicans (except those like Ron Paul) embraced the right of the executive to seize individuals, including US citizens, detain them indefinitely, and torture them in order to extract potentially false confessions (while most democrats just stood by mute or approved it as well). And then some of these torture confessions were used as a pretext to start another war (our only enemey is, and always has been, Eurasia! Our only enemy, is, and always has been, Eastasia!).
If you want to look at Orwell's thoughts on it, compared to modern politicians, this post seems fairly on target to me.
This one too.
But if we are going to have a strong defense of liberty and the rights of man, then the all the warantles governmental surveillence supports and torture cheerleaders need to be the first to go. At least less of them are in power now than 6 months ago.
Reply to this
You mean weakened because of DOJ policies like this ?
Sorry, Ryan, you are going to have to explain to me how to post links in comments without posting them first...I don't know how without posting and then editing,..
Reply to this
if youre gonna use the relaxation of federal dope laws in the cali as an example of kinder gentler policing then i say it is you that has the sampling bias of which you accused me. man, that was a cool rant but i just couldnt let it go out over the intertubes.
Reply to this
It's actually the only example I can even think of for a slight relaxation of the civil liberties horror show that has been the drug "war" lately.
I don't really expect much else from the current admin on that front. I believe that the current folks wouldn't actively fight to keep the current drug laws (a slight improvement over the last admin), but they aren't going to make any efforts at reform on their own. Barney Frank in the house keeps pushing for drug war relaxation (and a repeal of the anti-internet gambling laws), and Webb is going to make a move in the Senate. But I don't think they'll get enough votes to change anything or significantly reform that aspect of the police state.
As for posting links, when making a comment (talkin to you huffdaddy), highlight the word you want to be the link then hit the far right button in the toolbar (looks like an orb and a chain link, I guess to represent a link to the world wide web?)
There's also a shortcut key: highlight the word you want to be the link, then hit ctrl-k
So then you can post things like: What happens when state governments relax the drug laws? A hippie/techno freak out!
Reply to this
I vote for the eye of Sauron...
Reply to this
get out of my head you fucking mind reader.
nerd.
Reply to this