Redefining rights

[Beefy]

Once again, it comes down to what is a right? What is privacy? Why, its exactly what the government tells you it is, right or fucking wrong.

You big government types should tke heed to this:

________

WASHINGTON (AP) -- As Congress debates new rules for government eavesdropping, a top intelligence official says it is time that people in the United States change their definition of privacy.


Donald Kerr, principal deputy director of national intelligence, wants Americans to redefine privacy.

Privacy no longer can mean anonymity, says Donald Kerr, the principal deputy director of national intelligence. Instead, it should mean that government and businesses properly safeguard people's private communications and financial information.

_________

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/11/terrorist.surveillance.ap/index.html

[Damocles]

"privacy can no longer mean anonymity"?.. What the?

[Bonestorm]

Well, Republicans don't believe in the right to privacy in the first place so what do you expect.

[Blackwater Lunchbreak]

We will all learn to love big brother in time.

[Chapdog]

they should just microchip us all.

[Damocles]

they should just microchip us all.
Watch that Paranoid Schizophrenics video that Watermark posted....

You'll love it.

[evince]

This is what happens when you have the corporations running the government.

[Cypress]

Once again, it comes down to what is a right? What is privacy? Why, its exactly what the government tells you it is, right or fucking wrong.

You big government types should tke heed to this:

________

WASHINGTON (AP) -- As Congress debates new rules for government eavesdropping, a top intelligence official says it is time that people in the United States change their definition of privacy.


Donald Kerr, principal deputy director of national intelligence, wants Americans to redefine privacy.

Privacy no longer can mean anonymity, says Donald Kerr, the principal deputy director of national intelligence. Instead, it should mean that government and businesses properly safeguard people's private communications and financial information.

_________

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/11/terrorist.surveillance.ap/index.html


"big government types" is historically code word for liberals


These are authoritarians, more properly.

[ib1yysguy]

Just take the blue pill. Or is it the orange one?

[Damocles]

"big government types" is historically code word for liberals


These are authoritarians, more properly.
"Historically" maybe... presently? Hayul no! Big Government conservatives are equally bad for people's individual rights as Big Government liberals.

[Bonestorm]

"Historically" maybe... presently? Hayul no! Big Government conservatives are much much worse for people's individual rights as Big Government liberals.

Fixed.

[uscitizen]

they should just microchip us all.

Yeah thos little RFID thingys would work fine and just have to wave you hand at the payment machine at wally world on the way out and all done :)

[Damocles]

Yeah thos little RFID thingys would work fine and just have to wave you hand at the payment machine at wally world on the way out and all done :)
And the government could use them to keep track of the Paranoid Schizophrenics. In time they could use the implants to speak directly to their minds, telling them which manholes are portholes into the secret underground government and which tattoos are really listening devices.

[Cypress]

"Historically" maybe... presently? Hayul no! Big Government conservatives are equally bad for people's individual rights as Big Government liberals.


"Big Government" is just code word, for the constitution in exile crowd, who wants us to return to the days before Teddy Roosevelt. IMO

I don't think the term "big government" has much utility. Either you're an authoritarian, or you're not.

Outside of war, pentagon spending, health insurance for seniors and the poor, the federal government really doesn't do much, or influence our daily lives to any great extent.

[Beefy]

"Big Government" is just code word, for the constitution in exile crowd, who wants us to return to the days before Teddy Roosevelt. IMO

I don't think the term "big government" has much utility. Either you're an authoritarian, or you're not.

Outside of war, pentagon spending, health insurance for seniors and the poor, the federal government really doesn't do much, or influence our daily lives to any great extent.

When extrapolated far enough, "big government" and "authoritatian" become one and the same. Whether its the left or the right that propogates it.

[FUCK THE POLICE]

"Freedom is overrated" - Jon Stewart

[Beefy]

"Freedom is overrated" - Jon Stewart

"Watermark is retarded" - beefy

[FUCK THE POLICE]

"Watermark is retarded" - beefy

"Beefy is fat" - Watermark

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Retardness > fatness

Pwned

[Cypress]

When extrapolated far enough, "big government" and "authoritatian" become one and the same. Whether its the left or the right that propogates it.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by big government. I'm assuming, as a Libertarian, you're possibly refering to the amount of revenue a government takes in, relative to the whole economy. i.e., a big "spending" government.

I don't see a correlation between the amount of government spending/taxes/reveue, and authoritarianism.

Checking with the CIA factbook, liberal social democracies like Norway, Denmark, and Switzerland spend around 30 to 50% of their GDP on public services and government.

Some actual real authoritarian regimes have "smaller" government, in the sense that they allocate far less of their GDP on government expenditures. Venezuela, which is allegedly authoritarian, spends less of its GDP on public expenditures, i.e., "big government", than do the european social democracies.

I think authoritarianism is linked to the independence of the judicial system (or lack thereof), the rule of law, and whether or not that state supports a massive internal domestic "security" system. Not to "big government", in terms of revenue, taxation, spending, etc.

[FUCK THE POLICE]

http://starbulletin.com/98/01/01/news/teniz.gif

[OrnotBitwise]

"Historically" maybe... presently? Hayul no! Big Government conservatives are equally bad for people's individual rights as Big Government liberals."Authoritarians" is, after all, probably the right word. And you can find authoritarians in any political camp, mine included.

The interesting thing is what goes into the making of an authoritarian. From my perspective, authoritarianism results from "knowing" (sic) how people ought to act and what they ought to think.

Also, they tend to wear ass-hats.

[FUCK THE POLICE]

"Authoritarians" is, after all, probably the right word. And you can find authoritarians in any political camp, mine included.

The interesting thing is what goes into the making of an authoritarian. From my perspective, authoritarianism results from "knowing" (sic) how people ought to act and what they ought to think.

Also, they tend to wear ass-hats.

They tend to be named "RStringfield".

[Beefy]

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by big government. I'm assuming, as a Libertarian, you're possibly refering to the amount of revenue a government takes in, relative to the whole economy. i.e., a big "spending" government.

I don't see a correlation between the amount of government spending/taxes/reveue, and authoritarianism.

Checking with the CIA factbook, liberal social democracies like Norway, Denmark, and Switzerland spend around 30 to 50% of their GDP on public services and government.

Some actual real authoritarian regimes have "smaller" government, in the sense that they allocate far less of their GDP on government expenditures. Venezuela, which is allegedly authoritarian, spends less of its GDP on public expenditures, i.e., "big government", than do the european social democracies.

I think authoritarianism is linked to the independence of the judicial system (or lack thereof), the rule of law, and whether or not that state supports a massive internal domestic "security" system. Not to "big government", in terms of revenue, taxation, spending, etc.

No, I'm not simply claiming that "big government" is simply a financial deal. But great job refuting that scarecrow.

Big government is a multitude of areas. The government now has decided what you can think, where you can travel, what you can eat, drink, smoke... Where you can live, if you can drive, what you can drive, ........
They are in every last aspect of our lives. Every last one.

[Cypress]

No, I'm not simply claiming that "big government" is simply a financial deal. But great job refuting that scarecrow.

Big government is a multitude of areas. The government now has decided what you can think, where you can travel, what you can eat, drink, smoke... Where you can live, if you can drive, what you can drive, ........
They are in every last aspect of our lives. Every last one.

I still say what you describe is authoritarian government, not "big govenment". Plenty of authoritarian regimes have "smaller" governments, than the liberal social welfare states of europe. With respect to determining where you travel, and what you can think, that is a function of a country with a lack of constitutional seperation of powers, and a neutered independent judiciary, and a police state domestic security apparatus.

With respect to food and smoking, and cars, I can only assume that as a former republican-turned-libertarian, the new york and california smoking laws and anti-trans fat laws bug the shit out of you :) - but to me that is not symptomatic of impending fascism.

I think we all know what the term "big government" is, and how its used by libertarians and republicans. :cof1:


So, the only thing I'm nitpicking about, is that authoritarianism is not linked to some libertarian/conservative concept of big government. Its linked to the lack of a constitutional seperation of powers, and the lack of the rule of law in a country

[Blackwater Lunchbreak]

"Big Government" is just code word, for the constitution in exile crowd, who wants us to return to the days before Teddy Roosevelt. IMO

I don't think the term "big government" has much utility. Either you're an authoritarian, or you're not.

Outside of war, pentagon spending, health insurance for seniors and the poor, the federal government really doesn't do much, or influence our daily lives to any great extent.

Except when they decide to allow companies to ignore whatever laws they want, so we can be put out of work to boost the bottom line.

[uscitizen]

And the government could use them to keep track of the Paranoid Schizophrenics. In time they could use the implants to speak directly to their minds, telling them which manholes are portholes into the secret underground government and which tattoos are really listening devices.

Yep an id the child molester ones and alarm and summon cops if too close to an underage RFID.
Many possibilities....