New "Iron Curtain" for Russian Internet

Dionysius, God of Wine and Leaf, points out a story about the Russian government's interest in expanding anti-extremism laws to include the blocking of websites and ISPs. The laws would match those already in use for the country's print media. Russian internet users may soon be forced to deal with the same issues facing Chinese citizens. Quoting: "An official at the Russian prosecutor's general office, Vyacheslav Sizov, told the Russian-language newspaper Rossiiskaya Gazeta that any web site that is determined to host what he terms 'extremist material' would be blocked from being accessible from within the Russian Federation. Given the Putin government's history with the media, 'extremist material' may be very broadly interpreted as any content unfriendly to the interests of the Russian government."

Comments

Been done before

[phpmysqldev]

This is quite a disturbing trend in so called 'industrialized' countries (although Russia's industrialized status could be questioned). The lack of outside information and abundance government propaganda is why N. Korea is so scary. Many of the people there that have no access to outside information actually whole heartedly believe what the government tells them, and why wouldn't they, it's all they've ever known. All it takes is one new generation to grow up behind these 'iron curtains' and the governments have effectively indoctrinated an entire country with the ideals of a select few.

Re:Been done before

[blahplusplus]

"All it takes is one new generation to grow up behind these 'iron curtains' and the governments have effectively indoctrinated an entire country with the ideals of a select few."

Sounds like America. Despite all the hoopla about freedom and whatnot in america, there is substantial indoctrination i.e. any mention of helping others gets you labelled a 'socialist' or a 'commie'. IMHO America is probably one of THE most indoctrinated societies in the world at the moment. You can't have a discussion about much with a large percentage of people about certain topics.

Re:Been done before

[phpmysqldev]

Sounds like America. Despite all the hoopla about freedom and whatnot in america, there is substantial indoctrination i.e. any mention of helping others gets you labelled a 'socialist' or a 'commie'. IMHO America is probably one of THE most indoctrinated societies in the world at the moment. You can't have a discussion about much with a large percentage of people about certain topics. Agreed, but the difference is in America the information is available, most people just don't care to find it on their own. In the case of Russia, you more than likely have people that want outside information and now won't be able to get it.

Re:Been done before

[mrbluze]

All it takes is one new generation to grow up behind these 'iron curtains' and the governments have effectively indoctrinated an entire country with the ideals of a select few. All it takes is one generation to grow up exposed to the US media machine and we have a country effectively devoid of any of its original culture. The sword has two edges.

Re:Been done before

[user317]

Sounds like America. Despite all the hoopla about freedom and whatnot in america, there is substantial indoctrination i.e. any mention of helping others gets you labelled a 'socialist' or a 'commie'. just because Americans believe that no one should be forced to donate their money, doesn't mean that we don't donate ourselves. http://www.nptrust.org/philanthropy/philanthropy_stats.asp

IMHO America is probably one of THE most indoctrinated societies in the world at the moment. You can't have a discussion about much with a large percentage of people about certain topics. What do you even mean by that? The topics that divide American politics, the ones that people care deeply about are discussed all the time. Abortion, gay rights, immigration, war on terror, torture just to name a few. Just because there is a large percentage of people who have a different view then you doesn't mean that they are not talking about it.

Re:Been done before

[Z80xxc!]

What you say is true, however, keep in mind that (at least for the time being) we still have almost entirely unrestricted access to the internet. That's not to say we haven't been indoctrinated - I'd be the first to admit that, actually. However, fortunately, we still have access to the rest of the net, which allows us to get less biased information if we so choose to. And although it's true that one can't discuss a lot of things with a lot of people, nevertheless, we have discussions about sensitive topics frequently in high school. We discuss controversies in the government. We openly criticize what is happening and we do have discussions about things that maybe doesn't exactly fall under what the government would like to see us indoctrinated with. The fact that we can do this in a public high school in the U.S. and that there's nothing the government is doing or going to do to stop us is why the U.S. is still different. Maybe not for long, but at least for now, we do have some freedoms, even if they are being curtailed as we speak.

Re:Been done before

[ozmanjusri]

Agreed, but the difference is in America the information is available, most people just don't care to find it on their own.

The United States has less than 5 percent of the world's population, but it has almost a quarter of the world's prisoners.

I think if I lived in a place with that rate of imprisonment, I'd be keeping my head down and avoiding controversy too.

Re:Been done before

[Neoprofin]

If we're all so indoctrinated and there is no freedom why do I have to sift through so many overblown posts about the American media to find any posts actually discussing this new iron curtain?

Re:Been done before

[Hal_Porter]

Sounds like America. Despite all the hoopla about freedom and whatnot in america, there is substantial indoctrination i.e. any mention of helping others gets you labelled a 'socialist' or a 'commie'. IMHO America is probably one of THE most indoctrinated societies in the world at the moment. You can't have a discussion about much with a large percentage of people about certain topics. It's not at all like America. America has does not have state censorship - the constitution forbids it. Ok, I'm sure you can find a few corner cases where it has happened but compared to China or even Russia where the government directly decides the content of the only legal news sources and kills unofficial journalists it is non existent.

Of course in the marketplace of ideas, you're allowed to try to sell anything no matter how quirky. But that does not mean that all ideas will sell equally well. Some ideas will be popular like iPods and some will be unpopular like feces brown Zunes.

Maybe you're the indoctrinated one, and you only believe in Socialism because you avoid reading anything that disagrees with your preconceptions. Certainly what I've read about planned economies and dictatorships of the proletariat makes me think they just end up making most people poor, unfree and unhappy while a spoiled, vicious elite wields absolute power. If someone seriously advocated them to me, I'd argue with them just like people argue with you.

From what you're saying you'd be happier in a country where no one argues with Socialist ideas. Now I've read enough about those places to tell you that you'd probably end up in a concentration camp for unorthodox thought. It's the idealists and true believers that end up getting martyred, not the vast mass of people that are basically uninterested in politics.

And incidentally the fact that you're able in America to read only progressive media that agrees with you while other people are free to watch only Fox news that agrees with them tells me that the government is not indoctrinating people, it's more that they indoctrinate themselves. Which is fair enough of course, they will all end up being wrong politically but in different ways.

I think of it as error terms from the Platonic ideal set of policies that no individual can know. Imagine that the political spectrum is represented as a two dimensional line. The far left have a large negative number and the far right have large positive ones. The average is zero. Now the average may not coincide with the Platonic ideal of course, since there are some key facts that no one knows. No one can know how well the policies being debated will actually work in practice of course. But the average is not bad per se, just not perfect. It is much better than fringe ideas.

You can think of the democratic process - free elections and a free press - as averaging out all the large individual errors to produce a smaller error in the policies of the governing party which will try to get elected by having policies that most people support.

Of course if I were on the far left or the far right this process would work very much against me. But to me that's the point of democracy, a few people at the fringes of the political spectrum end up not having any power at all ever and the vast mass of centrists get to compete for it.

Re:Been done before

[Anonymous Coward]

You can read Kasparov and Politkovskaya in the USA. In fact, you can write or read whatever you want here. Now, I know I was indoctrinated to think that, but..., in the words of Bill Hicks..."Its a Fact".

Re:Been done before

[JAlexoi]

> In the case of Russia, you more than likely have people that want outside information and now won't be able to get it.

Really? Never, ever, EVER! Noticed, that. People that want information, get it in Russia. There is no problem in information sources in Russia. There is however a lack of good information sources in US.

Re:Been done before

[rm999]

"any mention of helping others gets you labelled a 'socialist' or a 'commie'."

Wasn't it like that during the previous generation? And the generation before that?

Re:Been done before

[ShieldW0lf]

Good point. No one will get it though.

Re:Been done before

[Anonymous Coward]

"...there is substantial indoctrination i.e. any mention of helping others gets you labelled a 'socialist' or a 'commie'."

This is utter bullshit, no one will call you a socialist or commie for helping another person. What you are referring to is an issue of what the government should be responsible for. The U.S. national government was originally formed as a means to regulate relations between states and to protect the states. It was not designed to take care of individuals. The more responsibility you pile on top of the national government the less individual's opinions matter. That's what state and local governments are for. If you get called a socialist or commie because you want something like universal free health care, that has nothing to do with you wanting to help others and everything to do with you wanting the national government to help others for you.

Re:Been done before

[Ramze]

It would be interesting to find out whether that's because the US has too many strict laws or broad reasons to incarcerate people or if other nations are simply lax on incarceration terms. Perhaps many countries simply execute their prisoners. I believe the UK has very short prison sentences due to prison overcrowding. Maybe the US can afford to build more jails than other countries. Maybe it has a better police force to catch more criminals. Maybe it doesn't have anywhere near the execution rate of other countries? If your statistics are correct, it'd be very interesting to know why. I'm sure some is due to drug and prostitution laws which aren't present in many countries. It'd make a fascinating research paper.

Re:Been done before

[Andtalath]

Seriously, don't even try to compare the states with North Korea. The states have a lot of indoctrination, however, it comes from a lot of sources, not just the state, making it a very different beast.

Re:Been done before

[sumdumass]

Wow.. Do you actually believe that? Maybe you were indoctrinated into the lack of perspective groups of people. It isn't if you want to help, it is when you want to take something from me against my will/wishes in order to do your good that gets you labeled as a commie and socialist. And quite frankly, that would by definition be communist/socialist.

I know Bashing America at every change is fun and profitable, but you could at least get the story straight first. I mean with all the valid reasons to Bash America, you have to go and basically make something up.

Re:Been done before

[mrogers]

I think if I lived in a place with that rate of imprisonment, I'd be keeping my head down and avoiding controversy too.

I agree that the rate of imprisonment in the US is disturbing, but with the exception of The War on Altered States of Consciousness the US doesn't tend to lock people up for crimes that could be interpreted as self-expression. As the NY Times article points out, the main reason for the high prison population in the US is harsh sentencing - people aren't being convicted for things that are legal elsewhere (again, with the exception of drugs), but once they're convicted they are being imprisoned for longer.

Re:Been done before

[mrogers]

The way I see it, the more criminals in prison, the less there are on the streets.

That would make sense if you could simply divide the population into criminals and non-criminals. Unfortunately it's not that simple - people move between the two categories. So when judging whether a particular method of punishment works, we need to ask three questions:

1) Does it keep criminals off the streets?
2) Does it dissuade non-criminals from becoming criminals?
3) Does it persuade criminals to become non-criminals?

Prison does well on the first test, and fairly well on the second (although the worst offenders don't respond to deterrents). But it fails the third test: criminals released from prison in the UK have a higher reoffending rate than those given community sentences. That's why judges are reluctant to impose a prison sentence for a first offence: once you've gone to prison, you're likely to keep going back.

Re:Been done before

[drsmithy]

1) Does it keep criminals off the streets?
2) Does it dissuade non-criminals from becoming criminals?
3) Does it persuade criminals to become non-criminals?

You forgot the most important one:

0. Should they even be considered a criminal in the first place ?

Re:Been done before

[Kattspya]

You say this like it's a bad thing.

Also about 50% television programming and some music does not equal culture.

Re:Been done before

[Anonymous Coward]

See, that line of argument would be more effective if Americans were being imprisoned for voicing their opinions en masse. Which they aren't.

Re:Been done before

[sydneyfong]

Maybe you're the indoctrinated one, and you only believe in Socialism because you avoid reading anything that disagrees with your preconceptions. Certainly what I've read about planned economies and dictatorships of the proletariat makes me think they just end up making most people poor, unfree and unhappy while a spoiled, vicious elite wields absolute power. If someone seriously advocated them to me, I'd argue with them just like people argue with you. The GP doesn't seem to favor Socialism or Capitalism or whatever from his post. Why the digression anyway? Pointing out "self-indoctrination" that exists in many so called "free" countries doesn't mean that he wanted to avoid reading things he disagrees with. Quite the contrary I think.

And incidentally the fact that you're able in America to read only progressive media that agrees with you while other people are free to watch only Fox news that agrees with them tells me that the government is not indoctrinating people, it's more that they indoctrinate themselves. Which is fair enough of course, they will all end up being wrong politically but in different ways. Exactly. But if everybody gets indoctrinated one way or the other, isn't that a problem? If that's not a problem, why is government indoctrination worse than "self-indoctrination"? If it is, why not try to tackle the problem instead of saying "oh well that's the way it is"?

Re:Been done before

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't believe we have good data on the number of people imprisoned in Russia and China.

Re:Been done before

[sydneyfong]

I think it goes both ways.

If the people are aware of censorship, that's a vital piece of information, and if one wants information badly enough, (s)he will get it, especially with the technology in the last decade.

However, if one simply believes that information given to him/her is free and unbiased, (s)he will never seek other perspectives and probably will dismiss any other views that conflicts with his/hers.

This willful ignorance can be even more dangerous in some situations. For the person who's aware of censorship, to reason with him you simply present him with the missing information. For the willful ignorant, no amount of evidence will convince him that maybe, perhaps, the things he believed in was wrong.

Of course in countries with heavy censorship there are people who's willfully ignorant of opposing views, but in a supposedly "free" country I think it's just easier to fall into that trap.

Re:Been done before

[Anonymous Coward]

If we're all so indoctrinated and there is no freedom why do I have to sift through so many overblown posts about the American media to find any posts actually discussing this new iron curtain?

Because the first principle of the indoctrination is "Nothing that happens outside America matters." If that fails, the second principle is "All arguments about world politics can be reduced to arguments about American politics and then settled by quoting from the Constitution." ;-)

Re:Been done before

[mrbluze]

You say this like it's a bad thing. It depends on whether people value their culture or not.

Also about 50% television programming and some music does not equal culture.

I never said the original culture was replaced. Rather, a vacuum is left and we find country after country with a youth that has become hedonistic, shallow, selfish, consumerist and unhappy.

But that's not a bad thing if you want to make money from those people. They make great customers.

Re:Been done before

[Kattspya]

What does "devoid of culture mean" in your original post?

Re:Been done before

[hairyfeet]

If you look around it is getting pretty damned scary everywhere. Between the mass media all being bought by a scant handful of mega corps that all spout the same "viewpoint", the feds wanting to monitor everything you do on the net, along with talk by the attorney general that "piracy equals terrorist supporters" and talk of the need for a new "more secure and trustworthy" Internet, it really wouldn't surprise me if in 2 decades or less we end up with our own "great firewall" to protect us from terrorists and save the children from the evil child predators, of course.

As a child of the 70's, I never thought I'd see the day that the modern societies would end up looking more and more like that joke from Airplane II,"Four alarm fire makes way for GLORIOUS new tractor factory!". For my boys and their future childrens sake I hope we change our course, but with both the dems and repubs seeming to have never met an increase in power they didn't like I don't see that happening anytime soon. But of course that is my 02c on the world around me,YMMV (And I sincerely hope it does.)

Re:Been done before

[mrogers]

You're right, I didn't mean to come across as some kind of authoritarian - just trying to focus on one part of the problem at a time.

Re:Been done before

[RiotingPacifist]

Perhaps many countries simply execute their prisoners. Not really even in countries where executions are common, they still wouldnt acount for a significant amount of the convictions.

It would be interesting to find out whether that's because the US has too many strict laws or broad reasons to incarcerate people or if other nations are simply lax on incarceration terms. Well the fact you can get sent to prison for tax evasion, pretty much proves that you have very broad incarceration terms, i think in the UK the rule is they have to be a flight risk or a danger to others to get locked up.

I believe the UK has very short prison sentences due to prison overcrowding. Dont belive everything you read, while UK prisons are overcowded, peoples sentences are reduced by weeks, even for a 2 year sentence thats only going to be a couple of percent shorter.

Maybe the US can afford to build more jails than other countries. I thought your ecconomy was fscked? but given such little spending in other areas, if you spend more on jails it shows were your priorities lie.

Maybe it has a better police force to catch more criminals. Lol, erm nah just Lol.

I'm sure some is due to drug and prostitution laws which aren't present in many countries. Drug and prostitution laws are present in all countries, how much theyre enfoced and if you get jail time for selling them is different though.

correct, it'd be very interesting to know why. It'd make a fascinating research paper. I think it would be an interesting paper, but it would end up being an opinion piece, either pro-jail or anti-jail, i think its one of those things you cant sit on the fence for, either you realise that "all our taxes paying for your wars against the new non-rich" or your a republican.

Re:Been done before

[hardsky]

Ok. I'm from Russia and can read slashdot.org :)

Re:Been done before

[Escogido]

However, if one simply believes that information given to him/her is free and unbiased, (s)he will never seek other perspectives and probably will dismiss any other views that conflicts with his/hers. It's actually even worse - as it is today, people here in Russia are happy to be spoon-fed. They have too much pride to acknowledge that a lot of the negative heard from the informational sources abroad actually makes sense. People will hear what they want to hear.

Ironically enough, most western mass media plays along by creating an image of Russia that has little in common with what is actually happening here. Not saying the western mass media is to blame, but it's most certainly a factor.

On a brighter note, it's not all that bad as it may seem. These tricks 'only' work with the generally badly educated population, and lack of a proverbial 'middle class' which is about the worst thing about today's Russia. If said middle class will develop and achieve a certain threshold, the process will become irreversible and no iron curtain policies will be sustainable.

Let me restate: the way I understand it, having a sizable middle class is not compatible with any iron curtain policies whatsoever. And as a middle class is like a pre-requisite to be able to compete in today's globalized world, I hope these attempts at creating an informational shield are just convulsions of the old system where people would just blindly believe what their government tells them to.

Re:Been done before

[Anonymous Coward]

why wouldn't they, it's all they've ever known

Exactly. Reminds me of the story about a woman who, after escaping the oppressive hell of communism, only pleaded to return after failing to adapt to a life of freedom. Like an animal kept captive from birth, she knew nothing but the cage.

Or how the average American suggests -- no, expects -- more government as the solution to any given problem. It's all they've ever known, and I say we start calling it what it really is: conditioning.

Indoctrination to the empire starts at birth, and sadly, very few people are able to escape the endless sea of promises they've been raised on, and unlearn their own indoctrination by accepting the truth that government works in self-interest.

There's a reason why the US government of today absolutely dwarfs the US government of only 100 years ago, both in revenue and poewr over the people, and it's not because "the people" either want their own oppression, or (my favorite) "failed" to prevent the inevitable from happening. The reason is so simple yet so hard to accept: more government benefits the people who run the business of government, not the people who are forced to support it.

Re:Been done before

[oodaloop]

Sounds like America. Which America is that? Would that be in the Blue States or the Red States?

We have a very diverse range of political beliefs in the States, which is exactly how it should be. As someone else pointed out, there is also lot of apathy when it comes to politics, which is a shame. But how could anyone confuse diversity and apathy with indoctrination?

You can't have a discussion about much with a large percentage of people about certain topics.
And in what country is that not true?

Re:Been done before

[Attila Dimedici]

It is not mentioning helping others that gets you labeled a socialist. It is wanting to help others with someone else's money (taxes). I have yet to see someone who talked about using their own resources to help others get labeled a socialist.
However, when you want to use my resources to help others, then I will call you a socialist. It is my decision how I use my resources (money, property, time). The fact is that those most opposed to using tax dollars to help others are the ones most likely to use their own money to help others.

Re:Been done before

[RiotingPacifist]

Top gear says differently http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LE1QVhYdIpg

Re:Been done before

[Hognoxious]

i think in the UK the rule is they have to be a flight risk or a danger to others to get locked up.

Jeffrey Archer, Lester Piggot...?

Re:Been done before

[RiotingPacifist]

Yeah thats good point, I thought my always law student friend was wrong on that one.

The solution to jail overcrowding is simple though, legalise it. get rid of the money going into gangs (which mostly comes from 'soft drugs') but I digress.

Re:Been done before

[hesaigo999ca]

I agree with you 100% ...in fact the only way for the world to see the TRUE
meaning of what happens behind a government, is to have a global change or disaster, on such a massive scale, that it would take ALL nations to fight it, or get through it.

IE- alien invasion, asteroid hitting earth...something so massive, that everyone would have
to work together to find a solution, then the effects of mass communication would open up many people's eyes to all the other culture abroad.

I still am amazed at how much beautiful culture is in Egypt, where the pyramids are,
yet find it hard to find anything at home. I am sure someone from a different country would
see more then I do about my own country, and say It was beautiful...

Re:Been done before

[Burz]

TFA plays fast and loose with the term 'extremism' to play on people's fears about Russia. OTOH the US government defines extremism as resorting-to or advocating violence to further a cause; Sort of like terrorism but not necessarily aimed at civilians or even people (i.e. could be the pursuit of damaging property).

In fact, I'd say the author is a Russophobe banging out another red meat article: In the last paragraph he goes beyond the original AFP article and paints the incitement of terrorism (incitement of violence) as normally censored only by the likes of China and very recently the EU... when the US and also the EU member states have censored such speech before living memory.

Re:Been done before

[bryce4president]

How do you get modded as +5 Insighful for that post? First you quote the nytimes! Then you write an insinuating statement like we live in some police state and if you say something or look the wrong way then you could just get thrown in jail! That's all BULLSHIT! I think your post is 1. offtopic, and 2. Troll. You make some dramatic statement and that is insightful....HAHA! How about this. People stop breaking the laws and we'll stop putting them in jail. Its really that easy. We don't just make shit up. We have this thing called innocent until proven guilty...it actually works. Maybe you don't agree with some of the laws against drug or prostitution. But here in America the PEOPLE vote in our elected officials, and those officials make these laws. Ironically enough the majority of the people in America SUPPORT the anti drug laws and anti prostitution laws and until the people change their mind it will stay that way. So if you don't like it then its time for you to run for office and get out your message and change it, or you can just leave and live somewhere else.

Re:Been done before

[Hognoxious]

I think you'll find that it reads you!!!

Re:Been done before

[BForrester]

Exactly. In America, the barrier is not of authoritarianism and despotic police rule; it is one of ignorance and complacency. The barrier may look imposing, but it can be penetrated with ease.

From Seattle in the Pacific to Jacksonville on the Atlantic, a "soggy cardboard curtain" has descended across the Continent.

Re:Been done before

[moosesocks]

Exactly.

The US is only just now beginning to realize the importance of addressing the underlying causes of crime, and figuring out other ways to deter criminals from committing crimes.

Unfortunately, the mentality of much of our legal system is based upon "punishment", and not deterrence/rehabilitation. Long prison sentences simply don't work except for the most egregious and violent of offenders.

On the other hand, I *do* support the several recent cases that have put high-profile individuals and celebrities in prison for white-collar offenses. Enron, Martha Stewart, and most recently, Wesley Snipes, actually do seem to serve as a significant deterrent to those sort of crimes.

Re:Been done before

[dreamchaser]

I will be modded down as a troll no doubt, but I have maintained for many years that the real purpose of government run public schools in the US is to indoctrinate, not educate. I saw it beginning when I was young, and having now raised a child who will graduate from High School this year I have seen it get steadily worse.

Re:Been done before

[dimeglio]

0. Should they even be considered a criminal in the first place ? Some wise person whose name eludes me once said - paraphrasing:
"Do governments create legislation as a way to increase control on it's population or to actually maintain social peace?"

Getting a $100-$200 ticket for burning a red light(which can kill) vs a $750 fine per song for downloading "illegal" MP3s (which doesn't kill anyone) seems rather unfair.

Re:Been done before

[cosmodrome]

The average Russian is not really any different from the average American or the average Italian or anyone else. That is to say, they don't care at all about outside information. There is always a minority interested in engaging the world, intellectually, economically, etc, and certainly the size of this minority varies from place to place. However, I have seen nothing in my travels to indicate the the average Ivan 6-pack gives a toss about what the BBC or some blog has to say about Russian elections, or some other issue.

Re:Been done before

[conan1989]

"...people that want outside information and now won't be able to get it." great firewall of china does sweet fuck all when proxies are used... what makes you think the russian iron curtain what have the same flaws?

Re:Been done before

[chrish]

Welcome to the secret No Fly List, citizen.

Re:Been done before

[russotto]

The United States has less than 5 percent of the world's population, but it has almost a quarter of the world's prisoners.

But, from your reference:

(That number excludes hundreds of thousands of people held in administrative detention, most of them in China's extrajudicial system of re-education through labor, which often singles out political activists who have not committed crimes.)

And also excludes places where the entire frigging country is run like a prison and/or labor camp.

Re:Been done before

[russotto]

OTOH the US government defines extremism as resorting-to or advocating violence to further a cause;

Which makes a large part of the US Government, including nearly the entire Departments of Justice, Defense, and Fatherl..err, Homeland Security, "extremists".

Re:Been done before

[russotto]

. Rather, a vacuum is left and we find country after country with a youth that has become hedonistic, shallow, selfish, consumerist and unhappy.

With the possible exception of "consumerist", a complaint which has been repeated by every generation about the latest one since at least Ancient Greek times. Looks like it's time for you to set out the porch swing, pick up the shotgun (or metal rake if you're anti-gun), and start practicing the phrase "GET OFF MY LAWN!"

Re:Been done before

[gad_zuki!]

>Rather, a vacuum is left and we find country after country with a youth that has become hedonistic, shallow, selfish, consumerist and unhappy.

Ah yes, the idealized past argument. Because we all know that these are new problems and people a generation ago were perfect beings who never gave into being selfish and shallow, etc.

Re:Been done before

[Anonymous Coward]

Amazing how fast a negative comment about another nation immediately converts into a US bashing session. I wonder if in Russia or China when somebody wags a finger at the US, a crowd suddenly begins criticizing their own.
Anyway, I call BS. I'm an American. Tell me how ignorant I am of everything in the world. Arrogant pricks, you just can't stand that there are people who don't share your viewpoint. I see this attitude all the time. If you disagree with me you're uninformed, ignorant or you've been lied to. Since if you were intelligent and informed, you'd agree with me.
So go ahead, show me how the "media machine" has brainwashed me. Examples please.

Re:Been done before

[armareum]

Too true. Take these recent stories of criminal activities in Britain:

Mum fined £75 for being clumsy with roll

Prosecuted for overfilling wheelie bin by four inches

Re:Been done before

[Murrquan]

Sounds like America. Despite all the hoopla about freedom and whatnot in america, there is substantial indoctrination i.e. any mention of helping others gets you labelled a 'socialist' or a 'commie'. IMHO America is probably one of THE most indoctrinated societies in the world at the moment. You can't have a discussion about much with a large percentage of people about certain topics. Helping others? Heck, I've been labelled a socialist for suggesting that maybe the corporations shouldn't control the government.

It's easy to be generous with other people's money -- especially when you're helping yourself and your shareholders!

Re:Been done before

[Murrquan]

It's not at all like America. America has does not have state censorship - the constitution forbids it. Censorship isn't needed as much when the government can insinuate itself into the media.

Maybe you're the indoctrinated one, and you only believe in Socialism because you avoid reading anything that disagrees with your preconceptions. Which is, of course, why he posted on Slashdot where he gets to hear opinions like yours.

Certainly what I've read about planned economies and dictatorships of the proletariat makes me think they just end up making most people poor, unfree and unhappy while a spoiled, vicious elite wields absolute power. That honestly sounds like America to me.

I'm sorry if I sound rude. I actually agree with you, in that I think that it's socialist policies that are destroying America. The corporations that control the country can pass laws forbidding competition -- especially foreign competition -- and getting sweet deals, subsidies, and tax breaks from the government. I.e., our pockets. And then we keep buying from them anyway.

I don't like the idea of forcing everyone to be generous -- that is, socialism. It's like punishing people not for doing something wrong, but for not doing something right. But it's even worse when it's the ones in power who benefit, instead of the impoverished. Just like here in America, and just like it was in Russia.

Re:Been done before

[Samgilljoy]

If we're all so indoctrinated and there is no freedom why do I have to sift through so many overblown posts about the American media to find any posts actually discussing this new iron curtain?

Exactly. Thanks for saying that. And let's not forget all the long posts about American gun policies and prisons. Apparently, it's still just not gratifying enough for people to discuss a problematic issue about another country; you always have to find a way to discuss how America is worse or just as bad.

Re:Been done before

[Burz]

I wonder what Barry Goldwater (with his famous quote about extremism) would think of that.

Re:Been done before

[Hubbell]

Read point 5.
Federal prisons were estimated to hold 176,268 sentenced inmates as of Sept. 30, 2006. Of these, 16,507 were incarcerated for violent offenses, including 2,923 for homicide, 9,645 for robbery, and 3,939 for other violent crimes. In addition, 10,015 inmates were serving time for property crimes, including 519 for burglary, 6,437 for fraud, and 3,059 for other property offenses. A total of 93,751 were incarcerated for drug offenses. Also, 54,336 were incarcerated for public-order offenses, incluging 19,496 for immigration offenses and 24,298 for weapons offenses.
That's just federal, here's states:
According to the American Corrections Association, the average daily cost per state prison inmate per day in the US is $67.55. State prisons held 249,400 inmates for drug offenses in 2006. That means it cost states approximately $16,846,970 per day to imprison drug offenders, or $6,149,144,050 per year.
The reason there are so many incarcerated and it costs so much to keep them so is the drug war tbh, and it's spectacular failure and completely unlawful basis.
"I, as a responsible adult human being, will never concede the power to anyone to regulate my choice of what I put into my body, or where I go with my mind. From the skin inwards is my jurisdiction, is it not? I choose what may or may not cross that border. ...I am the sole legal and spiritual government of this territory, and only the laws I choose to enact within myself are applicable." - Alexander Shulgin, PHD, Chemist & Author

Re:Been done before

[rtechie]

Of course in the marketplace of ideas, you're allowed to try to sell anything no matter how quirky. But that does not mean that all ideas will sell equally well. Freedom of the press only exists for those that own one. Debate in the USA is limited mainly by the opinions of the owners of the presses. That's why there is very little serious criticism of the US economy, US military, US business, and most of all, US trade in the media. Media companies are big corporations, and more importantly, they accept billions in advertising dollars from big businesses who pointedly insist that they not produce anything critical.

Of course if I were on the far left or the far right this process would work very much against me. But to me that's the point of democracy, a few people at the fringes of the political spectrum end up not having any power at all ever and the vast mass of centrists get to compete for it. I HATE this line of reasoning. There is no such thing as a "center". There are issues and people have opinions on them. That's it. The notion that some issues are "right" or "left" are political tools used to divide people. "You shouldn't believe in that because only dope smoking leftist hippies believe in that." or the converse of "You shouldn't believe in that because only racist crazy right-wingers believe in that."

Nobody is 100% "right" or 100% "left". These are merely political labels, not reality.

Re:Been done before

[Jorophose]

At least there's information in the US.

Good luck finding out what's going on when you're in the PRC...

Re:Been done before

[Hal_Porter]

The GP doesn't seem to favor Socialism or Capitalism or whatever from his post. He said people label him as a 'socialist or a commie'. Now he said that any mention of helping others triggers this but reading between the lines I'd say he's actually advocating the state helping others as opposed to, say, going out and helping them himself.

So I'd say his error term from the average is likely large and negative and that is why most people disagree with him. It's democracy at work really.

Re:Been done before

[Hal_Porter]

That honestly sounds like America to me. Read a book about Mao's China or North Korea now. Guess what, elites exist everywhere. But they behave worse in Communist societies when they have absolute power than in in democratic ones where they don't, because they can.

Look at this way. In a Communist dictatorship the ways that the elite can manipulate society are a superset of the ways an elite in a democracy can. That's because the whole point of democracy is to limit the power of the elite and the whole point of a Communist dictatorship is to maximize it.

Re:Been done before

[mrbluze]

Ah yes, the idealized past argument. Because we all know that these are new problems and people a generation ago were perfect beings who never gave into being selfish and shallow, etc.

It may still be true, despite what you say.

Saying the past was better isn't always incorrect, because in some ways, it was better. Of course in other ways the present is better. But when it comes to cultural wealth then for a country to lose its original language, music, diet, religion, etc., is a sad thing for anyone who enjoyed these things.

Modernism is easily the cause of as many problems as its proponents claim it solves. I'm not talking about scientific progress here, but the sausage-machining of the artistic sphere of people's lives.

Re:Been done before

[damasterwc]

Whole heartedly believe information presented to them? It's the same here to a lesser degree. Most people believe that if something is on Fox and CNN then it must be true. People forget that the media outlets are owned by a small group of massive conglomerates that often push their own agenda.

Re:Been done before

[mrbluze]

I know, I must be getting old. But I still think the point is valid and yes, the problem repeats itself, but civilization builds on the past and the richness of civilization rests in the minds of the living.

If people of a generation throw off their links with their ancestors (if their history has in it anything to be proud of), then they are are devaluing themselves by taking on a lesser alternative. Existential subjectivism, which this is the practice of (the "so what, who cares, I make up my own reality" approach), results in people who are culturally adrift. They stand to lose a lot by being conquered (and inevitably exploited) by an outside culture - the Australian Aborigines are a good example.

Re:Been done before

[mrbluze]

What does "devoid of culture mean" in your original post?

"... culture should be regarded as the set of distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual and emotional features of society or a social group, and that it encompasses, in addition to art and literature, lifestyles, ways of living together, value systems, traditions and beliefs" - UNESCO

Devoid of distinctive, identifying features for that society/social group. They become americanized/westernized. You can tell when you visit the country repeatedly that it becomes less and less different from your own. I guess I meant that the culture is replaced, but when all you have is what some foreign nation gave you, then you are poor indeed.

Re:Been done before

[pipingguy]

Are you an American?

Re:Been done before

[Kattspya]

You can't have it both ways. Either culture is the same as TV/movies and music or it's not. If it is no country on this earth is "devoid" of orignal culture but has a large fraction of imported American culture. If it isn't no country on this earth is "devoid" of original culture and has but a small fraction of imported American culture. In other words you are plainly wrong however you put it.

As long as no laws are made prohibiting languages, holidays or demolishing historical structures I don't see a problem that people choose American "culture" before or rather side by side with their own. How you are going to inhibit this voluntary exchange is beyond me. Also you should be forced to watch indigenous Swedish TV-series. After a few minutes you should understand why people prefer American TV.

Re:Been done before

[ibsteve2u]

They could stop imprisoning "deadbeat dads" who truly don't have the money, too. The U.S. is one of (the?) last nations on the planet with "debtor's prisons".

Re:Been done before

[Anonymous Coward]

  Agreed, but the difference is in America the information is available, most people just don't care to find it on their own. In the case of Russia, you more than likely have people that want outside information and now won't be able to get it. oh man! A thing that we have an abundance of but don't want and another country is starving for! thats never happened before

Re:Been done before

[ozmanjusri]

What about sex offenders?

Democracy did win right?

[kidsizedcoffin]

The stories about Putin and his hot gymnast girlfriend got a paper's license revoked. I imagine the internet rules would be as even handed.

Re:Democracy did win right?

[calebt3]

This is /.
Here, hot means alive and breathing.

Re:Democracy did win right?

[BattleCat]

She's hot indeed. Check Alina Kabaeva pics , see for ourself. And, by the way, newspaper's license wasn't revoked. GP got his facts wrong.

Re:Democracy did win right?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is /. Here, hot means microwaved. Fixed it for you.

Re:Democracy did win right?

[RoboRay]

As opposed to alive and not breathing?

Re:Democracy did win right?

[megaditto]

Sharapova.

Re:Democracy did win right?

[calebt3]

It happens

Re:Democracy did win right?

[neurolux]

Sure democracy won. Russians decided to take advantage of their democracy by voting for authoritarians.

Re:Democracy did win right?

[Anonymous Coward]

When your kids are starving, when your house is taked away from you by mafia thugs, when you work your ass off on three jobs and they just plain won't pay you for months on end, what would you do?

For most people basic survival of their kids and family comes first. Democracy -a distant second.

Re:Democracy did win right?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sharapova. Met her.

Not that hot.

Re:Democracy did win right?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you talking about America or where?.

Re:Democracy did win right?

[Anonymous Coward]

Russia. Whatever you say about America, kid's don't yet starve en masse, and they do pay you for your work (might be not much, but they do send the check).

But the second part is true everywhere I suspect.

Re:Democracy did win right?

[Anonymous Coward]

Russia, the number one source for weapons-grade jailbait.

Re:Democracy did win right?

[Hal_Porter]

It reminds me. I've got a Hungarian friend who's obviously not keen on things Russian given Russia's historical behaviour in Hungary.

Back when Putin was first elected my friend read that he flew his own fighter down to Chechnya. And it's true, he has flown to official visits in jet fighters.

Which, whatever you think about the guy as a politician is damn cool. He's like James Bond, or maybe a James Bond villian. Rumours about his personal life just confirms the impression.

Re:Democracy did win right?

[dunkelfalke]

yep, he pretty much was the coolest russian head of state of at least a century.
flying a jet fighter, black belt in judo, promises of blasting terrorists even in their toilets.

Re:Democracy did win right?

[Hal_Porter]

He does seem like something out of Ian Fleming. I always thought a typical Ian Fleming character had a thin veneer of sophistication over a fundamentally limited intellect and thuggish personality. It's enough to fool the bimbos they prey on, and to some extent each other but you definitely wouldn't want to get stuck talking to them in a bar since they'd probably enjoy beating you to a pulp more than sex with yet another interchangable woman. They remind me of Patrick Bateman, the souless yuppy antihero of American Psycho actually. They certainly share his strange disatisfaction with normal heterosexual sex, unthinking materialism and fondness for extreme violence.

Then again who hasn't dreamed of saying something like this to a European who keeps whining about your country's brutal but eminently practical foreign policy -

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/11/12/world/main529102.shtml

Putin became agitated Monday after a reporter from the French newspaper Le Monde questioned his troops' use of heavy weapons against civilians in the war in Chechnya. Chechnya is predominantly Muslim.

"If you want to become an Islamic radical and have yourself circumcised, I invite you to come to Moscow," Putin said.

"I would recommend that he who does the surgery does it so you'll have nothing growing back, afterward," he added. Circumcision is a tenet of Islam for all males. I dunno really. Russia was in semi terminal decline before Putin. I think desperate times increase the likelihood of psychopaths being elected and more controversially that you sometimes need them.

Certainly in the UK, Churchill was pretty much completely vicious when he had a chance but his viciousness was directed at the Nazis and probably saved the country. I suspect he'd have dealt with whiny Euro journalists with much the same contempt too, though he would probably have phrased in a more genuinely witty way. Someone genuinely civilized who listened to the Eurowhiners might have lost everything because they lacked the fundamental ruthlessness necessary to deal with the situation. And once there were no more enemies to be smitten, the Great British electorate replaced Churchill.

And maybe the Le Monde reporter had second thoughts when Muslim mobs burned the Paris suburbs and imposed de facto Shariah law on 5 million French citizens.

Re:Democracy did win right?

[hughk]

Putin needs a fluffy white cat!

Re:Democracy did win right?

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean Cheryomooshki district judge, Sharapova, who acquitted the guy behind allofmp3.com, right?

The kind of freedom of Internet that people in Russia enjoy is something you don't even dare to dream about. People in America are getting their pants fined off them and even go to jail for merely downloading stuff, whereas in Russia libraries of books and recordings of music and cinema are being made available for the public good.

You guys have this ridiculous notion of intellectual property and still speak with a straight face about internet freedom? Pathetic.

Re:Democracy did win right?

[RiotingPacifist]

Quick somebody tell Americans, maybe they'll realise that being in the army doesn't make you a good political leader, just an aggressive mother****

Re:Democracy did win right?

[kabocox]

The stories about Putin and his hot gymnast girlfriend got a paper's license revoked. I imagine the internet rules would be as even handed.

I'd think most people would support a leader more with an eye candy girl along side him. Why would they want to hush up that news? Oh, well different country, different culture. They might actually have a sense of privacy in public person's lives over there. We don't have that concept around here.

In Soviet Russia

[Anonymous Coward]

Redundant meme censored.

Czar Putin

[Profane MuthaFucka]

For Russian history to be made correct, all that is necessary would be to go back and add the title 'Czar' to all the leaders since 1917.

Re:Czar Putin

[eneville]

I thought that was Tsar? - I don't have ru on my xkeyb layout at the moment so I can't use the correct characters, but I think that's the word you're after.

Re:Czar Putin

[Profane MuthaFucka]

Actually, the word I'm looking for is spelled with Cyrillic letters. Slashdot won't let me put non-Roman characters into the text. When spelled with Roman letters, either Tsar, or Czar are used.

Re:Czar Putin

[Domini Canes]

there is this rather nice site - www.translit.ru, which allows to enter Cyrillic characters with Latin keyboard in those rather cases you need them

I don't know how yet, but...

[zappepcs]

I think that it is time for the Internet (read anonymous) to start striking back at those world leaders that wish to silence information.

Yes, I'm American and I think the Bush Administration is one of the likely targets of such an effort.

We have the Internet, it is free, information flows around the globe. For all the faults that might bring it has been hailed as an equalizer and liberator of peoples all over the globe. Freedom of information is the basis of the good inside an OLPC.

FTFA:

Print (and television) media in Russia is already under either official or unofficial government control, leaving the Internet as the last frontier free of government scrutiny. "It is difficult to find anyone who is not against extremism but it depends on how the law is used," Center of Journalism in Extreme Situations director Oleg Panfilov told the AFP in response to the news. Panfilov noted that the government has used the law "selectively" in the past, but that it's still worrisome when the government tries to expand the law into new areas. Yes, we are all against extremism and extremists, but very few of us agree on what exactly those are. Such subjective terms should never be allowed to be enacted as laws. By allowed, I mean that free peoples should protest such laws, even if they are not in the country where it is enacted.

In times past it was said that Monarchy's that do not hang together will 'hang' separately. I think that time has not changed this at all, and many of the so called republics are merely facades for the ruling classes to hide behind.

Wow, that sounded a bit socialist or something, but I truly think that the Internet has the power to change things for the better. If the Russian people are unable to, perhaps we outside of Russia should make our voices known and heard.

Does anyone have any ideas?

Re:I don't know how yet, but...

[Shihar]

Yeah, I am pretty sure that a bunch of ornery 16 year old American kids are going to kick over the Russian political system to the cheers of the Russian people. Right.

I have a better idea. How about we just realize that people need to sort their own shit out? The best you can possibly do is elect a government that realizes that it isn't going to beat another nation into submission with rhetoric. If the west wants to do anything for the poor huddled masses of all the oppressed people around the world, it should happily and merrily jump in to help fledgling democracies, reward leaders who bring about democratic change, make some vague attempt to hold a little moral high ground, and serve as example and rewarder.

Tongue lashing Putin is a waste of breath. Words are worth their weight in gold. The best thing to do is give Russia a pat on the head, a hug, and a wad of cash when they do right, and wait for a less drunk and incompetent Yeltsin to appear to bring Russia back to something closer to a democracy.

Re:I don't know how yet, but...

[JAlexoi]

Mod parent Insightful.
Could not agree more.

That would be really good practice on the part of US.

Re:I don't know how yet, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, that and stop reading the TIME magazine who declared Putin THE person of 2007. *Spit*

Re:I don't know how yet, but...

[u_genie]

We have tons of a red-eye fanatics here in Russia. Being poisoned by TV propoganda they're screaming everywhere that democracy is only the evil for Russia and we should go "back to USSR". But in the case of a new politic crisis all of those fanatics immediately forget what they were screaming about and you can see them in the queue of refugees leaving the country. It's some kind of pseudo-patriotism. The politic system they offer for Russia instead of the Democracy is the "Total Corruption" (from up to down). And this's very convenient system to live in. You just need to be in one of the 4 clans - "police", "criminals", "bureaucrats" and "militaries" (the most poor clan now) and then you'll get access to all the national budget's money.

Re:I don't know how yet, but...

[Pecisk]

I have a better idea. How about we just realize that people need to sort their own shit out?
But that is whole problem. If Russia just sat down and tried to figure out how deal with all problems, then everyone would be clapping hands and handing Putin a price of peace. However, Russia thinks that their problem is not their imperial attitude, but everyone who doesn't submit to their power. For now, all neighborhood countries which doesn't fully corporate with Russia are subjects of extortion, fist swinging, threats of violence, threats of economical "violence", etc. In fact, they do almost EVERYTHING not to be loved. And they go on their "Ohhh, everyone is enemy of Russia, nobody wants us to understand, nobody wants us to love". Guess what, it is usually how drink heads think.

Yes, there is lot to compare with US, however, they somehow learned to keep their cravings for power in civil level (more or less, of course, Bush was a over the top) and somehow they don't give me those sudden freakout moments, as lot of stuff which comes from Russia do. And even then, when I do reality check, I CAN criticise Bush heavily and be not prisoned or silensed in US. Can't say that about Russia and Putin.

Maybe Russia needs some fresh kick in a stomatch (figuratively speaking), someone to show them nice STFU, because for now, they are too deep in circle of self-pittiness. How about improve lives of Russians in Russia before talking about how "bad" everyone treats them in, for example, Baltic States or Ukraine. Everyone know it is a rhetoric, it is nothing to do with truth, but they keep telling it, keep feeding it to their people. For what?

I am really confused, because as Latvian, I have MANY friends which are Russians. And they are nothing like that. Strange.

Re:I don't know how yet, but...

[ElBeano]

Stating the obvious: There is a lot of wisdom in the PP and it represents a measured and thougtful response to the policies of the U.S. these past seven years. We've given up the moral high ground by conducting a preemptive war in Iraq and handed a huge opportunity to Putin. If Putin is a monster, we have helped making him what he is. This does not erase his responsibility, nor does it let the Russian people off the hook. Nevertheless, the U.S. became intoxicated with the heady sense of being the world's lone superpower, and acted as though the use of this power (in the raw) could impose freedom and democracy on the world. We should learn our lessons and strive for a different future. It will take generations to undo the damage. It WILL NOT happen if the U.S. increasingly copies the closed societies it supposedly loathes, in the pursuit of "security".

Re:I don't know how yet, but...

[oodaloop]

Words are worth their weight in gold. The best thing to do is give Russia a pat on the head, a hug, and a wad of cash
Pats on the head and hugs are worth their weight in gold too. And giving money to dictatorships that do what we want tends to look pretty bad in the eyes of other countries. Either we support dictatorships, use empty words to decry them, let them continue their crimes unabated, or force their demise. We've done them all, and been hated no matter what.

Re:I don't know how yet, but...

[sydneyfong]

And even then, when I do reality check, I CAN criticise Bush heavily and be not prisoned or silensed in US. Can't say that about Russia and Putin. I see this argument over and over again. The logic doesn't seem right but I really can't exactly pin point the problem. Anyway, two questions:

* what does it matter if you could criticize your government if it doesn't amount to any real changes?
* Suppose in an imaginary scenario, Russians gets free speech tomorrow. You criticize them for (eg) their imperial attitude. They respond by saying USA has the same issues too. Now, you say "so what? we can criticize our government for that!", but then they respond by saying "guess what, now we can do that too!" Are you going to stop criticizing their government for their wrongs, or are you going to shut up now because they have free speech? (and this question is intended both as a rhetorical one and a real question, I really am interested to know the answer)

If the former case, suppose further that they agree with their government's imperialist attitude, and don't try to change things, what would you do? (This is actually what I feel towards the USA in these few years. I mean, I can write off the 2000 elections due to various reasons, but > 50% Americans (who bothered to show up) voted for Bush during the Iraq invasion. They say things are going to change "soon", but everybody else is saying that too...)

If the latter case, you just showed that free speech to criticize your government is orthogonal to the discussion. Why bring this up as an excuse then?

Re:I don't know how yet, but...

[russotto]

And giving money to dictatorships that do what we want tends to look pretty bad in the eyes of other countries. Either we support dictatorships, use empty words to decry them, let them continue their crimes unabated, or force their demise. We've done them all, and been hated no matter what

Damn, I wish I had mod points. In some cases (including Iraq), we've done all four to one dictatorship, at various times. And yes, been hated for it each time.

Re:I don't know how yet, but...

[Shihar]

Words are worth their weight in gold. The best thing to do is give Russia a pat on the head, a hug, and a wad of cash Pats on the head and hugs are worth their weight in gold too. And giving money to dictatorships that do what we want tends to look pretty bad in the eyes of other countries. Either we support dictatorships, use empty words to decry them, let them continue their crimes unabated, or force their demise. We've done them all, and been hated no matter what. Quote my entire sentence next time and you won't be so confused. Let me quote it for you with the key words you missed in bold.

The best thing to do is give Russia a pat on the head, a hug, and a wad of cash when they do right, and wait for a less drunk and incompetent Yeltsin to appear to bring Russia back to something closer to a democracy. I am not advocating sending dictators fruit baskets. I am advocating a policy of measured indifference to dictators and warm and gooey treats for friends and leaders who bring about democratic change. If a country takes the plunge into something close to a liberal democracy, toss them the bone of favorable trade status. If a country kicks ass in the name of democracy, shower them with kindness.

So, to be really specific, pick the South American nation of your choice. Most of these nations have gone from having dictators to something we could call a liberal democracy. If we wanted to do something constructive, we could have rewarded the ones that were the most liberal (liberal in the traditional sense of the word, not the leftist sense) with the best trade perks. The US is a god damn huge market. Letting a little nation have unrestricted access and not demanding the same in return is pure gold. To the US, it is a trivial economic hit. To a small nation, it is like heaven opening up and raining down money. If you want to see this policy in action, look at Japan after World War II.

Re:I don't know how yet, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

I am advocating a policy of measured indifference to dictators and warm and gooey treats for friends and leaders who bring about democratic change. What you are advocating is doing nothing while dictatorships continue their crimes and paying off other leaders who make a show of democracy for money. And not every nation wants our kind of democracy, nor would it would it work well for many cultures. This is the kind of Neocon logic most liberals hate, trying to bring American democracy to the rest of the world. Paying people to do it is probably the least effective way.

Lenin's tomb

[davidwr]

Lenin must be resting quite comfortably in his tomb.

Re:Lenin's tomb

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean Stalin. Learn some history, Lenin was horrified at what Stalin turned the soviet union into.

Another anti russian hysteria

[BattleCat]

OMG another antiRussian propaganda thread. What else ? When will somebody state russkies drink blood of innocent American babies on lunch.
In another news, USofA is the land of freedom and equal limitless opportunities .

Re:Another anti russian hysteria

[Anonymous Coward]

OMG. Another poster that instantly calls is propaganda because he doesn't like what it says. I'm from Europe and even I can see what is happening. No need to bring up the United States.

Wake up dipshit. Bush is a fascist, Putiin a fascist. They equally suck.

Re:Another anti russian hysteria

[megaditto]

It's not propaganda if it's true. What has Putin ever done for Russia except embessling billions, undermining democracy, and building up state-endorced mafia?

The one good thing I can think of is high oil prices. But the Russians should thank Bush and Jiang Zemin for that.

Re:Another anti russian hysteria

[Ox0065]

What are you trying to say? America is entirely different from what they do in Russia.

Over in America they don't block your website. They read your e-mail, & if they think they might not like you, they kidnap you without charges, torture you for a few years without trial & then release you like 'Oops! We made a mistake. No hard feelings hey! BTW. We're watching you.'

At any price, all to protect the liberty and freedom of people with no guaranteed healthcare, education or welfare and a user pays justice system... ...and maybe to protect their owner's owner's business interests in dictatorships across the globe.

Re:Another anti russian hysteria

[Ox0065]

The article is interesting, informative and valid to the best of my knowledge. It is also part of a bigger picture The truth can be propaganda if all you hear are true tales of woe about one side.

Are you saying that if China reports only the bad news about Taiwan, but the reports happen to be true, that it isn't propaganda? It still pushes an agenda, a particular framing of reality. It's propaganda.

His determination that this is somehow bad is a value judgement that is perhaps a little irrelevant on a discussion board for intelligent people... ...I can hear it now:

you're new here, aren't you?

Re:Another anti russian hysteria

[darkhitman]

Over in America they don't block your website. They read your e-mail, & if they think they might not like you, they kidnap you without charges, torture you for a few years without trial & then release you like 'Oops! We made a mistake. No hard feelings hey! BTW. We're watching you.'

The difference being, in Russia, they don't release you at the end.


P.S. I just followed up an "in Russia" clause with a statement in normal order. What is Slashdot coming to?

Re:Another anti russian hysteria

[Anonymous Coward]

In soviet russia, the memes forget you ;)

Re:Another anti russian hysteria

[temcat]

Please go fuck yourself. It's you who is anti-Russian here. You know why? Because when somebody says something bad about Putin or Russian government or newly enacted Russian laws, trolls like you pop up and say "you're all against Russia", EQUATING Putin/the government/the laws with Russia and thus INSULTING RUSSIA. My country - or shall I say "this country" to make you extra mad - deserves something better than these. And better than you, of course.

Re:Another anti russian hysteria

[hughk]

Thank heavens. However, there are many, particularly older people and especially in the oblasts who feel uncomfortable with the idea of uncertainty, wanting a strong and stable government. They do not understand that central control is in the end unsustainable.

There are a lot of smart people in St. Petersburg who understand this (and elsewhere, but St Pete's proximity to western countries brings another perspective). Unfortunately, it is far from easy for their view to be propagated even just in St. Pete, hence the presence of a strong Kremlin supporter as mayor.

Putin isn't Russia but given the backing of the FSB, it is effectively their opinion which is running (& ruining) Russia. The issues remain, the failure of the rule of law, the failure to develop infrastructure or manufacturing and the control of information.

Re:Another anti russian hysteria

[Burz]

Except that in places like England and the US, the hyperventilating over the Russian government is often followed by or subtexted with characterizations (or slurs) about how popular Putin has remained with the 'increasingly nationalistic/fascistic/racist' population.

Well...

[Swifti]

At least this will end the F-16 versus Mig-29 debates on YouTube.

Copper Curtain

[Ox0065]

Wouldn't that be a copper curtain?

Maybe a glass curtain. ... people who live behind glass curtains, shouldn't throw stones... (^-^)

Re:Copper Curtain

[rev_media]

Or is it only people who live behind glass curtains should throw stones?

Re:Copper Curtain

[Ox0065]

I mean people who live behind glass curtains shouldn't throw stones 'or else...'

People lucky enough to not live behind glass curtains are perhaps morally obliged to throw a stone or two occasionally.

that's what I think.

Re:Copper Curtain

[megaditto]

Airgap curtain.

Re:Copper Curtain

[gehrehmee]

I would propose "lead curtain".

Re:Copper Curtain

[Anonymous Coward]

Faraday curtain.

Iron ????? Curtain

[calebt3]

Let's see... we have the Great Wall of China and the Great Firewall of China. What should we insert between "Iron" and "Curtain" to describe this?

Re:Iron ????? Curtain

[calebt3]

Sorry to reply to my own post.
How's 'Big Iron Curtain'?

Re:Iron ????? Curtain

[arotenbe]

How's 'Big Iron Curtain'? But "Iron Fire Curtain" would sound so much cooler!

[...gets out "Karma Fire Extinguisher"...]

Re:Iron ????? Curtain

[Anonymous Coward]

beef.

Anaerobic organisms

[megaditto]

Tapeworms

In modern Russia...

[wickmclean]

...the internet pwns you.

Re:In modern Russia...

[maxair_mike]

Actually, I believe you were looking for: In Soviet Russia, internet browses you.

to her fluttering scarlet banner...

[mark72005]

Unbreakable union of freeborn republics, great Russia has welded forever to stand.

Created in struggle by will of the people, united and mighty, our Soviet land!

ideas

[aleph42]

IMHO, one of the best way to use the democratic power of the internet would be to have internet communities buying stocks.

A bit like the so called "ethic funds" who buy stocks in companies with good ethics first, then try to influence the companie's decision according to that agenda (which many entities do, only they do so with an "ethic" agenda in mind")

As an optimistic person, I think that if the mass of internet users did that, they would be more powerful than the few rich people right now (that might need some math).

As for the details (in bulk):

- A central website, looking something like slashdot or wikipedia (although with far higher standards for accountability, no special power to foundators, or even better, a system with no admins (every modification on the site is automatic and public, with a hash system to prevent tempering).

- Someone's vote is weighted by the amount of money he gave to the site, but with a low (300$?) cap; you can invest more (and get the proportional revenues), but your voting power is capped.

- People vote for the stocks to be bought, and for the common voice of the community in stock holder's vote. Since an account is linked to real money, you don't have most of the problems with votes on the internet (bots, etc).

That would give more power to "public opinion", which oterwise tends to be to often disregarded. Even if the community is small, it's power can already tip the balance in many cases; think about the EFF, for exemple. With that kind of money, even if you can be majoritary share holder, you can already buy ads in the New York Times or things like that, and break the barrier for entering the "rich people/big companies club".

Re:ideas

[aleph42]

Just a precision:
It can seem like that idea focuses only on western consumers (like influencing a software companie's choces or stuff like this), but when you look at the role of oil companies in affecting the stability of some african governments (including dictatorships), or the importance of economic embargo in diplomatic relations, you'll see it can be much more than that.

Re:ideas

[zappepcs]

Thanks for that, it's a good idea... a great idea. Money always talks.

I'm working with another person on brainstorming ways to push democratic 'public opinion' onto the politicians, and this fits in with that goal.

Thanks again.

Re:ideas

[English French Man]

Your idea is insightful, but I'm afraid that capping voting power is not possible, if you combine it with the problems with votes on the internet.

e.g. Rich people could register multiple accounts using bots, and have access to uncapped voting power

Re:ideas

[aleph42]

The difference with a standard website is that you've already given a credit card number at this point. Credit cards are linked to names, and this identification is controlled by the banking system.

This is as solid as it get (so much that I actually hate it when any shop can have your full identity this way, with no way of spoofing it).

Of course rich people/companies could still pay someone to vote in their name, or send their employees, but then that's true of real elections too. Actually, I think this would be a bit more secure than standard elections! (what with the tracability, password and all.)

Re:ideas

[RiotingPacifist]

Greak idea, only one problem, were all lazy fucks.
The same way that the Public are to lazy to make politicians acountable, people on the internet are too lazy too, to even convince friends which way to vote, why will they bother spending $300 unless it directly affects them? The most you could get out from internet users would be a group for net neutrality, and nobody can even be bothered with that.

Re:ideas

[Murrquan]

I'm not sure I'd want to invest in an oil company or someone else with a lousy record, even if I had a say in what they did. All it'd amount to was giving them my money.

Maybe we should instead find companies that are doing good, and then invest in / buy from them, rather than their competitors. We wouldn't need a website to co-ordinate this, either, as there are plenty of sites dedicated to "ethical consumerism" already.

Re:ideas

[aleph42]

I'm not sure I'd want to invest in an oil company or someone else with a lousy record, even if I had a say in what they did. All it'd amount to was giving them my money.
  Sure, that kind of fund would only invest in companies with good ethics; but even those will do some questionnable stuff, and that's when it's important to influence their actions with stock holder's votes.

Maybe we should instead find companies that are doing good, and then invest in / buy from them, rather than their competitors. We wouldn't need a website to co-ordinate this, either, as there are plenty of sites dedicated to "ethical consumerism" already. Well, i'm not aware of those sites (could you give me some links?), but it seems different from having a monolithic community, where all actions will always be co-ordinated. You get a lot more power that way.

Re:ideas

[aleph42]

Some times you care enough to spend 300$, but not enough to do the actual activism, or even to get informed well enough; for example, people who give to the EFF would not know what precise law to fight, but they know that the EFF does it well and serves their objectives.

Plus, those 300$ are an investment; you might get a little less money from it than from a standard stock set, but that's all. It's just that, in the current stock exchange, big stock-holders are the only one able to quickly affect the policy of a company. But if many small stock-holders unite, they should be able to do it too.

Re:ideas

[aleph42]

precision: what I mean with the EFF analogy is that, if you "can't be bothered" with getting informed and voting, you can just buy the 300$ of stocks, and not vote. That way you trust the other users of the webiste to do the voting and information gathering, the same way you trust the EFF.

Re:ideas

[Murrquan]

Well, i'm not aware of those sites (could you give me some links?) Here's one!

Re:ideas

[aleph42]

I checked the site. My comments are:

1) Not a community run website (no accountability). Apparently users cannot submit articles, and they can post comments to stories, but with no assurance that it will really show up. Check out boingboing's new crazy comment policy if you don't think this can be a problem. Excerpt (from boingboing):

Q. One of my comments has disappeared!

A. There are several possibilities. One is that we may be having technical problems. It never hurts to write and ask. Another possibility is that someone thought your comment would be better gone. Of course, as long as the website has no real importance, and as long as you completly trust the site's admins, there is no problem. But I think the last wikipedia scandals showed it's not a good attitude.

2) Only provides information for buying goods, so the actions of the website's reader are not automaticaly coordinated. If it was an association that you payed every month to have them buy stuff for you, but letting them chosing the brands, it would have far more impact.

Right now, a negative article on that site means that some of the site's members (those who read the article) might not buy that product (if they agree/remeber). And their is no way to know what those numbers actually are.

If everyone's action were determined by the global vote, then a negative vote would mean that all sales made by the association will cease (or all the stocks possessed by the site will be sold, if we take my idea). That's a lot more intimidating for the given company.

"message force multipliers"?

[Sonnung]

Just a few days ago there was a story here about new Russian law requiring Wi-Fi registration. It turn out they would require registration of commercial and non-standard equipment. Earlier there was a story about creating an isolated Russian Internet. It turned out they just want to use Cyrillic letters in domain names. There were many stories like this before and each time they were twisted to cause cries about dictator Putin and slavish Russians. Are these posted by "message force multipliers"?

Re:"message force multipliers"?

[Anonymous Coward]

And Hitler just wanted to get his troops some warm soup from Stalin, given how cold the winter was.

Re:"message force multipliers"?

[temcat]

The WiFi story was bogus, and it was found out soon after it appeared at fontanka.ru. This one seems to be real.

Re:"message force multipliers"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice try. By "message force multipliers", do you mean the Russian government Internet brigades http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_brigades#Internet_brigades_in_Russia? Or the advertising agency hired by said government "to improve the image of Russia abroad" http://www.svobodanews.ru/Article/2006/06/14/20060614181622763.html?
Have to agree with you, they seem to be posting here.

Re:"message force multipliers"?

[aerton]

I've searched website of the mentioned Rossiiskaya Gazeta to found an article under similar header with talk with Vyacheslav Sizov http://www.rg.ru/2008/04/23/prokuratura-izmenenia.html (Russian). According to the article, there were some clamour that proposals refutations to the posted materials of extremist materials would have to be posted upon request, rather than court decision. Vyacheslav Sizov clarifies that that was misunderstanding, and the proposal merely provides government organs a right to sue to enforce posting of refutations. Apparently, now only individuals and organizations can sue someone to force to post a refutation. When asked about similar practice in other countries, he replies that in UK and USA there is no need for the court decision to deny access to web resources. A mere request from corresponding government organ is enough. P.S. Not to say that Putin is no longer a president and is not mentioned in any of the sources.

Re:"message force multipliers"?

[burbilog]

P.S. Not to say that Putin is no longer a president

Wrong. He is the president and will be president until May 7.

Re:"message force multipliers"?

[sydneyfong]

Old news. As a Chinese I've seen enough "message force multipliers" (whatever that means) that I'd be surprised if I read a news article by western media which doesn't have them.

Digression: when the Chinese "nationalist" bloggers say "the western media 'lies'", this is exactly what they mean. Sometimes when you dig deep enough into the story the facts are usually true, or somewhat true, but twisted beyond recognition to cause cries against the Chinese government.

I'm pretty sure the multipliers were worse during the cold war against the Soviet Union (not that I was old enough to understand/remember at that time though)...

Re:"message force multipliers"?

[kabocox]

There were many stories like this before and each time they were twisted to cause cries about dictator Putin and slavish Russians. Are these posted by "message force multipliers"?

I think that we have to rail against Russia, China, North Korea, and Iraq with little actual knowledge of those countries. Those countries will "always" be our public villians or such even if they are more our allies than enemies.

My 10 year old daughter has it in her head that she hates China. I ask her "why what did China ever do to you?" and she just gives me a blank stare and can't come up with anything, but she still dislikes China. When I was growing up mainly in the 80s anything Russian in the movies was nearly automatically the bad guy. (Unless it was the hot Russian girl that liked the US more that Russia.) I couldn't name a single thing that Russia ever did against the US, but our entire country hated there guts. During the whole late 90s, the new bad guys were anyone from the middle east. Those folks are mostly terrorists or support terrorists so its o.k. for you to hate them.

The only place that I really hear people talk against North Korea is on slashdot. I think North Korea is under the mental radar of most of the public around here as just not being worth it to bother to hate. We'd rather hate our neighbor that's going to the wrong cult of Christ than spend time worrying about what anyone in Asia is doing.

Re:"message force multipliers"?

[tetromino]

Do not ascribe to malice what can be more simply described by intellectual laziness and stupidity. Even slashdot stories about science, Linux and US politics frequently contain major mistakes and bullshit summaries; as long as the summary touches a few buttons (patents! civil liberties!, and so forth), the slashdot readership will lap it up. Naturally, slashdot submissions about more esoteric subjects (e.g. Russian politics) are held to an even lower standard.

Re:"message force multipliers"?

[russotto]

I think that we have to rail against Russia, China, North Korea, and Iraq with little actual knowledge of those countries. Those countries will "always" be our public villians or such even if they are more our allies than enemies.

I don't remember any public vilification of Russia under Yeltsin. And China seemed to be getting decent press until Tianenmen Square.

Re:"message force multipliers"?

[n dot l]

I don't remember any public vilification of Russia under Yeltsin. Russia didn't look threatening enough. We were too busy alternately making fun and pretending to take pity on of Yeltsin's drunkenness, the Russian government's fragility, the nation's poverty. Occasionally we fretted about the security of their nuclear missiles. Every now and then we patted ourselves on the back after giving poor, pathetic Russia some food aid or a loan. At least that's what I remember of the few Russia-related stories from that era.

And then Putin comes along, and their country's economy starts to recover (whether due to or despite his influence - doesn't really matter), and we don't like him but he's popular over there so suddenly it's OK for us to hate them again (even if only a little bit).

Sounds like America?

[mi]

"All it takes is one new generation to grow up behind these 'iron curtains' ...

Sounds like America.

Please, confirm for the record, that it is your belief, one or more generations of Americans have grown up behind an 'iron curtain' unable to get information from an outside source.

Thank you.

Re:Sounds like America?

[FoolsGold]

Ah, but what you fail to realize is that even if Americans are able to get outside info, a lot of them have no desire to DO so, hence they are effectively indoctrinated regardless of having access to this information. They either don't care, or wouldn't believe it in the first place.

By being able to obtain the will of the people without having to close-off outside info, you've achieved much more than just simple censorship. It's much worse. It's willful ignorance, and THAT'S the scariest of all.

Re:Sounds like America?

[Chandon Seldon]

Conceptually, the strategy of having a vocal "mainstream media" that labels anyone outside of a narrow political range as a "crazy extremist" can be even more powerful as an indoctrination tool than an "iron curtain". In the USSR, everyone knew that the news was all government propaganda. In the USA today, most people believe in the "free press".

Re:Sounds like America?

[Anonymous Coward]

If China gets the "Great firewall of China"... and Russia gets the "Iron Curtain" firewall, does that mean if USA sets up its own censorship firewall that we will call it the "diseased blanket" firewall?

Re:Sounds like America?

[denton420]

It is easy to tailor ones argument over issues as open ended as this one. If you have an end in mind, you can certainly reach it through a variety of logical routes such as the "free press" indoctrinating the masses. Of course the free press is going to do this. People do not watch the news to not believe it in ANY country. They take bits and pieces of it, some people take more than others.

I strongly believe that while one can turn on the television and be disheartened by Faux news, the fact that information is out there that is readily available sets America apart from countries such as Russia and China. None of us can really relate to how life must be in a country such as N. Korea. Drawing parallels from these countries to America is a bit cynical, no? Is it not belittling the extreme censorship they endure?

You cant expect the masses to get it, thats why they have their title as the masses. While one could argue that the masses control who gets elected, I think it is just as easy to argue that the masses do not know what they are getting in a representative.

Long gone are the days where candidates actually take meaningful stances on issues. Even campaign promises can quickly be broken due to "unexpected" budget cuts.

I believe our founding fathers were quite familiar with this idea, and hence decided that we should not govern our selves directly, since we clearly do not know what is best for us.

Now whether the people making the decisions in America... that is a whole different nut to crack...

Re:Sounds like America?

[Daimanta]

No, they call it "the firewall to protect the children", I mean you can't be against a wall that protects the children, right?

Re:Sounds like America?

[sumdumass]

I don't think too many Americans actually believe that the press is free and unbiased or without an agenda. Most people seem to think they are biased and wroking against them. Ask a conservative and he will say it is liberally biased but when asking a liberal, they will claim the same publications are conservative shills.

It is more likely that there are a lot of people that you are meeting in the US over the Internet or whatever, that simply don't have all the concerns that you do. They use the Internet as a means to fuck off where you seem to think it is a tool or something. This means that you are meeting the slackers which I'm sure exist in every country, it is just different enough for it to stick out in your mind. I know brits that don't even know why WW1 was fought for. The same people who openly accept Cameras on every corner watching your ever move in public. The same people who don't care that their right to keep and bear arms which is probably the best way to control their politicians has been taken for the most part. They don't care that essentially only criminals have guns now and companies are running to the publics defense with bullet proof hoody style sweat shirts.

And don't think this is limited to the American's or British. In AU they are classifying a laser as a weapon to ban it from the majority of people's possession because a minority of people have misused it. I was in a conversation the other day where an Australian citizen told me that if was perfectly fine for the government to decide who needs and doesn't need things.

No, it doesn't stop there, I have more examples but I have showed my point quite well about the so called indoctrination of a countries citizens. Your probably an American, most likely from the north east, Mass area, and think your shift doesn't stink and everyone else's does except that you have some romantic affliction to foreigners and countries other then your own. I guess I should just offer the advice that you need to get out more and get involved with a circle of friends that aren't stupid if this really is a problem your seeing. You can trust me, it isn't something isolated within the US and it isn't something that is wide spread like you think it is.

Re:Sounds like America?

[jimicus]

Ah, but what you fail to realize is that even if Americans are able to get outside info, a lot of them have no desire to DO so, hence they are effectively indoctrinated regardless of having access to this information. They either don't care, or wouldn't believe it in the first place.

By being able to obtain the will of the people without having to close-off outside info, you've achieved much more than just simple censorship. It's much worse. It's willful ignorance, and THAT'S the scariest of all. Trotsky, I believe, is credited with saying that any society is only three meals away from revolution.

I think the converse is also true - provided a society as a whole is happy that it has the next three meals coming, it will continue in its own status quo and is safe from revolution. It follows that most people will not seek out challenge the status quo.

I'll tell you which societies will change first - regardless of how indoctrinated they are. It'll be in those areas where peoples' wages barely cover buying food already. The worldwide increase in food costs will hit them first, and hardest. I wouldn't be too surprised to see another round of communist governments get in, subsidising staples like rice but letting everything else in the country go to hell.

Interestingly, the list of countries affected will very likely include at least a few places where it's possible to get decent Internet access but wages are very low - just the kind of place that things get outsourced to. Hmmm.

Re:Sounds like America?

[sydneyfong]

I have more examples but I have showed my point quite well about the so called indoctrination of a countries citizens I don't see it. Hate to dive into these muddy areas but tell me how exactly has the right to bear arms actually had a noticeable effect on your politicians. Not in theory (i.e. if the government turns against us we can organize an armed revolution!), but in practice. Besides, when the theory of right to bear arms was devised, tanks were not yet invented, so having a gun means equipment-wise you're not too behind an average soldier. But these days, Fighter jets, tanks, missile bombs, etc... do you seriously think a bunch of people with amateur guns could fight with an army with tanks etc? I'm not saying the right to bear arms was a flawed idea from the very beginning, but these days I think it has become pretty obsolete.

My humble opinion is that you fail to see the indoctrination of your countries ideals, and then claim that others are indoctrinated because they don't believe in the exact same things as you do. To be fair, this is the case of many many other countries' and their peoples, but your example is really not the best one, and if any, it just corroborates the GP's proposition.

Re:Sounds like America?

[RiotingPacifist]

I'll tell you which societies will change first - regardless of how indoctrinated they are. It'll be in those areas where peoples' wages barely cover buying food already. The worldwide increase in food costs will hit them first, and hardest. I wouldn't be too surprised to see another round of communist governments get in, subsidising staples like rice but letting everything else in the country go to hell. You say that like communism makes your country crumble, some of the rebuilding in Russia was fenominal, I mean they got damaged the most during both world wars, but managed to rebuild fairly quickly. After being in war on your own soil to be a super power competing with america that was barely effected is fairly impressive, in fact many historians believe that America stayed out of the war as long as they could so that Germany weaken Russia enough that it was no longer a threat.

No the reason the USSR fell is the same reason that Zimbabwe is going to hell, its all about control and corruption, not really to do with economics. On the other hand you have countries like Venezuela that are bordering on communism, but decentralising power and encouraging public broadcasting, it will be interesting to see how it turns out (As the factor owners have the power to take away 3 meals if the government annoys them too much)?

Re:Sounds like America?

[RiotingPacifist]

The same people who don't care that their right to keep and bear arms which is probably the best way to control their politicians has been taken for the most part. Say what?
hmm arms vs amry, whos going to win?
The idea that the right to bear arms defends you freedom is fairly flawed, i dont have time to go into all the details but think about this.
If the majority of people voted in the goverment, then they are going to have more guns that you anyway.
If guns could be used to protect your freedom, then how come they wernt used when alcohol & drugs was made illegal?
If the government makes what you do illegal, doesn't that make your weapon illegal and therefore you loose your right to bear arms?
Did the right to bear arms help the students that got shot and killed by the government during anti-Vietnam protests?

The idea that the right to bear arms protects your freedom is an idea that rednecks who dislike government choices cling to, for example 1st klan disbanding at the same time the NRA formed is no coincidence.

Re:Sounds like America?

[vbraga]

On the other hand you have countries like Venezuela that are bordering on communism, but decentralising power and encouraging public broadcasting, it will be interesting to see how it turns out (As the factor owners have the power to take away 3 meals if the government annoys them too much)? Seriously? Where did you find Venezuela was "decentralising power and encouraging public broadcasting"?

Do you know what "Soviet" means, don't you? That's common on most forms of collectivism. Power officially is held on people "committees" or something like that. And public broadcasting in Venezuela means closing down TV stations that dislike current government.

Venezuela is just a Good Old South American Dictatorship and nothing more.

Re:Sounds like America?

[RiotingPacifist]

Clossing down TV stations? oh you mean not renewing the license of a TV station that pretended you lost the election and tried to start a coup, but failed due to public opinion? Oh right i guess your from the only country that supported the coup.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Venezuelan_television_channels
If your trying to control TV, then why the hell would you help fund and start up 30+ tv channels, over which you have no control (the only goveremnt controlled TV channel being around since the 60s)

You mean like giving cooperatives 51% ownership of factories and refusing to take control? (this is after the owner left damaging anything he could on the way out).

Re:Sounds like America?

[vbraga]

Lies, lies and more lies.

Better laugh off and relax.

And who control the "cooperatives"? Do you really think PEOPLE do it? As people would control every soviet in CCCP. Yes, just like that. Don't be a fool. That every single south american banana republic propaganda over the centuries and you're going to see the same. I'm South American myself (Brazilian). And I'm sick and tired of it.

I loved your Wikipedia reference.

"% of Venezuelan households reached: N/A" for every single TV channel.

There's no free broadcaster in Venezuela. Smallish local channel or not active channels doesn't count. There's was a single private broadcaster and it was shutdown by the government, because it was non supportive of current government.

Grow up. Get real references. And go see a slum near Caracas. And you're going to find people really like Chaves. Because he gave them food. And you're going to see that they'll need it forever. Because that's give power forever to the government. "Populismo" has been around for a long, long time and it's not a new form of socialism.

That's how these kind of thing works. Poor people get some "Pai dos Pobres" (Poor People Father, or something like that) that gave them food and are going to need him forever. No sustaintable economic growth, no real educational (in free thiking) policies and so on.

He's just a bastard and nothing more. Like many before him. Like many will be long after he is forgotten and gone.

Funny, reviewing my post it looks like I'm a conservative blasting off a collectivism-centered government. And more funny I am not. But there's no salvation on things like Chaves. Populismo has been around a long long time and it's nothing new. Just the same old crap.

Re:Sounds like America?

[RiotingPacifist]

There's no free broadcaster in Venezuela. Smallish local channel or not active channels doesn't count. There's was a single private broadcaster and it was shutdown by the government, because it was non supportive of current government. It license wasn't renewed, but its not like government went in a raided them. And when a TV station pretends you resign I think it is fair for you to not renew their license

"% of Venezuelan households reached: N/A" for every single TV channel. A bad wikipedia article doesn't stop the channels existing, having transmitting equipment and the ability to say whatever they want, even if it is just to the local areas its still something.

No sustainable economic growth, they have a GDP growth of 8% thats larger than the uk or us, however they have higher inflation and as IANAE im not sure if GDP growth accounts for this (it should do tho), weather its sustainable remains to be seen tho.

Poor people get some "Pai dos Pobres" (Poor People Father, or something like that) that gave them food and are going to need him forever. Your probably right, but that doesnt stop it being a valid policy, if the goverment is feeding people, then atleast theyre getting feed, it may not be the best way to do it. The roll of the goverment is to benifit people and these people are still benifiting(even if it is just short term). Im not saying that the policy is right, just that its a policy. Also given that unemployment in Venezuela is about 6% surely not all his support can come from these people.

"Populismo" is very different to dictatorship, he is still voted in by the public, for his policies, disagreeing with his policies is one thing, but claiming hes a dictator is a bit far fetched!

Re:Sounds like America?

[phpmysqldev]

Successful society will continue to grow more complacent and weak. And many ancient scholars and philosophers have been of the theory that this is what happened to the Roman and Greek Empires (can't remember any names, been a while since world lit and philosophy). As the empires expanded and the standard of living increased, and the generations went by, people forgot what it was like to constantly have to defend your country and liberty. This complacency is what allows other powers that are not as well off to conquer those that are.
Just like in sports, it comes down to who wants it more.

Re:Sounds like America?

[sumdumass]

Well, just sit back and look at the state of politics since areas like DC basically banned guns. Some of the most offensive places in America with the most offensive laws and the most offensice legislation, had a gun ban first.

But your right, it isn't a universal Guns = good politicians. It has more to do with how in touch the politician is and how likely they think an armed revolt might be. Politicians know there is a right and wrong, they can separate it just fine. The gun is the figurative farthest point you can push a man, but fear of retaliation is what basically stops the politicians from doing something bad or getting caught.

That doesn't mean my example is meaningless. I talked about several other things that I find just as outragous. Cameras watching your every move, making sure you are charged for every last bit of taxes by reporting the roads your car is on or by mailing you a ticket for speeding when some closed software detects your license number in a cambera faster then it should be because of the distance between cameras. There is quite a but to be concerned with there.

Re:Sounds like America?

[sumdumass]

Lol.. Yawn.. Ok lets turn your simply world into a more complexed one.

hmm arms vs amry, whos going to win?

Hmmm.. And exactly who is giving the US armies a lot of trouble in Iraq? what are they using again? Generally, there are laws that limit the government's ability to use the military on it's own people. And you seem to be making the fundamentally flawed mistake of assuming that the Military of it's own country wouldn't sympathize with the citizens and refuse to fire on them if not outright support them.

he idea that the right to bear arms defends you freedom is fairly flawed, i dont have time to go into all the details but think about this.

Well, lets think about this. Why hasn't the US been invaded? It isn't like we don't have natural resources, it isn't like we haven't pissed other countries off. So why? because with the right to keep and bear arms, every household is a potential fighter that could potentially repel the invasion or damage the efforts to a point that a reserved conflict could take them out.

If the majority of people voted in the goverment, then they are going to have more guns that you anyway.

It isn't about the government doing what the majority of the people want. It is about the government turning on the country and the majority of the people. Think about that.

If guns could be used to protect your freedom, then how come they wernt used when alcohol & drugs was made illegal?

Well, your got part of a point. When drugs where made illegal, the people it effected didn't care and generally are the same people who said gt rid of the guns. It is like saying why didn't the crack addict stay off crack long enough to show up for court to defend themselves. As for the Alcohol, history shows me that they where used. And guns were used effectively enough that the prohibition on alcohol was appealed soon after. Sure, they didn't form a line and march on Washington shooting up the capitol all along the way. But they where used to protect the stills, to protect the clubs selling the illegal alcohol, and they kept that freedom to drink open to the point that prohibition didn't have a negligible effect.

If the government makes what you do illegal, doesn't that make your weapon illegal and therefore you loose your right to bear arms?

Only if your convicted of a felony and certain misdemeanors. But there is the rub, they disarm the people and don't have to worry about an armed population.

Did the right to bear arms help the students that got shot and killed by the government during anti-Vietnam protests?

If those students would have taken advantage of their rights, it very well could of. But what your saying is similar to does your right to free speech help you when you chose to keep your mouth shut and the government does something that harms you. You have to use your rights in order for them to have an effect.

The idea that the right to bear arms protects your freedom is an idea that rednecks who dislike government choices cling to, for example 1st klan disbanding at the same time the NRA formed is no coincidence.

Yea, us Bitter rednecks. I bet your voting for Obama aren't you. Look at the freedoms they are attempting to take away from us, and then look at the countries without gun rights and you will find that more and more, the massive outrage in the US have been implemented for years over there. Why don't you get a grip on life.

Re:Sounds like America?

[t0rkm3]

On 2 August 1946, some Americans, brutalized by their county government, used armed force to overturn it. These Americans wanted honest, open elections. For years they had asked for state or Federal election monitors to prevent vote fraud -- forged ballots, secret ballot counts, and intimidation by armed sheriff's deputies -- by the local political boss. They got no help.

http://www.constitution.org/mil/tn/batathen.htm

You see, the local gov't should be afraid of it's citizens and the Feds should be afraid of the states. That is the only thing I regret about the Civil War, the Fed asserted itself as a controlling body rather than a forum of regulation.

It has only gotten worse, to the point that the 10th Amendment is nullified by pandering SCOTUS.

I've said it before. Like every other Amendment, the 10th is vitally important even if it doesn't support your goals like making pot illegal, universal health care, or making abortion legal/illegal.

Each of those issues are clearly outside of the domain of the Fed, but we've had enough justices that assert power that should not be within the gov't to establish their puissance and preeminence in the DC scene.

Re:Sounds like America?

[RiotingPacifist]

Hmmm.. And exactly who is giving the US armies a lot of trouble in Iraq? what are they using again? I dunno if youve noticed but theres very little conventional fighting in iraq, and very little of that is using pistols, most attacks are done using morters IEDs & suicide bombers, none of which are protected by your right to bear arms.

When drugs where made illegal, the people it effected didn't care and generally are the same people who said get rid of the guns. Yeah because ive never heard of a dealer with a gun! No the reason they didnt use their guns to protect their rights is because the police had and always will have more guns & bigger guns.

As for the Alcohol, history shows me that they where used. And guns were used effectively enough that the prohibition on alcohol was appealed soon after prohibition was appealed due to public opinion being against the ban, given that your right to bear arms is revoked as soon as you use them to do something illegal, such as protecting illegal sale of alcohol. All your really saying is guns let you commit crimes, when you disagree with the law! but as drug runners prove, that happens both with and without gun control!

Well, lets think about this. Why hasn't the US been invaded Why hasn't Spain been invaded? why hasn't England been invaded? why hasn't Switzerland been invaded? why hasn't Portugal been invaded?, why was Kuwait invaded? why was the gaza strip invaded? oh right the fact is you can list a load of countries it doesn't mean anything. America hasn't been invaded because it has an army that would make it impossible, nothing to do with gun laws.

If those students would have taken advantage of their rights, it very well could of. But what your saying is similar to does your right to free speech help you when you chose to keep your mouth shut and the government does something that harms you. You have to use your rights in order for them to have an effect. Right so your saying that when the army opend fire, the students should have shot back, hmm trained army vs bunch of students, no matter how badly trained the US army is that is only going to go one way.

Yea, us Bitter rednecks. im not saying the NRA is still a represntation of the KKK, but if you want to change politics, why not do it through the political system or public opinion. a bunch of gun totting rednecks isnt & shouldnt be able to change anything, If you belive in democracy enough to try and export it why not give it a shot at home.

Re:Sounds like America?

[RiotingPacifist]

Interesting, but that's still over 60 years ago, the world is a different place now. While the state of US voting may not be perfect, id hope it has improved beyond the point where people will be forced to use guns in florida08.

While it does make a good case doesnt;
"Short of firearms and ammunition, the GIs scoured the county to find them. By borrowing keys to the National Guard and State Guard Armories, they got three M-1 rifles, five .45 semi-automatic pistols, and 24 British Enfield rifles. The armories were nearly empty after the war's end."
mean that most of the weapons they were using were being used illegally anyway, and it was many the fact that they were GIs that helped not their right to bear arms.

I find it ironic sometimes when america seams such a patriotic country, that by its own rules its more akin to the EU, where the states are loosly bound.

Re:Sounds like America?

[Anonymous Coward]

Give it a few more years. The United States is headed in that direction full steam ahead. It'll be even better when McBush, er McCain gets elected.

Re:Sounds like America?

[mi]

Conceptually, the strategy of having a vocal "mainstream media" that labels anyone outside [...]

Do you seriously believe, there is such a strategy in someone's drawer somewhere? Labeled with "execute on put date here"?..

In the USSR, everyone knew that the news was all government propaganda.

Having grown up in the USSR, I can state, that no, most unfortunately, not everyone knew that...

In the USA today, most people believe in the "free press".

Of course it is free — no quotes. The craziest — and often mutually contradictory — things are freely published with impunity. Ted Rall and Ann Coulter are equally accessible from Yahoo's "Op Ed" (in addition to having their own web-sites). Arabic-language American newspaper(s) were openly mocking the hapless Americans burned in Falluja right after the event — all perfectly legal.

I wonder, what your definition of free press is, if America's press does not qualify... Would it be "freer", if somebody special were to decide, what the unwashed masses must read? Hopefully not — the only alternative is for these masses to decide for themselves — and that's what you see happening...

Our only limits are self-imposed — blasting the government is perfectly Ok, but a picturing a noose or mocking somebody's prophet is not. Legal (mostly), but impolite...

Re:Sounds like America?

[mi]

Ah, but what you fail to realize is that even if Americans are able to get outside info, a lot of them have no desire to DO so [...] It's willful ignorance, and THAT'S the scariest of all.

So, you have a problem with the people's free will? They choose not to get outside info, and you hate it?.. What's the alternative? Some elite institution forcing, what it sees "fit to print" (cough-cough), onto us? Since, of course, a human being can not possibly digest everything, that happens around the globe, that elite institution has to apply its own filtering, right?

I'm sorry, but I find this far scarier, than what you are describing...

you've achieved much more than just simple censorship

Excuse me... I have achieved? Do you believe, somebody is doing this on purpose? No, it is, very simply, a consequence of freedom of press and other freedoms. Printers are free to publish, what they please — they just aren't guaranteed to be paid for it. So, to be paid, they choose to publish, what people want to read about. That's all — if you meddling with this, you will impede freedoms...

Shouldn't that be called ...

[DrJimbo]

... an iCurtain?

US and Europe not far behind

[soren100]

The US and the European Union seem to be working hard to keep up.

The EU just passed a resolution making it illegal to publish "terrorist propaganda", even though the actual definitions are quite vague. That vagueness is incredibly broad:

EU officials said the decision to punish propaganda, recruitment and training for terrorism through the internet filled an important gap in European legislation. America hasn't outlawed "terrorist propaganda" websites yet, but they are working hard to create the case that they need to -- they recently passed the "Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007" , in which our government finds that:

" The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens.

    While the United States must continue its vigilant efforts to combat international terrorism, it must also strengthen efforts to combat the threat posed by homegrown terrorists based and operating within the United States." The US government has been so busy pumping the notion that the Internet is recruiting terrorists at home that they have even claimed that terrorists hang out in the online game Second Life where they engage in information warfare .

Re:US and Europe not far behind

[pembo13]

I don't think the US (not sure about Europe) even need such. Those who are interested in information and gather and disseminate it are often quickly labeled as conspiracy theorists. Most others simply don't care. (large generalizations here of course)

Re:US and Europe not far behind

[dbcad7]

One groups news is another's propaganda and vice versa.

Re:US and Europe not far behind

[Burz]

One groups news is another's propaganda and vice versa. Indeed. It all depends on where the group's suspicions lie.

As things are today in the US, the suspicions of the upper class are acted on as 'just cause' by default (usually against the poor), whereas the suspicions of the poor and middle class are energetically denounced as 'conspiracy theories' since they are known to originate from confirmed conspiracy theorists (just look at them-- outsiders). Its a signal that those suspicions are NOT to be investigated, irregardless of whether significant suspicious activity was shown to exist.

Likewise, some the the wackiest conspiracy theorists that exist today control Wall St. and the US government. Those theories, often borne of anti-plebe paranoia and xenophobia, are the vehicle for driving this place to a police state.

Re:US and Europe not far behind

[GiMP]

There have been documents on Wikileaks indicating that Enemy Combatants have been indicated and incarcerated entirely on hearsay and possession of propaganda. This is particularly frightening since even US Citizens can be given this label, and the fact that there has been a suspension of habeas corpus.

Of course, Bush won't explain it this way, he prefers New Speak.

Re:US and Europe not far behind

[dbcad7]

If we take a look at some countries news, about the US for example.. They could be reporting legitimate and accurate events of the news.. but being unfavorable to the politics of the US, then it would be considered by the hard liners to be propaganda..

On the reverse side.. inaccurate news reported "as facts", that support local causes.. is in essence propaganda that is reported and received by the people as news.

Lack of trust in news reporting, has been infamous in Russia.. however, the US is catching up to them gradually. I fear that the only thing that will tackle the problem would be to create some ethics laws.. The industry used to police themselves fairly well.. but I think that's all out the window. These conglomerates are politically biased.. CNN (who I used to like) for example, was atrocious in how it handled John Edwards in the debates.. they cared not for facts, but "they" decided who were the top two candidates regardless of little things like election results.

or...

[Anonymous Coward]

In soviet russia curtain irons YOU!...

And Slashdot can cut their bandwidth 20%

[LostMyBeaver]

Was this article in fact a cost cutting measure?

Really?

[Alex Belits]

Given the Putin government's history with the media, 'extremist material' may be very broadly interpreted as any content unfriendly to the interests of the Russian government." And given the "Western" (read: American) media history with Putin government it may mean Fox News, that should've been blocked in US long ago if Americans valued their sanity.

Russian Hackers

[Anonymous Coward]

With Russia housing some of the world's best hackers, I wonder what their plan is?

Nothing new

[iGraphiX]

Ra-ra-rasputin... Oh, those Russians! I have a friend in Leningrad, he told me that his website was brought down because he had a link to a blog that was offering DIY information on how to build a gun. Isn't it that funny since the most developed weapon trading is made in East and South of Russia. Only God knows what's happening in the far East. But his humble site has been taken offline for a simple link. Meanwhile, politicians do their business with trading guns and kill "unwanted" reporters, which is not dangerous for the Government and their democracy, but a link is definitely dangerous.

Hyperbole or just plain ignorance?

[Shivetya]

here is substantial indoctrination i.e. any mention of helping others gets you labelled a 'socialist' or a 'commie'.

What is it with people like you? The problem isn't helping others, Americans donate more per capita than most other peoples - and conservatives even more so than "liberals" which I am assuming you are referring to as being targeted for the "socialist/commie" label.

If your willing to help people that is fine, it is what makes America great. Many of us pour money into charities daily, charities of our choice.

YOU ARE NOT GIVING IF IT IS SOMEONE ELSE'S MONEY

Clear? I am quite happy you want to give and that others do to. Just do it with your own money. you have NO RIGHT to my property and using the government to force me to give up my property so you can feel good about yourself is wholly against what this country was founded upon. Amazing how some of the very same people here will come crying over the Patriot act then turn around and lambaste people for wanting to maintain their property rights.

You are a socialist if your plan for making your fellow man better off means taking from others to do so, especially if you buy into this idea of taking more from others simply because they earn more. Your also a selfish bastard too

I believe it when I see it

[ezh]

Slashdot is turning into big political troll lately: Chinese are bad, Russians are bad, Europeans are bad... IMHO, adding politics to /. was a BAD idea in the first place. /me removes politics from Preferences (first edit of those evah).

Re:I believe it when I see it

[sydneyfong]

Well Microsoft has been proven bad, SCO is bankrupt, Vista is released and sucks, BSD is already dead, 2007 was the year of Linux on the desktop, and in Soviet Union, you belong to a Beowulf cluster of bases and nobody cares.

Nerd news is getting slow these days.

Wrong target !

[Anonymous Coward]

Russian government would better try to fight the spam coming from their country, instead of trying to shut up journalism and free speech.

Dionysius, God of Submissions

[jollyreaper]

Dionysius is a web development firm. They're spamming Slashdot with submissions to get their name out. This sort of behavior is being rewarded?

Re:Dionysius, God of Submissions

[Random Destruction]

As long as their submissions are as good as others' submissions, I don't see how their motive matters.

What's in a name?

[spikedvodka]

I find it slightly interesting that we have the "Great Firewall of China" and a "Iron Curtain Of Russia"

why not call 'em like we see 'em? This is censorship, pure and simple. by putting a "pretty" name on it, we take away some of the effect.

Obligatory

[OutSourcingIsTreason]

Mr. Putin, tear down this firewall!

Sorry, Gotta Hurry Off Now!

[beadfulthings]

I have to go work on putting some subversive materials on the server. Maybe then their bots, crawlers, and spammers would leave me the hell alone. It would actually be a merciful relief to be free of them for a while. I probably would have been concerned about that sort of oppression a few years back, but at this point I'd have trouble summoning up enough energy to care.

Foolish Russians

[Jawn98685]

You don't have to erect an electronic "Iron Curtain". All you need is a little "traffic shaping" to effectively prevent users from accessing "unfriendly content".

in your mind

[circletimessquare]

does there happen to be any difference between

1. some cromagnon neocons calling you names
2. some cromagnon neocons closing down any media that differs from the party line?

gee, i dunno, maybe a slight difference there?

or rather

[circletimessquare]

go to some of those places with low prison populations, rampant crime and corruption, and ask some residents there what they think about the discrepancy. i don't think you fill find patriotic pride in their response. i think you will find that people living in places with low prison populations and huge corruption would love to see some more american style prison population levels

Re:or rather

[0a100b]

Wouldn't you rather have an Icelandic prison population level in the US? The crime rate in Iceland is fairly low and they have 40 prisoners per 100,000 inhabitants, opposed to 751 prisoners per 100,000 inhabitants in the US?

Re:or rather

[rtechie]

i think you will find that people living in places with low prison populations and huge corruption would love to see some more american style prison population levels So you're saying people in these places want their corrupt officials to imprison them? Really?

If you look at American prisons you'll find they're not filled with corrupt officials. It's mostly petty street criminals that are given excessively long sentences due to "3 strikes", mandatory minimums, and elimination of parole.

uh, what?

[circletimessquare]

is it controlled by the government or is it not?

that's some creative bullshit you got there that posits media wholly controlled by the government is somehow less harmful than one that clearly isn't

a free press is a free press. you believe in some sort of vast government manipulation? are you paranoid schizophrenic?

Re:uh, what?

[Murrquan]

See how well they're doing their job?

Why take over the media when you can insinuate yourself into it? That way you have the illusion of objectivity.

Re:

[clint999]

Ah, but what you fail to realize is that even if Americans are able to get outside info, a lot of them have no desire to DO so, hence they are effectively indoctrinated regardless of having access to this information. They either don't care, or wouldn't believe it in the first place.By being able to obtain the will of the people without having to close-off outside info, you've achieved much more than just simple censorship. It's much worse. It's willful ignorance, and THAT'S the scariest of all.

In Soviet Russia

[Anonymous Coward]

Internet Uses You!

Something like it is inevitable for all countries

[analog_line]

The Internet as it stands causes governments, regardless of party, left/right leaning, democratic, heriditary, authoritarian, fascist, or progressive, way more problems than it solves.

1. It makes many laws nearly impossible to enforce on people in your country (the various laws in France banning Holocaust denial, globalised P2P in less RIAA/MPAA friendly countries).

2. It makes it easier for corporations and other employers to provide services and product in your country while employing few if any of your citizens.

3. It creates a tax-gathering nightmare for revenue officials.

4. It provides free and open access for foreigners who are inclined to break your laws, and exploit and defraud your citizens. Commercially operated botnets and the total hijacking of e-mail for spam, protected with a wink and a nod by corrupt officials and organized crime sponsors are just the start.

5. Foreign militaries, paramilitaries, intelligence agencies, and terrorist groups have a direct, hard to trace, and nearly impossible to stop communications line into your country, on top of a map to attack your critical network infrastructure (and physical infrastructure too, if you're like the US and are stupid enough to connect power plant control systems directly to the Internet).

6. Critical Internet infrastructure, and new development is often at the whim of an unfriendly or hostile government. (though this government is generally the US in just about every case, with its control of ICANN)

Again, this is governments. The people don't like a lot of the negatives too, and that means that in general they are going to be pleased if action to cut off "bad actors" from flooding their inboxes with spam, or stopping the US government from controlling the DNS system, or the Chinese military from attacking their country, or Russian hackers taking their entire country offline if they do something that Russia doesn't particularly like. The fact that it gives governments nothing but nightmares is eventually going to create a lot of little internets, with countrycountry access governed by treaty. The Wile West was tamed a long time ago, and the Internet will be as well, just like every other frontier. You've just got to create a new one.

Back in the USSR...yeah I'm back wooo wooo wooo

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad they (Russian Govt) cant firewall or filter out all their outbound malware garbage in addition to implementing their old soviet style censorship dreams, keeping the people from truth which could lead to their freedom from the tyrants and bring on true propserity.

      Russia, is a country run by a mafia, there is no 2 ways about it. The Russian people, hard working and industrious, intelligent and cultured, have suffered far too long under the evil that is the oligarchy.

    What russia needs is information, guns and some fresh revolutionary ideas

From John Birch

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like the same path the US is headed in. More Gov. control of what we do, say, how we can spend our money and savings and no Net neutrality............ Viva La Revolution! Now they come looking for me. Oops...

of course. duh

[circletimessquare]

but your question is really asking "wouldn't you like to live in iceland?"

i'm glad icelanders have such low prison and crime rates. good for iceland. lets all clap for iceland

exactly what do you think your point is?

the idea i guess is that you want to turn the united states into iceland

ok. well lets freeze the country. then make it dark half the year. then decimate the population to a low density. then make it a monoculture of stoic scandinavians. then isolate it in the middle of an ocean far from any neighbors

how about you do this instead: go to dhaka, the capital of bangladesh. where corruption is through the roof. and the prison population is a lot lower then the us. now ask your average bangladeshi if:
1. they are filled with patriotism at how empty their jails are compared to the usa
2. or, if they would like to see their jails swell with some of the criminals they have to deal with everyday

Re:of course. duh

[0a100b]

When you read the post you originally replied to and your post I replied to, it seemed to me that you were saying that there are two options: a high prison population with low crime and corruption rates, or a low prison population with high crime and corruption rates.
I tried to point out that there is at least one more option: low prison population with low crime and corruption rates. This is the case in Iceland. I think it's other Scandinavian countries.

But if you just meant to say that, in this area, there are worse countries than the US so the US is not that bad, be my guest. It is just that I rather look at other countries to see what can be improved in my country than being satisfied with not living in the worst country.

omg!

[circletimessquare]

they have government talking heads in teh media!

its just like teh fascism!

please. try reason and logic next time. hysterical paranoia is not a valid replacement

oh, btw, my comment under that story, you should familiarize yourself with the notion of what free speech and free media really means:

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=531142&cid=23164506

Re:omg!

[Murrquan]

*reads* So the free media is a lie, the government does control what they say, but I was wrong when I said the exact same thing because I didn't suggest that we listen to them? How does that make sense? And wasn't it the Nazi minister of propaganda who said that if you repeat a lie enough times, people will start to believe it?

there are 3 choices actually

[circletimessquare]

3 choices concerning the interpretation of the fact that the usa has a very high prison population:

1. american culture breeds lots of criminals
2. american justice is puritanical and extreme
3. the usa does a better job of catching criminals than other countries do

that is, all i take from the high us prison population is that other countries have more criminals per capita roaming the streets. criminality is a constant across all countries. human nature is a constant. i wouldn't expect one country or another to have a lot more criminals than the next. but perhaps some do awful jobs catching crooks, and some do good jobs

i mean you can compare the usa to spitsbergen too if you like. i'm sure the prison there is tiny and only populated by the town drunk sleeping it off. but it doesn't seem like an instructive comparison to me. i mean, the prison populations are low in haiti too. so haiti is like lceland? what? the conclusions one can draw form prison populations don't tell you mcuh without other variables considered

scandinavian countries and finland are dark and cold. the people there are usually morbid or drunk. hey, that's not a smear, don't take my word for it, ask any swede or dane or finn, they'll tell you the same. so the criminals there are passed out or its too cold to go outside

so i don't think scandinavia has much to teach the rest of the world about how to run a country, just something to teach the world about what it is like living on permafrost

dude

[circletimessquare]

a free press, where anything can be printed, even though it sometimes includes the government line

is not the same as

a press that can't print anything without government approval

because the government gets its viewpoint out there with all the viewpoints, thats the same as a press that is allowed ONLY to print the government viewpoint?

you really believe that?

Re:dude

[Murrquan]

I think there's a lot more money behind the government's and corporations' point of view.

Come on!

[Degro]

This kind of story always leaves me shocked at the large number of idiots on slashdot. The bulk of posts are group A vs group B type garbage. Censorship sucks no matter what and we need to figure out ways to prevent it, that's all there is to this. Nationalism is a sign of stupidity. None of us got to weigh the options and pick the country we were born in.

How bout the....

[Anonymous Coward]

How about they do the world a favor and block the RBN.

Re:there are 3 choices actually

[rtechie]

1. american culture breeds lots of criminals Relative to Northern Europe, yes.

2. american justice is puritanical and extreme Again, relative to Northern Europe, yes.

3. the usa does a better job of catching criminals than other countries do American criminal justice certainly likes to make this claim, but this is something notoriously difficult to measure. Conviction rates really only tell you how biased the system is towards the prosecution/defense. Matching actual crimes to convictions is extremely difficult for outside researchers due to the unwillingness of police agencies to release accurate records and the lack of independent records.

The reality is that US law enforcement is very good at catching certain TYPES of criminals, like petty drug offenders (BTW, most people in jail for gun offenses are really there for drug offenses). Because of "conspiracy" laws it's now incredibly easy to pin drug crimes on people, so we have very high conviction rates for this particular crime. We have very low conviction rates for corporate fraud, for example, because those people can actually hire/bribe police, lawyers, judges, politicians, etc.

i wouldn't expect one country or another to have a lot more criminals than the next. This is batshit crazy. Do you really think the cultural environment doesn't contribute to the level of crime? Do you REALLY think their are the same number criminals per capita in, say, Iraq, Congo, or even Russia as there are in the USA?

scandinavian countries and finland are dark and cold. the people there are usually morbid or drunk. hey, that's not a smear, don't take my word for it, ask any swede or dane or finn, they'll tell you the same. so the criminals there are passed out or its too cold to go outside Well, I'm of Danish descent and I find this pretty offensive. Yeah, Danes drink a lot. Americans drink a lot too and it seems the drunker they are the more crimes they want to commit, so this reasoning doesn't follow.

Most American criminals are in jail for drugs. One big difference between Denmark and the USA is that marijuana, cocaine, heroin, etc. are either de-facto legal or the penalties are very low. This alone could account for the low rate of incarceration in Denmark, but there's more to the story. Most people who end up in jail are effectively there because they're poor (this is easily proven). Danish society is much more egalitarian than the USA, so poor people that would turn to street crime in the USA (like drug addicts) have access to public assistance, housing assistance, and drug treatment. Prostitution is also legal in DK. So all of this together means there is little street crime. Relatively tight regulations means less fraud (though higher costs). Law enforcement tends to concentrate on teenagers, domestic violence (pretty uncommon in DK), traffic, and the occasional serious crime (like murder).

right

[circletimessquare]

i guess you get your opinion from all those multimillion dollar anticorporate antigovernment movies

(smacks forehead)

Hundreds of partially connected little internets

[SleepyHappyDoc]

This kind of thing is a real danger to the global network. If we start segmenting content into the zones that are 'safe' or 'approved for such-and-such a country', it adds artificial tiers to the internet. That, to me, defeats the whole point. All this stuff is supposed to help us work together.

Yet another great wall

[rstewart]

And so comes another Great Wall of China.
Is this so surprising from a government that has slipped back into "their old ways" of doing business? This is the real problem that our government doesn't seem to understand when they talk about "democracizing" the world until a people are ready for a real democracy any gain in that direction will ultimately be short lived unless they fight for it themselves. The old soviet union collapsed there was no real revolution for it just as in Iraq it probably will not stand because the people didn't fight for it and defend it.

In this country we're allowing ourselves to slip back into it because we're not fighting for it with our votes. Ultimately it is our votes (or lack thereof) for this issue that is allowing our own censorship in this country in the forms of internet restrictions by ISPs but instead of it being for political filtering it's for corporate filtering. We are becoming the sheep that must follow corporations.

In Soviet Union

[Rockin'Robert]

In Soviet Union law 'hooliganism' is label and crime.
Not to confuse with West 'conspiracy nutjob', Comrades.
Democratic Russian cBay item.
Slightly used tinfoil hats and Internet for sale.
Buy now, Comrades!
Great price = profit.