Slashdot Mirror
Republican Staffer Khanna Axed Over Copyright Memo
Bob9113 writes "Ars Technica reports that Derek Khanna is getting axed over his memo detailing the conflict between laissez-faire-oriented free market ideals and the regulatory monopoly that is copyright. 'The Republican Study Committee, a caucus of Republicans in the House of Representatives, has told staffer Derek Khanna that he will be out of a job when Congress re-convenes in January. The incoming chairman of the RSC, Steve Scalise (R-LA) was approached by several Republican members of Congress who were upset about a memo Khanna wrote advocating reform of copyright law. They asked that Khanna not be retained, and Scalise agreed to their request.'"
Who in the adult world is surprised when a low level employee is canned for upstagin and blindsiding the higher up leadership??
This is not the least bit surprising and shocking. Anybody who does this in an other venue would have gotten the boot, and rightfully so.
He had to know this would cost him his job.
He could not have expected anything else.
Highest bidder wins all! The US political system in a nutshell...
You younger Slashdotters may not believe this, but at one time we had conservatives (and Republicans) with principles.
(Not that the Democrats are all that great.)
They've publicly disowned the brief and now it looks like they're cutting off the hand that wrote it ... but have they actually put forth a logical and rationale rebuttal that explains why Khanna was so wrong that his termination was necessary?
If my employer came to me and said, "Pack it up, you don't have a job tomorrow." I'd be very interested in knowing why and being completely fine with my termination if they were just batshit insane in their reasoning. I'm sure I'm not the only one that suspects this came as an order from an industry lobbyist or at least in the form of "This is very interesting work by Khanna. On an unrelated note *cough* *cough* you might be hard pressed for campaign donations next election cycle."
Oh, and I am absolutely relishing the goodwill and lip service paid to the Republicans in the initial Slashdot comments.
My work here is dung.
except when they don't!
You shouldn't be - after all, this is the same political organization that had a report banned from the LoC, because the facts contained within did not mesh with their party philosophy.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
If you're not echoing the echo chamber's talking points, you're not allowed to talk to other Republicans.
That's it in a nutshell. And so we have Romney condemning 47% of the population because some idiot in the WSJ did the calculations, found 50% of the country weren't paying one type of tax, ignored the fact that most of these people weren't paying it because their employers were too cheap to pay them a decent wage, and called them "Lucky Duckies". And he, and others, refused to hear the counter arguments, and he ended up making a fool of himself.
Indeed, we have the entire Republican party convinced that the way to win an election in a recession is to say "Yeah, we know you're feeling really insecure at the moment, so we're going to take your safety net away. Because anyone receiving UI is a moocher."
We have Rove and others absolutely convinced they were going to win the election, because they refused to read the polls.
There's been a lot of discussion after the 6th about the Republicans and why they lost. Sure, they lost because of their policies (well, duh.) But the question remains: how did the Republicans end up with such an absurd ticket, and how did they drag along 47% (interesting co-incidence) of the country to vote for them anyway?
Answer: because they built an echo chamber. If it didn't fit the interests of those funding the Republicans, it wasn't said. People who said the Republicans might be going in the wrong direction were purged. Fox News, the WSJ, and some blogs and radio stations were pretty much seen by Republicans as the only media to read, and because those outlets insisted that anything that wasn't them was "liberal biased" they didn't see the truth, they didn't see what was going on out there, they totally missed the boat.
This firing suggests they still haven't "gotten it", no matter what was said after November 6th.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
There are at least two important points we can take away from this:
1. The republican party lies about having free market ideals.
2. The current IP regime is NOT an example of free market economics, even though it is widely touted as so.
of why I'm not a Republican....
-- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
He had to know this would cost him his job.
He could not have expected anything else.
He's 24 and probably still believes that United States politics offer an open and free forum where you can put forth ideas no matter what side you're on and the change that follows can be a good thing if the logic behind it is sound. Surely the worst that could happen is that your party would have to explain again logically why your brief was incorrect and unsound?
Boy it sure was hard typing that with a straight face.
My work here is dung.
From the article:
Many things the Republican Party is doing are surprising moves, for a party that is looking for ways to attract...well, anyone. It almost seems like the party forgot that the point of democracy is to represent your own people, not try to tell them that you know better than they do what would be good for them.
For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
and Limbaugh, shirley?
And St. Reagan (pbuh) for bringing in the religious loons.
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
Backup copy. (And because the document was created by a Congressional employee, it's not copyrightable. So there.)
Here's the proposal:
This is a good proposal. Start circulating it around. For only a very small number of copyrighted items is there revenue beyond 12 years, and that's covered.
Politicians are not just corrupt, politicians have been raised, grown up, got their experience in a system where the truth is told, more or less. In the real world, we know evil exist but politicians are shielded from the real world pretty early on. They are in a rare world where meetings and negotiation "work". As you learn the world of politics in high school and university were your adversary are at worst teachers or fellow students and then ONLY those students who are interested in politics. They are surrounded and protected by people who share the same world view, not just left or right wing but the idea and knowledge that money is never an issue, you can always find another job, multiple at the same time, hard work is having a long meeting and there is always a deal to be made with the other side and the other side is never ever really just out to screw you over.
In Holland, when the rail system was privatized, a contract was drawn up that allowed the rail company to do its own customer survey reports and ignore user reviews that scored to low. Choose its own lines to ignore for judging its punctuality, not have to count canceled trains as delayed and a lot more stuff that any sane person would NEVER have allowed in a performance contract. So... were the people who signed it bought off? To stupid to be allowed to live?
Yes... and not exactly. The parties responsible BELIEVE in privatization, all their models, all their advisers say it must work and surely business wouldn't lie to them because they don't lie, they just present facts that exist in their mind and not in the real world. Their was a parliamentary investigation on whether privatization in the last two decades had a positive effect and the answer was NO and the two parties (CDA VVD) STILL said what was needed was MORE privatization.
They can't do anything else because it has become their identity, it is what they are, their faith, their gospel. And any evidence to the contrary isn't going to shake a faith they grew up on. The left isn't much better, the multi cultural society is falling apart and the best the left can manage is "we shouldn't want that"... Groen Links (Green Left) was decimated in Holland when it became clear the party had lost all touch with reality in supporting several right wing measures, forgettin they were supposed to be a LEFT wing party. CDA has been recudeced to a fraction of itself and still doesn't know why. SP scored big in the polls but lost it all during the actual election and still is wondering what happened.
The arstechnica article expresses suprise at this move because it thought the republican party was trying to appeal young voters. WRONG. Oh it wants to attract more voters but it is NOT going to change itself, it can't. It is what it is. To change itself, it would first have to admit it was wrong, ALL if it, ALL of them, ALL they ever believed to be true. WRONG. People don't do that. Especially people who live in an ivory towers removed from all reality. Romney wasn't a particular evil guy, he just really believed his fantasy land, the made up world of Fox News.
And people living in made up worlds are easily manipulated by people good at telling stories. The Lobbyist know how to bend the world of make believe to reflect their wishes. The ordinary voter doesn't. Not only is the average voter barely coherent but everyone one of them has an endless amount of conflicting wishes so any politician who tries to actually listen will quickly realise that if you can't please them all, why bother. In the mean time, the lobbyist gives a clear simple and therefor sensible and achievable story.
Basically, we are screwed. We need more REAL people in politics but the only way to get anywhere in politics is to grow up in it and become part of the system. Any real person will either quit in disgust, be torn apart by the pack for daring to rock the boat (any outcast public figure like Assange) or become part of the system.
You could try an experiment if you got the time. Write down your
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
You are thinking small scale, sir. A software development team throwing shit at each other is a completely different scenario. Imagine, however, that you run the development team and one of your underlings published an article in The Washington Post/New York Times illustrating what a moron you are. Throw away your ideas of "what is fair". Neither business nor the government (or even life for that matter) is fair. He played the asshole, so he got served by an asshole.
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
It will be completely forgotten by the next election.
Dear Derek Khanna,
You have made more friends than enemies. You may have been canned today, but you could easily replace your boss. RUN FOR OFFICE!
Sincerely,
Someone who actually votes.
Posted by timothy on Thursday December 06, @02:15PM
What got posted is an edited version of my submission, and the editing is a distinct improvement. Thanks, Timothy!
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
I think most of us realized long ago that when politicians claim to be "pro-business" they are referring not to some abstract ideal of free markets, but rather to being in favor of the incumbent players getting richer and more powerful. But just in case anyone on Slashdot hadn't figured this out yet, hopefully after this event they will have.
I think he should stand by his memo and run for office.
Copyright reform should be the conservative position since our current state of copyright is so far out of line with the original constitutional text and intent. Conservatives rightly complain when we use foreign law to influence interpretation of the Constitution, yet our copyright has been warped to follow the copyright schemes of most foreign countries, not ours, and that's somehow considered constitutional.
Abandoning their principles, the basic reason the Republicans lost, and will keep losing. All the Democrats have to do is not screw up too badly.
The thing is, this could actually have been a good wedge issue for the Republicans if they had run with it instead of backing off. It tends to be younger people who care the most about copyright reform, and the young are a strong Democratic voting bloc. Advocacy of copyright reform on the Republican side could have forced the Democratic Party to risk either alienating its younger supporters or losing the support of the big-money boys in Hollywood. But apparently the Republicans aren't willing to piss in the cheerios of any rich people, even the ones who don't vote for them anyway.
They really seems to be hellbent on political suicide at this point.
A party that benefits the top, say, quintile, and also favors opportunity rewards for work, has historically done well in America. We all like to think we'll be in that top portin one day.
However, when it gets too narrow, you can't make it work in a democracy. I think there's a real argument to be made for "if taxes are just too high on the wage bracket most small busines owners are in, that really hurts jobs". But the current GOP is not making that argument, and worse they seem willing to sell out that group for the most wealthy handful.
Well, they won't survive as a party that way. America needs a fiscal-conservative party (either one, doesn't matter). The GOP seems intent on not being that either.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
I don't mean this to stick up for the Republican party at all but does anybody really believe that the Democratic party would welcome this report any more than the Republicans? Would a Democrat who wrote this report still have a job afterwards? I doubt it. Both sides are in bed with corporations and especially the media ones.
From the article:
Many things the Republican Party is doing are surprising moves, for a party that is looking for ways to attract...well, anyone. It almost seems like the party forgot that the point of democracy is to represent your own people, not try to tell them that you know better than they do what would be good for them.
Actually, that attitude is very much in line with what large chunks of the hard-right fundamentalist Christian faction believe. They want someone with greater authority to tell them what to believe, what to do and think.
Dan Aris
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
I don't really think this is a contradiction. I think the reality of the party line is more "Corporations are people .. the only people." Less government, less taxes, less regulation, more rights. These apply to real people: corporations, not you or me.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
He released the memorandum on his own, totally undermining other staffers and most likely bypassing any sort of vetting, validation, and/or peer review stages. It's naturally in the RSC's best interests to put forth memos and reports that present a consistent argument and (most importantly) don't express opinions in a way that may offend constituents.
While I hate to see them distance themselves from a sane and rational argument for copyright reform, I can't help but think that any other organization would do the same thing when one of their employees decides to go all "cowboy" and fire off memos and reports without organizational consent.
Dear Mr Kline,
I'm deeply disappointed in my GOP caucus at the dismissal of Derek Khanna for his writing of a paper discussing copyright reform.
(ref http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/12/staffer-axed-by-republican-group-over-retracted-copyright-reform-memo/)
I sincerely hope you weren't "one of the congressmen" Rep Scalise was approached by to remove Mr Khanna.
Copyright reform is a desperately-needed, serious issue. "Shooting the messenger" signals that the GOP is NOT the party interested in fixing the situation. To less charitable eyes, it might even seem that these Representatives are just doing the bidding of their lobbyists from the MPAA and RIAA donors. The *only* silver lining here is that the Democrats are even MORE obviously in the pocket of media producers.
I invite you and your peers to review the Copyright Clause of the US Constitution: (art I, sec 8, clause 8) "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
Note, copyright is to PROMOTE THE PROGRESS OF SCIENCE - not to promote the ongoing rent-seeking by the umpteenth-descendant of an artist. Further, the clause specifically says "LIMITED TIMES" - constantly revising copyrights out to longer and longer durations is complying with neither the letter nor the intent of the US Constitution.
So, I ask MY PARTY representatives in Congress - what's your point here?
I would love to get a serious, considered response to this email, or would cheerfully like a chance to talk to you on the subject.
-Styopa
His committee asked him to write it and then signed off on publication, so he neither blindsided nor upstaged the management. They changed their minds, and then went for plausible deniability.
davecb@spamcop.net
Let me explain something to you. People vote Republican because they are hoping that their taxes won't be raised as much as if they vote Democrat. It is absolutely that simple. I have met people who actually want their taxes to go up, but such people are always Democrats. Republicans are motivated by their wallets.
I'll get modded into oblivion (will I make -3?) for saying this on Democrat dominated slashdot but what seems to motivate Democrats is anger and jealousy. They want to make anyone who makes more money than they do make less money. It's not egalitarianism exactly because they don't under any circumstances want to reduce their own pay down to somewhere around minimum wage (where it would probably be if the government just averaged everyone's salary).
As long as I can remember Democrats have been about class warfare, but in the 80s it seemed to be a more minor issue. There were even some idealists who wanted to take from the rich (and everyone else) and give to the poor. Now class warfare is practically the only issue. A political party that is almost entirely based on hate is kind of scary for obvious reasons. Many Democrats used to support ACLU issues and personal freedoms and even constitutional rights (gasp!). Not anymore. Now it's all about soaking the rich as long as the rich category doesn't include yourself.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
He is one of us - look at his linkedin profile
http://www.linkedin.com/in/derekkhanna
Unless, we stand up for him, no one else will ever dare write about copyright reform in the future.
This needs to be something like fight against SOPA.