NSA Still Funded To Spy On US Phone Records

Americans no better than foreigners by Anonymous Coward · 2013-07-25 01:45 · Score: 5, Insightful

Spy on everyone. Karma is a bitch, folks.

Re:Americans no better than foreigners by PolygamousRanchKid+ · 2013-07-25 02:09 · Score: 4, Funny

It's watchers . . . all the way down.
Sadly, this isn't even funny, but rather the reality.

--
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Re:Americans no better than foreigners by somersault · 2013-07-25 02:37 · Score: 3, Funny

Rather the sad thing is that reality is actually pretty fun when you're not busy with the reality of being sad about the unfunny realities of reality.

--
which is totally what she said
Re:Americans no better than foreigners by interkin3tic · 2013-07-25 05:16 · Score: 4, Interesting

What karma? We didn't vote for the spying. We knew, or rather some of us knew, that Obama wasn't going to change much when it came to national security theater and control, but at no point was that a question that was put to us. We brought it up with the patriot act and others, those efforts were obviously unsuccesful, and looking back, I'm still not sure how that campaign could have succeeded. Seriously. If I had to go back to before 9/11, I STILL wouldn't know how to keep it from happening. Let alone how to turn it back now.

Not to say I'm giving up, and hopefully neither is anyone else, but this seems like saying to someone who lost their house to a tsunami "Karma's a bitch: you should have prevented the tide from coming in."

It's A Start by some+old+guy · 2013-07-25 01:48 · Score: 5, Informative

Not bad for a first try to rein in rogue agency.

We need to keep the pressure on, and support organizations and officials who think the principles of Constitutional government are more important than fear-mongering.

If we don't, the fight is over. The terrorists and our fascist "protectors" have won.

--
Scruting the inscrutable for over 50 years.

Re:It's A Start by Joining+Yet+Again · 2013-07-25 01:55 · Score: 5, Interesting

Rogue? Seems complicit to me.
What I wonder about right now are the NSA employees who - some surely being geeks who read Slashdot - are reading this comment. How do they sleep at night?
Do they speak like so many mid-20th century "soldiers", absolving themselves because they're only following orders? Have they been brainwashed into thinking that there's suuuuuuch a threat from terrorists to the American Way Of Life that what they do is essential? Or do they just enjoy the power trip in a dying empire? At least one such NSA employee will be reading this, and their conscience will twinge, just for a second.
Re:It's A Start by Anonymous Coward · 2013-07-25 02:07 · Score: 3, Interesting

Not bad for a first try to rein in rogue agency.
Just wait until the tech sector starts sending in the lobbyists in droves. Right about now, the implications are starting to hit home in Silicon Valley. All those government contracts in foreign countries are about to go bye-bye, along with a pretty good percentage of private contracts.
Re:It's A Start by drinkypoo · 2013-07-25 02:10 · Score: 5, Interesting

At least one such NSA employee will be reading this, and their conscience will twinge, just for a second.
No, no it won't. Cognitive dissonance will prevent it. They have convinced themselves that they are good people on no basis whatsoever, and in order to protect that belief they will convince themselves that there is no way to achieve their goal but to ride roughshod over the constitution. Then they'll tell themselves that it's OK to violate the constitution as long as you're doing it to protect the constitution. Unfortunately, holding such a clearly contradictory belief is a kind of insanity.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:It's A Start by DeathToBill · 2013-07-25 02:22 · Score: 4, Insightful

Perhaps it did for one - his name was Edward Snowden.

--
Slashdot - News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters, in ISO-8859-1 Has just realised that beta makes this signature redundant
Re:It's A Start by asylumx · 2013-07-25 02:35 · Score: 4, Interesting

Given that Pelosi and Boehner both voted against this bill, I'd say this is a much bigger problem than most of the others we've talked about around slashdot. When those two agree, you know something is severely wrong with the world.
Re:It's A Start by GameboyRMH · 2013-07-25 02:38 · Score: 4, Insightful

People in the "defense" industry typically respond with "I sleep just fine on a giant pile of money" or a slight variation of it, I'd expect the same from NSA stooges.

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Re:It's A Start by Anonymous Coward · 2013-07-25 03:12 · Score: 5, Insightful

I don't think, at least in their mind, there's any moral issue at all.
People in all law enforcement branches have the following two facts constantly being reinforced in their minds:
1. They're trying to catch bad guys.
2. No matter what they do, sometimes the bad guys get away.
Imagine working in such an environment. You're only human, so naturally you begin to think, "If only I had a little more power, I could do so much good with it."
So you make a grab for a little more power, and guess what? It does help to nab a few more bad guys. But it's still not enough. So you start to grab for a little more, then a little more, then a little more. There's nothing wrong with it, because you have the best intentions, right?
That's what's happened. The NSA has simply grabbed for more power, a little at a time, all in the name of trying to catch the bad guys. No one is telling them, "This steps over the line." The only results of their power grab, at least that they can see, is that they're more effective at doing a good thing.
So yes, it is possible that a decent, honest person could have no moral qualms about working at the NSA and recording all the communications of all Americans.
It doesn't mean they're right, of course. There are some lines they shouldn't cross. The problem is that all they can see are the reasons to cross those lines, never the reasons not to.
Re:It's A Start by Anonymous Coward · 2013-07-25 03:22 · Score: 3, Interesting

Close, but not quite.
While Snowden's actions should be commended for bringing this issue front and center, he wasn't an employee who saw what his company was doing and alerted the media (what most people think of with the term "Whistle-blower"). He had suspicions about what the US Government was doing, sought a job that would allow him to verify it, then went public with some proof (i.e. "investigative journalism").
The level of "spying" being performed by governments, and private organisations, around the world isn't new. The base concepts here are centuries old (if not millennia), the only thing relatively new here is the technology used. And even that has been in the works for decades. The fight for individual liberty is not a single bloody battle or war, it is a constant struggle against the forces of tyranny. A free people must always be on guard for when actions are taken that may oppress their freedom. Too many people have been negligent in this regard, but I believe there are signs that this is turning around.
Re:It's A Start by LordLimecat · 2013-07-25 03:30 · Score: 3, Interesting

What makes you think it?
The number of times I have seen someone admit that they were wrong (without pressure / coercion) pales in comparision to the number of times someone has been wrong but has continued defending themselves.
It only takes a casual look around the world, and within one's own character, to realize this is true. Someone calls you out as wrong, the first instinct isnt "AM i wrong?", but "how can I refute him". This is part of human nature, and I havent really found anything to indicate that it isnt universal; though certainly some people are quite good at stuffing that defensive posture into the back of their mind and are more humble.

Not sure why you slipped in that little list, but are you by any chance looking at this problem from quite far to the right? I've noticed a tendency of ideologues (rather than ethical pragmatists) to view everyone as evil hypocrites by nature, and to use that as an excuse for their worldview.
I dont know if I'd say Im far right, because I can recognize that even "leftist" programs will accomplish some good (I just tend to think it not worth the cost), but yes, and its interesting you would say it like that. Im currently in a Poli Sci class, and there was a video on "realism" where the speaker described it as basically what you said-- a cynical worldview that everyone is NOT intrinsically good, but intrinsically self-interested and self-justifying. This idea seems to be foreign to a lot of folks I know that I assume to be more to the left-- certainly a number of students in the class appear to never have even thought of the world in those terms.
Folks on the right appear cold and unsympathetic in public policy because (If I can generalize) they DO tend to view the world cynically, as a cold and hostile place. We dont want publicly funded social welfare programs because we see the potential for abuse as through the roof, and the spending as driven by idealism rather than grounded in the reality of both budget and human nature.
Folks on the left (and this is how it seems to me) seem to want to assume the best; that cooperation is not only possible, but easily obtainable, and that we should not only aim for the stars, but actively work towards some ideal world that we surely can achieve. It appears to be a worldview that hopes and dreams that maybe a utopia that looks like communism could be possible, if only we could get rid of the elements that undermine it.
Im not sure how relevant any of that is, but I hope you find it interesting, and if you want to offer any corrections on how I view the leftist mindset, I would appreciate it; I think the hardest thing about really dialoging "across the aisle" is the huge difficulty in really understanding where someone is coming from at a visceral level.
Re:It's A Start by robthebloke · 2013-07-25 04:22 · Score: 3, Interesting

How do they sleep at night?
Can't speak for those at the NSA, but I grew up next to GCHQ, and knew a few people who worked there. Whenever the topic of GCHQ came up in conversation, it was pretty apparent that no one actually knew what they were doing. They are given small tasks from those higher up, but they have no idea what it's for, or why they're doing it. Someone might be writing speech regonition software, someone else might be processing some telephone numbers into a database, someone else might be writing some GPS software. No one is allowed to talk about their work to anyone else, and so no one gets the big picture as to what's actually happening. Individually the component libraries are innocent enough, but they turn positively orwellian when they are merged into a single tool (which is something the IT serfs will never see)
Re:It's A Start by Em+Adespoton · 2013-07-25 04:34 · Score: 3, Insightful

When you're getting paid well to perform a task, you naturally begin to view that task in a more positive light. This applies from the bottom of the power pyramid (where the pay is direct and official) all the way to the top (where the pay is indirect and unofficial).
Indeed -- and in a technical arena such as this, where you have access to all sorts of information that the "other side" doesn't have, you also can brush a lot off as "they just don't understand -- if they had the information I had, they'd behave the same way." This of course causes problems when the "other side" can't have access to the information for privacy reasons. The disconnect here is much easier to jump for the human mind than logic dictates.
Re:It's A Start by Em+Adespoton · 2013-07-25 04:54 · Score: 4, Insightful

I think many want to look at people in these situations in a very black-and-white way. If they're working for NSA then they must know how the information they are handling is being used. And since "we" consider it a bad thing, it must rest heavily on their conscience.
However, I would imagine more people are like myself than not. We come to work, make our widgets, and go home to our families. We don't spend any time worrying about the work itself as long as everything is functioning the way we are being paid to make it function. Using myself as an example, I get paid well with benefits and retirement packages to manage a small network. What the company does is irrelevant. I make my widgets and go home to my family. I'll leave the conscience decision-making for the armchair quarterbacks.
It's not privilege. It's not super pay scales. It's not patriotism. It's a job.
Indeed... if we expand the "How can they sleep at night" a bit, think about the following:
How can we sleep at night knowing that our "convenience" possessions are produced with the blood of impoverished nations?
How can we sleep at night knowing that our food choices are causing animal suffering, massive deforestation and health problems for the poor?
How can we sleep at night after playing the stock market and making a profit at the expense of someone who now has to default on their mortgage?
How can we sleep at night knowing that our clothing is made with forced child labor?
How can we sleep at night knowing that by wasting a large portion of the natural resources we have access to, we're really gumming things up for future generations?
How can we sleep at night when there are people in our area with no social security, no home, no friends, and no help?
And yet we seem to sleep at night just fine. Compared to these issues, some government employees supporting other government employees who have access to metadata about our daily communications seems a bit bland, and easy to sleep on.
Re:It's A Start by Hatta · 2013-07-25 05:02 · Score: 4, Insightful

Someone calls you out as wrong, the first instinct isnt "AM i wrong?", but "how can I refute him".
How else do you determine whether you are right or wrong except by attempting refutation? If someone publishes a mathematical proof, doesn't everyone immediately search for mistakes? If I can't refute your argument, then I'll happily admit I'm wrong. If I can refute your argument, what reason do I have to believe that I'm wrong?
The important part is that you base your refutation in facts and logic, and not character assassination or misdirection.
Im currently in a Poli Sci class, and there was a video on "realism" where the speaker described it as basically what you said-- a cynical worldview that everyone is NOT intrinsically good, but intrinsically self-interested and self-justifying. This idea seems to be foreign to a lot of folks I know that I assume to be more to the left-- certainly a number of students in the class appear to never have even thought of the world in those terms.
Socialism is necessary not because everyone is good, but because everyone *is* self interested and self justifying. Without some sort of correcting mechanism(e.g. redistribution of wealth by the government), self-interest compounds upon self-interest, amplifying inequality and leading to atrocities that no one will admit are atrocities because of their self justifying nature.

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Re:It's A Start by steelfood · 2013-07-25 05:06 · Score: 5, Informative

More than one. More than one.

--
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
Re:It's A Start by amicusNYCL · 2013-07-25 05:46 · Score: 4, Funny

his name is Edward Snowden.
In death, members of Project Mayhem have a name.

--
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black

My congressman will be getting a call today. by intermodal · 2013-07-25 01:49 · Score: 5, Informative

It's shameful. My district borders on two of my previous districts, and both of those districts voted aye. Both of those representatives are men I voted for in prior elections, and proudly so. My current congressman, on the other hand, has brought disgrace upon himself by voting against this amendment. To be fair, I voted against him...

--
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!

Re:My congressman will be getting a call today. by intermodal · 2013-07-25 02:24 · Score: 5, Insightful

*shrug* Doesn't matter, really. Unless I let my voice be heard, I may as well be a serf.

--
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Re:My congressman will be getting a call today. by DigiShaman · 2013-07-25 02:45 · Score: 3, Informative

John Culberson (Republican with TeaParty)- Texas 7th district - had this to say about why he voted against the Amash amendment but instead voted for the Pompeo amendment.
voted for the Pompeo (Nugent) Amendment instead of the Amash Amendment because it protects the privacy of American citizens. The Pompeo (Nugent) Amendment prohibits the NSA from targeting U.S. persons and protects the content of our phone calls from the NSA. Specifically, the Pompeo (Nugent) Amendment prohibits the NSA from listening to phone calls of American citizens without a court ordered search warrant. It protects our privacy and protects our Constitutional rights without destroying the NSA’s ability to track terrorists, as I believe the Amash Amendment would have done. The consequence of the Amash Amendment would be to prevent the collection and analysis of ALL bulk data in America — not just the data of American citizens. This would protect the data of terrorists who are operating sleeper cells in this country and make us vulnerable to future terrorist attacks. The Amash amendment would do nothing to reform the NSA surveillance program and would do nothing to ensure that the privacy of American citizens is protected. The NSA has successfully stopped several domestic terrorist attacks, and we need to continue tracking and stopping terrorists while at the same time protecting the privacy and Constitutional rights of American citizens.
http://culberson.house.gov/protecting-your-right-to-privacy/

--
Life is not for the lazy.

NSA sez... by ackthpt · 2013-07-25 01:53 · Score: 4, Funny

I'll know who you called this Summer.

but I still can't sort out my own emails

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar

System works! by Jade_Wayfarer · 2013-07-25 01:53 · Score: 3, Interesting

Representative government system at work, flawless as ever. Not like some godawful Egyptian generals, who are causing turmoil just because of some "spirit of the law" and other unholy gibberish.

Ah, Gibson, Sterling and other cyberpunk masters, you were truly prophetic back in your time.

--
Absence of proof != proof of absence.

Re:wait a minute by Joining+Yet+Again · 2013-07-25 01:57 · Score: 4, Interesting

If you don't know your representative's name in a representative democracy, something's very broken.

Re:wait a minute by dkleinsc · 2013-07-25 01:57 · Score: 4, Informative

Whoops, broken link. Try this instead: Official House vote

--
I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/

113th congress by MickyTheIdiot · 2013-07-25 01:58 · Score: 4, Informative

113th congress is the worst in history, which is sadly impressive given how bad the 112th was.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_the_113th_United_States_Congress

There have been a total 13 bills make it into law so far this Congress... and the ones that have made it into law are about items such as "Freedom to Fish".

It's at a complete stand still folks. You're representatives have finally dropped to the point they aren't even pretending to represent interests of voters over the interests of their corporate donors.

How bad does it have to get before something is done?

Re:113th congress by Anonymous Coward · 2013-07-25 02:07 · Score: 3, Interesting

Actually, them doing nothing is probably better, otherwise they will screw things up even more.
Re:113th congress by drinkypoo · 2013-07-25 02:12 · Score: 4, Insightful

Actually, them doing nothing is probably better, otherwise they will screw things up even more.
False dichotomy. There's a third option: Undoing things. They can be invaliding prior acts, which is what we really need. We don't need to "fix" the U SAP AT RIOT act, we need to eliminate it. Examples abound.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:113th congress by Anubis+IV · 2013-07-25 02:27 · Score: 4, Insightful

There have been a total 13 bills make it into law so far this Congress... and the ones that have made it into law are about items such as "Freedom to Fish".
Clearly you and I have different opinions on what qualifies as "worst" Congress. Considering all the harm they've been causing, them being completely ineffective in getting anything done is a marked improvement over what we've seen in previous years.

Re:Jury maundering at its finest. by robinsonne · 2013-07-25 02:01 · Score: 5, Informative

I think you mean Gerrymandering http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering/

War not over yet by wjcofkc · 2013-07-25 02:08 · Score: 3, Interesting

We may have lost this battle, but the war has barely begun. I would like to point out that when looking up your representatives, don't just maneuver to call and chew out those who voted against our liberties, call those who voted for us and praise them in a show of support.

I would also like to take a moment to sincerely apologize to the tin foil hat crowd: I have made fun of you in the past, only now I am sorry I was too blind to really listen. You were right all along.

--
Brought to you by Carl's Junior.

Re:Still don't get it... by Hatta · 2013-07-25 02:08 · Score: 4, Informative

Does the name COINTELPRO mean anything to you? Decades ago the government used illegal surveillance to attempt to quash the civil rights movement. What assurances do we have that they won't do this again? Why should we believe they have good intentions at all when they cannot comply with the 4th amendment?

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!

I did my part by Yevoc · 2013-07-25 02:15 · Score: 5, Insightful

Now that we all know we're being surveilled, I can understand why others may not make similar posts, but I'm going to risk it and say it anyway. I read the previous slashdot article on the amendment. I immediately called my representative. He voted YES! Even if the ship sinks, I still feel very good about this moment. The system may be dysfunctional, but at least some of us are still doing the right thing. The worst thing we can do is succumb to despair. It may take some really tough times to happen, but we WILL eventually emerge on the other side with a better system. It's what life always manages to do, no matter how dark the times become.

--
AccountKiller

Re:The people have spoken by scarboni888 · 2013-07-25 02:27 · Score: 4, Funny

Thanks guys. Hey - listen my external USB drive got corrupted last night and I can't seem to repair it.

Can you direct me to the request form for an NSA restore of my data, please?

Re:Still don't get it... by FriendlyLurker · 2013-07-25 02:30 · Score: 3, Insightful

Does the name COINTELPRO mean anything to you? Decades ago the government used illegal surveillance to attempt to quash the civil rights movement. What assurances do we have that they won't do this again? Why should we believe they have good intentions at all when they cannot comply with the 4th amendment?

Exactly -this is why it is a big deal arekin (GP). When the government pretty much knows everything about everyone - then there is no more ability to effectively and democratically reform society for the better, right injustices, fight to change the status quo etc. For example try and organize a rally, information drive, any form of community organization against or for [insert cause]. If it upsets those in power you will be picked up/harassed/fired/detained before any of your emails/chats/phone calls to organize democratically allowed protest even hit anyones inbox. This is not speculation, all these police state things have already happened. One recent example: if you care to look into the details of one particular movement called "Occupy" that threatened the heart of power and money by asking for those in wall street that broke laws to actually be punished for their crimes.

Allowing the surveillance state means any slippery sloped we are now on with just continue to get worse, no leaders in our community can take charge to organize others to resist/complain/pushback against [insert cause]. History has given us enough examples now to know that if we do not reject the surveillance state we now find ourselves living in, then we really do deserve everything that is coming...

Re:Of Course by swan5566 · 2013-07-25 02:31 · Score: 4, Insightful

The amendment vote was 205-217. That's not losing by too much.

--
In debates about Christianity, there are two groups: those looking for answers, and those looking to just ask questions.

This will never happen. by emil · 2013-07-25 02:31 · Score: 4, Insightful

Having acquired these powers over decades, no amount of voter insistence will be effective in removing them.

What needs to happen now is at the state level - the legislatures must be convinced to grant themselves greater oversight and control over federal activities.

Article. V. - The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Our representative democracy was designed in an era where (horse-drawn) transportation was problematic, and the decisions of a few were practical. These conditions no longer exist, and the few are now too easily swayed by money and power. More people need to participate in federal decisions if we wish to (re)establish the consent of the governed.

Next Election by sahuxley · 2013-07-25 02:34 · Score: 4, Insightful

I see 217 people that need to lose their jobs in the next election.

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2013-07-25 02:34 · Score: 3, Informative

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Still don't get it... by Arker · 2013-07-25 02:55 · Score: 3, Interesting

It's interesting someone brought up COINTELPRO. The contrast between COINTELPRO and Watergate is instructive. Watergate took down one President who had gone too far - NOT in acting against, and lying to, the American people, but in acting against the other powerful faction in DC. That got reported and everyone has heard of it.

COINTELPRO was much, much worse, it was decades of continuous criminal action. But it was targeted at the people, rather than against a faction of the ruling class. Mainstream media has studiously ignored it more than not, many people have never even heard of it, and those who have mostly have no real idea what it involved.

The rot in this country isnt new, it's been rotting for quite awhile now, it's just that we are finally reaching the point where average folks can no longer avoid being aware of it.

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.

Re:Of Course by jfengel · 2013-07-25 03:23 · Score: 4, Insightful

That's true, but you need to take the tally with a grain of salt. Everybody knows what the outcome will be before the vote is taken, so they each get to plan their votes according to what they think will get them re-elected. You could switch your vote when it's actually taken, but lying to the party whip is a good way to get yourself shut out of important meetings.

There were probably some who would have switched votes each direction if the tally were taken entirely in secret. I can't really say whether it would have gotten closer or further from passing, though I suspect the whips could take a stab at it.

Re:Still don't get it... by Nyder · 2013-07-25 04:37 · Score: 3, Insightful

Does the name COINTELPRO mean anything to you? Decades ago the government used illegal surveillance to attempt to quash the civil rights movement. What assurances do we have that they won't do this again? Why should we believe they have good intentions at all when they cannot comply with the 4th amendment?

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/national_world/2013/07/07/tea-party-only-one-of-irs-targets.html
http://www.hannity.com/article/irs-targets-political-candidates/17710
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/irs-targets-conservative-groups/

Seems they already started.

--
Be seeing you...

As a Canadian by msobkow · 2013-07-25 06:22 · Score: 3, Insightful

As a Canadian I don't enjoy any protection from the spying because I'm not a Canadian citizen.

So let me be amongst the many who say "Fuck the United States."

This is precisely the kind of behaviour that leads to hatred of and terrorism against the US.

--
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.

That kind of works for math, but only math by raymorris · 2013-07-25 06:54 · Score: 4, Insightful

>. How else do you determine whether you are right or wrong except by attempting refutation? If someone publishes a mathematical proof, doesn't everyone immediately search for mistakes? If I can't refute your argument, then I'll happily admit I'm wrong. If I can refute your argument, what reason do I have to believe that I'm wrong?

That works for math, some extent, because you can have objective, irrefutable proof. When someone says to me "you're being selfish", I can ALWAYS refute that and come up with some justification, no matter how right they are. The wise thing for me to do is to pause and ask "do they perhaps have a valid point?". "Am I indeed being selfish in some way?" Most of the time, they are at least half right, and my excuses don't change that fact.

The second half of your post is a great example. No matter how many times socialism fails, you can ignore the facts and "refute" the conclusion by reasoning abstractly within your own world of ideas, by mental masturbation. By the same token, no matter what success socialist regimes may have, I can refute your conclusion by pointing to their many failures. If I were wiser, I'd instead look to see what I can learn from your point of view. I might say "though your method of achieving the goal has always failed, perhaps the goal itself is worth pursuing". Indeed, that's often the case - leftists have lofty goals, worthy goals, but little to no knowledge of what actually works and what doesn't, what can actually be accomplished and how. Conservatives look at what actually works and end up with "let's stick with doing what has always worked". Better that they look at where each other have a good point they are making. Putting their viewpoints together, you get "let's dream big dreams, then figure out how to actually accomplish some of them".

Rather than refuting each other all day, how about I look for the nuggets of gold in your ideas, and you look for where what I am saying makes sense. Then we can learn from each other and work together to implement your dreamy ideals in a way that actually works in the real world.

Slashdot Mirror

NSA Still Funded To Spy On US Phone Records

46 of 362 comments (clear)