Slashdot Mirror
Spain's Crackdown on Catalonia Includes Internet Censorship (internetsociety.org)
Spain's autonomous Catalonia region wants to hold a referendum on independence next weekend. Spain's Constitutional Court insists that that vote is illegal, and has taken control of Catalonia's police force to try to stop the vote. They're deploying thousands of additional police officers and have seized nearly 10 million ballots. And now the Internet Society has gotten involved, according to an announcement shared by Slashdot reader valinor89: Measures restricting free and open access to the Internet related to the independence referendum have been reported in Catalonia. There have been reports that major telecom operators have been asked to monitor and block traffic to political websites, and following a court order, law enforcement has raided the offices of the .cat registry in Barcelona, examining a computer and arresting staff.
We are concerned by reports that this court order would require a top-level domain (TLD) operator such as .cat to begin to block "all domains that may contain any kind of information about the referendum."
We are concerned by reports that this court order would require a top-level domain (TLD) operator such as .cat to begin to block "all domains that may contain any kind of information about the referendum."
Ain't dead yet!
Trying to suppress people's freedom is the surest way of pissing them off. How many went from pro-union to pro-independence due to this nonsense?
If you start condoning Internet censorship for political reasons (for example, what has been going on with the Daily Stormer), it will never stop where you think.
Cataluña has no reason to secede. Nationalists, who are basically localist fascists are the ones pushing for an impossible exit of cataluña from the Spain, when by the way, they werent anexed. Cataluña entered Spain voluntarily, more than 500 years ago. Now the spanish government though is anything but smart. Prime Minister Rajoy could almost qualify as a sea sponge if we are talking about intelligence. This is why this move on the Spanish part is sad, stupid, but not unforseen. It plays into the hands of the fucking cataluña nazis, which is what nationalists are.
NO SIG
They are also arresting "civilian" programmers for mirroring the banned pages in other domains and charging them with disobedience, malfaesence and other charges.
Not too long ago, in 2006, a majority in the Spanish parliament voted in favor of a treaty that intended to give Catalonia some more autonomy - only to be subsequently stopped by jurisdiction - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... for more on this.
And now Spain has a government that seems inclined to follow in the foot steps of Erdogan and alike, who think that violence and oppression is the way to go if you don't like what some regional government has decided upon.
It's really a shame how this conflict is being escalated for no good reason.
we can't have that.
If Catalonia wants independency, there is a legal way. But it needs the approval of Spanish Parliament, and the independentists know it most likely won't succeed...
They kind of did succeed, when in 2006 a majority of the Spanish Parliament voted in favor of a treaty that basically gave Catalonia all the aspects of independence they asked for - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
But that treaty was never enacted due to the very questionable verdict from the a Spanish high court - and that is basically why the people in Catalonia do not believe in there being a "legal way to independence" anymore.
A few decades ago, Spain granted Catalonia quite a lot of autonomy away from the greater nation. While I don't know enough of the history to know why they did this, they were asking for this sort of trouble by doing it the first place. Catalonia is very wealthy, has a distinct culture, and provides about 20% of Spain's total GDP. If I remember, the call for total independence started about a decade ago. Spain's response at that time was to remove the extra powers they had been granted with their autonomy, reeling them back in to the fold. So this is not an entirely new issue. While I think Catalonia has a case for independence here, it will not happen. I cannot blame Catalonia for being sore over this. I suspect this will become violent with the end result being a Catalonia that will know longer be in any shape to offer Spain the wealth they are trying to hold on to. This is the creation of the sort of bad blood that will persist, serving neither any good.
Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
Driven by local nationlists, the north American territories of the British Empire did absolutely illegal things when they seceded. How could those people dare to question the legal rule of their central government?
And by the way, lot's of European countries would still be under the despotic rule of some emporer far away in Rome, had they not been "disobedient" to Roman law.
Thankfully there has been no violence yet except some extremists in confrontation with the police. Even the CUP wich have strong ties with the extreme left and some anarchist currents has been asking for restrain and non violent protests.
Just as people who wanted freedom in other decades and nations ways around central telco and print censorship will be found.
In 1950-80's Eastern Europe people printed their own newspapers, flyers and pamphlets.
Today the world has bluetooth, wifi for short-range ad-hoc networks, low cost usb sticks and ways if moving larger amounts of local data around without needing a national internet.
The more a government attempts to ban independence the more a local community will embrace anything that supports and spreads material thats pro independence.
A new generation of local and short distance network services could be developed under such draconian national telco censorship.
As Montenegro got independence so did Slovenia, Croatia. So will other parts of Europe. People want freedom. Trying to remove parts of the internet just shows the desperation of governments. Communities just create and embrace their own local and fun data flows.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
"The dark night of fascism is always descending in the United States and yet lands only in Europe." - Tom Wolfe
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
That makes no sense. You cannot have to rely upon someone else to allow you to vote on something. If Wyoming wanted to hold a vote on whether to secede tomorrow, so be it. On the other hand, the results of the vote wouldn't mean much, unless they were willing to go to war. Catalonia, Scotland, Puerto Rico. etc. should be able to vote as often as they want to bolster their peaceable efforts to obtain their goals.
Were that I say, pancakes?
A funny thing is how most of those "unconstitutional" articles are also present in other Autonomy Statutes and have not been repealed.
The move from Spain government seems rather stupid. It would have been easy to let the referendum happen and consider it unconstitutional, or illegitimate if few people attended.
Now Spain government appears as fighting democracy, I am sure that it pushed many people in Catalonia toward independence.
See how much better you have it?
Due for another separation referendum yet? Third time could be the charm!
Quebec thinks its a separate country in its own mind anyway. In many ways it is.
Spain could learn from Canada on this one.
Note that the issue here is not about independence or freedom of speech. It is about the authority to call a referendum, which the Spanish constutitution (which was accepted in a referendum by more than 66% of Catalonians) says belongs only to the central Government (or Parliament).
Well, if 66% of Catalonians still support not seceding, then why are you so afraid of them having a vote?
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
The concept behind the Second Amendment was discredited and abandoned a long time ago. The founding fathers had a deep distrust of a standing army, and so the theory went that a well-regulated militia could instead serve to defend the nation. After a series of failures of militias to various crises, within a couple of decades there was a large standing army. Now the US military is so large and so heavily armed and trained that the sole remaining provision (the right to bear arms) is superficial at best. The Second Amendment isn't going anywhere, but as a bulwark against government it is a complete failure.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
this is russian meddling again. trying to break up the eu. russia needs to be punished.
"Well armed" must mean something different to you and me. Most "arms" are pistols... what war were handguns instrumental in winning? Oh, yeah, none.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Hinckley? What in the world? He was an insane man trying to impress Jodie Foster. Of all the assassinations or attempts to pick as an example...
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Cataluña has no reason to secede. Nationalists, who are basically localist fascists are the ones pushing for an impossible exit of cataluña from the Spain, when by the way, they werent anexed.
You can say exactly the same things about Scotland in the UK and Quebec in Canada. In both cases the regions were given a free vote (two in fact for Quebec) about whether they wanted to secede and in both cases the majority voted against it and the independence movements in both locations are now effectively muted for decades. So while Spain has been saying that "no country would tolerate this" they are utterly wrong: two countries have and it worked out well both times.
If what you say is true then the Spanish government is being idiotic in its response. It should not only have allowed the vote but organized it too to ensure it is performed fairly. If you are right then such a vote would have been against independence and the problem goes away for several decades. Actively suppressing it is likely to greatly increase support for independence and the result will be some sort of election probably in favour of independence and then you'll have a resurgent independence movement which will cause you problems for decades and way well eventually result in independence!
...aren't the local police. They're a military organisation that carries out police-like duties. You'll often see them in the streets of Barcelona but it's generally not a good idea to ask them the time or for directions. On the other hand, you can have a friendly chat, especially in Catalan, with the local Guàrdia Urbana if you want to. They're the local police and they're standing in support of the referendum.
Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
...and no, there is no censorship involved.
Catalonia is not a colony.
Catalonia has been always part of Spain, and a very important part. This was already so when the province of Hispania was created under the Roman Empire, imposing a layer of latin culture and roman institutions on top of the existing Iberian tribes. After the downfall of Empire, the visigoths ruled all of the Peninsula as a single kingdom for more than two centuries. The small christian kingdoms and principalities that from 711 to 1492 fighted the muslims were at times also fighting each other, but the general trend was that of strengthening alliances and uniting forces under the same religion, not unlike other places in Medieval Europe.
Catalan counties were already integrated in a larger unit (the Kingdom of Aragon) in which different languages (such as castilian and catalan) already coexisted for two centuries before the marriage of the Catholic Monarchs. They no doubt kept their identity, but the same could be said of every other region. Asserting that those small medieval kingdoms survived into today's regions with zero intermingling, thus conforming clearly separate and distinct societies, is simply untenable.
In the heyday of the Spanish Empire and till the 19th century, catalans (and basques, BTW) were not just part of the thing, but a *leading* part of it. You can find lots of catalan surnames in Hispanic American countries, many of them in well-to-do families (check out the names of some well known distilleries such as Bacardi, Brugal, Barceló, if you don't mind my alcoholic references).
With the historical digression, I just wanted to point to the fact that there have been no borders inside Spain for many centuries. This is not some country with huge differences in racial/ethnic aspects, or torn out by religious strife. The interrelationships are deep and extended in time. At this point it's difficult to define exactly who is catalan or not. Is it just being born in today's arbitrarily defined administrative region what makes you catalan? Are you catalan if your parents were not? Are you catalan if you don't speak catalan? Are you catalan if you do speak catalan but don't live in Catalonia? The top 10 most frequent family names are the same in Cat and in the rest of Sp. Catalan is the first language of 36% of people living in Cat while Spanish is the first language for 46%. Catalan exports to Germany, to put an example, are less than half of those to its neighboring autonomous region of Aragon. Who gets to vote in a referendum?
The fact is that since 1978 Sp has been a highly decentralized country, much more similar to federal Germany than to centralist France. Cat, being one of 17 autonomous regions, has had for almost 40 years plenty of effective "independence": both an autonomous government and parliament, capable of passing their own laws within a large margin, as long as they don't undermine the general interests of Sp as a whole, which doesn't seem so unreasonable to me.
If you ask me, this autonomy has been used to put the emphasis on the difference. Autonomous administration has reached all aspects of civil life, to a point that the presence of national institutions are scarcely felt, and the words "país", "nació" are used all the time to refer to Cat and not to Sp. There's a huge part of the population whose first language is Spanish, yet it is not possible to study primary nor secondary school in Spanish (due to the official policy of "linguistic immersion"). Regional governments have spent a lot of money and effort in building their image, uniformizing and boosting the usage of catalan language, confering dignity to their institutions, projecting an international image, etc. etc. The regional PM is paid almost twice as much as Rajoy - not bad for an "oppressed nation"!
At the same time, complaints about things that don't go well are targeted to a ghostly oppresive presence, the "State", the "Central Government". The idea of Spain is ass
inclined to follow in the foot steps of Erdogan and alike
One is arresting people associated with a ballot and bypassing banned material.
The other actively killed opponents, arrested people with wide ranging roles including the media in attempt to silence opposition all while passing laws to gain additional power over people and also the judicial system.
Spain's government may not be acting in the purest of democratic ways, but comparing this to what is going on in Turkey severely undermines just how bad the situation in Turkey really is.
Spain (and Partido Popular/Mariano Rajoy or any other party) has nothing to do with a country like Turkey and a dictator-like figure like Erdogan. In Spain, talking about corruption means politicians stealing money/getting jobs to friends/family. Nothing to do with arbitrariness at the level of deciding what to do with the faith of a region.
It's really a shame how this conflict is being escalated for no good reason.
Unlikely your previous statements, that one is very accurate, although not because of what seems your intention.
Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
You are right that the situation in Turkey at this time is a lot worse than the situation in Spain, but look how quickly it escalates: Sending thousands of para-military "Guardia Civil" personell into Catalonia to enforce the will of the central government is the most sure way to alienate the locals - I would not be suprised to see the first shots fired soon.
Well, if 66% of Catalonians still support not seceding, then why are you so afraid of them having a vote?
Supporting one position or the other isn't even required to understand the current situation. In any law/constitution-based country, you can only do what agrees with the given laws/constitution. This issue is particularly important if you are part of the government, precisely in charge of applying said laws/constitution.
Logically, there might be some laws which are unfair and, in that case, disobeying them seems like the only valid approach. But nothing of this reflects the current conflict in Catalonia. This isn't about people whose rights, expectations, feelings, etc. are being ignored. This is about a rich regional government unilaterally deciding to ignore the laws/authorities which they should observe. If to get something you have convince someone else and you fail, you should accept that failure; you might try it again, attempt different approaches, support a change of the rules, etc. But if you unilaterally decide to stop applying the rules not allowing you to have what you want, your behaviour would become unlawful according to said rules; what becomes even worse in case that you are supposed to make sure that everyone respects those rules.
Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
See, the thing is the current Catalonian independentist government has said they will declare independence 48 hours after a "yes" victory.
Basically, the referendum is a political tool to illegitimately declare independence unilaterally (illegitimately, not only for legal reasons, but especially because the referendum will be obviously biased, the way it is being pushed by one side only). And that's why the central government doesn't want to let it happen.
So? Even if what you claim is true (and that's arguable)
They have an option supported by the Spanish Constitution itself. Each region in Spain can determine the level of autonomy they want to reach and go through the corresponding process. Even those rules might be changed/updated/extended. Catalonia chose (and got) one of the highest levels of independence.
if a people feel that they're not being represented by a government, secession should always be an option.
Firstly, we are not seeing what people want, but what a few parties (+ noisy supporters) promote as a way to fulfill their long-term expectations. Regarding secession, I am personally not too attached to abstract concepts of ownership/belonging and don't like forcing anyone to anything. On the other hand, there are quite a few people who don't think like me and have more profound feelings about abstract realities as the whole Spain. Even if I would have ignored all that and would only consider people living in Catalonia (now or since how many years ago? what about companies? what about people going in/out? etc), you would have to follow a legal/fair/considering everyone process, whose underlying requirement is legally-recognised authorities performing legally-binding actions. How can you get that under the current conditions?
It's the repression of a democratic process, and while thankfully it's not at Turkey's level, it's still escalating.
How can it be so? Let me put you an extreme example to help transmit this point. Imagine that I don't want to pay more taxes, to care about what the national/regional/local government say to me and decide to create my own virtual country formed by just one person: Alvaronia. The authorities say me that I cannot do such a thing, I reply to them that I don't feel represented by all what surrounds my virtual kingdom (yeah! I decided to convert myself in a king. LOL), that they are repressing my rights because of not allowing me to do so. What is the problem with this example? That I am just 1 person (with not too much money/assets)? But according to your idea, my intention might be fine otherwise? What about if I convince 100 people more to join my kingdom (all of them as slaves, logically; LOL)? And 1000? And 1 million? What is the number of people which I would need to allow me to arbitrarily impose my expectations to the legislation of the given country? So, we are a group of people in a democracy, but we don't like what that democracy and the associated legislation have for us (perhaps we don't even understand what we are talking about!?) and, one day, we decide to make our own rules. When the country we live in avoids us to do what we want to do, we complain about our democratic rights not being respected? The national authorities avoiding us to do whatever we want are the ones being supported by a democracy, by what is wanted by the most people! Our attempt wouldn't be democratic, but counter-democratic, illegal, revolutionary, call it whatever you want, but certainly not democratic. You cannot redefine the target audience of a democracy as a way to facilitate you meeting whatever expectations! Otherwise, you could call anti-democratic anything going against whatever that a group of any size might decide at whatever moment!
but when the Spanish government claims that secession is against the constitution
It is actually against the Spanish Constitution, as clearly stated by the most important authority in Spain about this matter: Tribunal Constitucional (whatever the name in English is). A different story is you not liking it or wanting it to be modified.
and stands by said constitution as if it were perfection on paper
Not at all. Everything is improvable. But the Spanish Constitution is the basic law for the whole Spanish legal system, similarly to what happens in other countries. You can try to change it but, meanwhile, all yo
Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
Not really exhaustive and in spanish, but you can get the idea. http://www.eldiario.es/canaria...
Also https://elpais.com/diario/2007...
> They want to stand eternally against the evil Spain
We Dutch know that can take some time, we had the 80 year war (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighty_Years%27_War) with Spain to gain our independence.
Did you say that about the Basques as well? If they suppress this with enough repression the fight for independence might escalate.
So now thay claim independence because the referendum was sabotaged by an invading army. The only difference is that now more people will support them. Spain might win the war but at the cost of having created another ETA.
Soif they don't call it a referendum but call it an opinion poll, nothing is against the law?
nothing is against the law
Most of this whole process might have been done without going against the law at all. Just asking citizens about their opinion by relying on whatever means might have been done without any problem (some time, patience and even constitutional modifications might have been required though). There shouldn't even be problems with talking about long-term plans as part of your political speech. The problems started when governmental bodies, bounded to the Catalan and Spanish laws, performed actions against the legal system and expected no consequences.
They proposed certain format for the referendum which the highest court for constitutional issues said that was illegal; this should have been it, but they continued anyway. Then they kept ignoring national authorities requests and this is where we are right now. All this is about a regional government which stopped caring about what the national authorities say. You can like the underlying ideas or not, but nothing of this will avoid all the actions against the law to have consequences. You don't care about all this and want to unilaterally start a secession process? OK. You can find quite a few references in this thread about US colonies and other independence processes; all of them illegal in that moment under the applicable legal system and succeeding after beating the corresponding country in a war. This is what you have ahead of you right now: either accepting the consequences of your illegal actions or somehow managing the corresponding authority to stop being applicable to you.
Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
Without dialogue it's obviously next to impossible to figure out the details that will affect everyone, but when the central government is the one that decided to send troops and arrest officials instead of saying "have your vote and if it gets a yes we'll work on the details".
Sending troops?! LOL. Nothing of this has happened. To know more about the different local/regional/national outside-military law-enforcement bodies in Spain, do some research or take a look at one of my other posts in this thread. I will tell you two recent events to help you understand the situation better:
- The Catalan government decided to not send the due periodic economic report to the national government. The national government froze all the payments to the government-related employees in Catalonia. The Catalan government changed its mind and sent the due economic reports to the national government.
- The national government has recently taken control of the Catalan regional police because, in extreme cases, they can restrict all the regional authorities like having their own police.
They arrested officials because they were acting illegally; all their actions have an illegal component (= against the Spanish Constitution as stated by the highest court on this front), but the arrests you are mentioning (performing by Guardia Civil, a police-like body present in Catalonia and in all the other Spanish regions) were ordered by a judge in a Catalan court apparently investigating these officials for misusing public money. Sorry to burst your bubble, but the unwillingness to having any kind of sensible dialogue is quite implicit in the fact of disobeying direct indications of the highest court on that matter: you aren't just not setting the best mood for any kind of dialogue, but additionally behaving illegally.
comes to self determination as long as it doesn't infringe on others. If a person never uses any of the services or infrastructure
I see. So you think that, in the case of Spain, a pluri-democracy of over 45 million people should work fine, right? The funniest thing is that you seem to seriously believe that! And regarding your not using infrastructures, I guess that you mean that you never go through the streets/roads, breath (sanitisation/pollution reduction), eat/drink (safety regulations), etc. I guess that you live inside a neutral-to-the-environment bubble floating in the only spot where there is nothing else around you, being both fed and entertained by your words, ideas and expectations, right? LOL.
Revolutions are always illegal, that doesn't mean that they're wrong or undemocratic.
Illegal doesn't need to be compatible with right, not even with democratic. Illegal is exclusively compatible with applicable authority and consequences from disobeying it. Democratic is related with what the most think what is usually incompatible with revolutionary movements. I am not precisely a pro (random) authority person, but a pro fairness and common sense one. So, I am kind of anti-authority, but this doesn't mean that I don't understand and accept the consequences of my actions. In any legal system, illegal actions have consequences.
Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
I sure hope that won't happen. If the Catalan independentists get credit for anything it's going about their business peacefully (at least in the physical sense; lots of political mudslinging going on, of course).
but ultimately all the Star Wars gadgetry in the world wasn't enough to police Iraq's basic infrastructure
We were an interloper hated by all sides. We also were limited in tactics by the Geneva convention. Saddam held the country in check for decades using a military several notches below the one that the US invaded Iraq with (twice!). US military action within the US would be more analogous to either our own civil war (doubtful, that was regional) or a dictatorship situation.
look incapable of simple deductive reasoning.
Funny, I'd reflect that back at you for sticking to a thoroughly defeated and abandoned concept. When you have a large, well trained standing army, a civilian uprising can succeed, as in Egypt - but only if the military decides to sit it out. If the military decides to weigh in, your massive stockpile of handguns will be almost useless. If I was dictator and had control over the military, I'd simply give them orders for summary execution for possession of a handgun along with rewards for turning them in and watch them disappear as a threat in a few weeks. Australia was able to pull this off in a totally peaceful, democratic environment - it would be child's play for the military in a state of emergency.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
but look how quickly it escalates
Yeah I know. Hitler's father died and a few years later world war 2. Yay extrapolation!
My understanding is that the Guardia Civil is a military force that usually has police duties and that 1200 were sent to Catalonia. It might not be the "real army" but it's still a military force.
For its proper definition, do some research. I can give you some informal ideas though: there are different levels of police-like bodies in Spain with different attributions. As what happens with everything else, here we have 3 main levels: local (city), regional (comunidades autónomas like Catalonia; there are also intermediate divisions, but their powers are very limited) and national. So, we have local/regional/national police bodies. Some regions like Catalonia have taken competence on police and they created their own regional/local police departments.
At the national level, the two main alternatives are "policía nacional" and "guardia civil"; where the latter is mostly focused on traffic and road control, but they also work on other issues like security. Although their origins (and even internal structure) might be closer to the army, they are an independent body mostly meant to perform police-like work. For army-like work, I guess that they use the army.
Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
I'm sure Erdogan charged his opponents with crimes before removing them from power.
This is so far away from being even remotely applicable (not just in Spain, but also in the other UE countries) that I don't even know what to say. Rajoy, or any other president before, has nothing close to Erdogan's power; not even to Trump's power. Spain is a parliamentary democracy where everything has to go through the parliament.
Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
Find a map of the world. Find your country on it. Now go down. Keep going down, through the thin windy bit. Stay on the right hand side. Keep going along that side till you come to a big bit that bulges out to the right. Go rightwards across the blue stuff and you'll come to Africa. If it has a hole that matches the bulge you just left from, you're in the right place. Now go up the left coast and around a bit until you come to a little narrow bit of sea. Above that is Spain, mostly.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
curious how you can deny the power grab the current government managed to pull off despite its loss in votes last election cycle.
Power grab?! How are you supposed to measure power in a parliament-has-all-powers kind of country? The more representatives you have either directly or agreeing with you, the more power you get. Partido Popular has currently the majority in the Spanish parliament because, according to our current election system, they won the last election. Getting more/less votes isn't as relevant as getting more sits in the parliament (defined by the votes being weighted on account of some regional factors) than the other parties. Who is to blame? Spanish voters, other parties and Spanish voting system. People at Partido Popular has proven to be very corrupt, but not in the sense that you seem to be implying; they mostly focus on stealing money and hiring friends/family. This kind of power hording Erdogan or Putin style isn't compatible with the Spanish system, overall attitude and even the EU expectations.
Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
What's with this informative BS? It's against the TOS, right? Back to snarky oneliners mister :)
(Thanks)
"Better" in the same way that it is "better" to go down with the ship.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
By who? Citations?
Citations of what? Presumably you know that the primary purpose was to ensure that the federal government could not become tyrannical? The idea was that an armed citizenry would dissuade any potential tyrant, and that this same citizenry could defend the country from invaders.
If you mean citations of where this failed, that's easy.
The first sign that the militia was recognized as insufficient was in 1792, when congress passed a law compelling every able-bodied man to report for military service. It was still a militia - they were not even provided arms, but were expected to bring their own. This obviously did not work, and estimates are wild - but of the people who actually showed up, only 10-65 percent met the requirements of the law in terms of supplying their own arms. This was laid bare during the Whiskey Rebellion in 1794, when the militias of the neighboring 4 states failed to mobilize. In the end they had to draft soldiers, and this action alone caused riots and even a mini-insurrection complete with liberty poles. 2/3 of the "militia" (now in name only, as it was largely a conscripted army) had no weapons and so they had to be provided from Federal armories.
Strike one. Just before the Whiskey Rebellion, congress saw the writing on the wall and authorized funding for federal armories since the militia was not "well armed" at all.
If the Whiskey Rebellion wasn't compelling - because, I mean, it was a rebellion after all... maybe people simply didn't want to take the side of the federal government? If it wasn't compelling, than the War of 1812 should be. The US called up the militia and - despite having a force that outnumbered the entire population of Canada, were unable to successfully invade - nor prevent the burning of Washington.
After that war, the US saw the need for, and funded a very large naval force. As for the army from then on the US maintained a standing army to fight the Indians. I don't think the militia was used in any substantial way in any war since - unless you include the National Guard, which I hope you'll agree is very different from the structure of the original idea of a militia. It's run more like a volunteer professional reserve force, and is mainly used to support the professional army.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
First, we were in no way hated by all sides.
which turned the screws on the general public until the frustration and desperation led to a swelling of their ranks.
Which is it? Are we simply debating the timeline? The point is that we were a foreign power that - for whatever reason - was seen as an interloper and a hostile force.
It's legal in most States for private citizens to own the same battle rifles that our troops carry, or a similar analog.
Long guns are far more useful in war, and there is a far better argument for them than for pistols if you are defending the 2nd Amendment on its original intent.
while Americans can literally buy an AR-15 at Wal-Mart
Sure, but presumably they would not be able to do this during an insurrection.
fought by hillbillies or urban youths armed only with handguns is an illustration of a lack of knowledge on the subject in question.
Urban centers would be the first to fall. There aren't a substantial number of guns, and the guns that are there are mostly illegal pistols or already in the hands of law enforcement.
but the attitude you express is typical for many people I've met who have a deep aversion to guns which usually results from a lack of education or experience.
Let me correct you - I'm not anti-gun, though I cannot not find a compelling argument for pistols. Certainly not in the 2nd Amendment.
I'm not "trashing" the 2nd Amendment - just pointing out that it was based on a failed concept... it is hardly unique in that regard - much of the Constitution has been changed. I'm also pointing out that, without altering it, we ignore the intent of it with a large standing army. However, I don't think it can simply be thrown away. If we want to change it, there is a process for that. I do find any argument for handguns based on the 2nd Amendment to be very insubstantial, as they are fairly useless in wartime.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
I'm sure even knives are "useful", but that's a very low standard. For that matter, high explosives, anti-aircraft weapons, fully automatic weapons, and mines would be very useful to the resistance - but we don't even contemplate allowing those. At risk of repeating myself, this is because we have all abandoned the notion that our citizenry can actually keep up with a modern military. We still have the 2nd Amendment, though - and that's not going anywhere anytime soon. So we party like it is 1789 and pretend the Amendment is still relevant. For rifles, you could still make a sort-of compelling case that these could actually slow down a tyrant in some meaningful way. Not so with pistols.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
The US military has won every war it was in. It's not as good at propping up semi-failed regimes indefinitely.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
In reality, when the Bill of Rights was written, the USA had a professional military. It wasn't very big
Indeed! Thus the need to raise a new conscript army (after the failure of the militias to form up) to counter the Whiskey Rebellion.
were not limited to or even primarily due to the presence of militia units.
Not limited to, sure. But primarily, yes - since militia was the bulk of the US force at the time. The professional navy actually did exceedingly well considering their diminutive size.
the corruption in Congress
You keep saying that, but I don't follow. Why would a corrupt congress be unable to call up a militia, but they were perfectly able to build a very capable professional army? This does not make any sense.
I think you'll find that most current and former active duty US military personnel are strong supporters of the 2nd Amendment.
Sure, the right to bear arms part. But not of the concept that a militia works as replacement for a professional army.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
They mention “measures restricting free and open access to the Internet”, which is a gross exaggeration.
The TLD .cat has “over 100 thousand active domain names”, but Spanish judges have decreed the shutdown of 10 very specific domains.
Nobody's restricting “free and open access to the Internet” in Catalonia or elsewhere in Spain; it is very confusing (or manipulative) to say so.
Web sites defending Catalan independence and organising people around that goal via democratic and lawful means are legan and stay open (and in fact, some of them receive generous public subsidies). It's only a few web sites calling for sedition and for disobeying the ruling of the Constitutional Court that are being shut down.
https://tripu.info/