Slashdot Mirror


Edward Snowden: 'The People Are Still Powerless, But Now They're Aware' (theguardian.com)

Edward Snowden has no regrets five years on from leaking the biggest cache of top-secret documents in history. He is wanted by the US. He is in exile in Russia. But he is satisfied with the way his revelations of mass surveillance have rocked governments, intelligence agencies and major internet companies. From a report Snowden, weighing up the changes, said some privacy campaigners had expressed disappointment with how things have developed, but he did not share it. "People say nothing has changed: that there is still mass surveillance. That is not how you measure change. Look back before 2013 and look at what has happened since. Everything changed."

The most important change, he said, was public awareness. "The government and corporate sector preyed on our ignorance. But now we know. People are aware now. People are still powerless to stop it but we are trying. The revelations made the fight more even."

70 of 155 comments (clear)

  1. Narrator: by DalM · · Score: 4, Funny

    Narrator: "Unable to bare the thought of his fellow Americans being spied on by their government, our hero releases the top secret documents and flees to... *pauses... squints at script...* Russia."

    1. Re:Narrator: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's just being practical. Name any developed country that 1) isn't spying on its citizens and 2) wouldn't cave to US pressure to hand Snowden over. The second consideration outweighs the first when it's your own life on the line.

    2. Re:Narrator: by ChromeAeonuim · · Score: 5, Interesting

      A more accurate way of putting that is that the US is so full of shit that he had to turn to Russia, of all places, for his own safety. Instead of trying to fix the problem, the US government decided to try to shoot the messenger who uncovered their criminal activity (and yes, until the Fourth Amendment is officially repealed instead of just blatantly disregarded, spying on citizens is still criminal).

    3. Re: Narrator: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, he fled to Ecuador, but the State Department yanked his passport and he got stuck in Russia. People like to skip that bit...

    4. Re:Narrator: by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      flees to... *pauses... squints at script...* Russia."

      What was his alternative? Residing in Russia does not imply endorsement of Russia's policies.

    5. Re:Narrator: by king+neckbeard · · Score: 2

      Are US intelligence services being abusive by any objective measure?

      Yes.

      Are US law enforcement agencies abusing intelligence provided to them or gathered by them?

      Yes.

      To what extent?

      To an endemic extent, where the best thing we can do for national security would be to destroy the headquarters of the major intel TLAs.

      Undercover cops and confidential informants are illegal in which reality?

      Not being illegal doesn't make something okay.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    6. Re:Narrator: by Riceballsan · · Score: 1

      well, he wanted to be able to inform the people of what he had found, and he wanted to not die in the process. He hasn't exactly hailed russia as a great place, but there just aren't exactly a lot of options.

    7. Re: Narrator: by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      Got stuck in Russia during a stopover on a international flight that was not supposed to pass through Russia but was redirected mid-flight allegedly to avoid a storm, the airline claimed later.

    8. Re: Narrator: by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      And your evidence for all of this is ... hey, look over there!

    9. Re: Narrator: by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Of course not. I'm sure he will be releasing a trove of information about Russian spying programs. Aaaaany day now.

    10. Re: Narrator: by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      The FBI was abusive back when J. Edgar was sucking up dirt like another kind of Hoover. Not even counting things like almost destroying the goddamn world during the Cuvan Missile Crisis, we've even got the recent LoveInt within the NSA. We've also got parallel construction for the abuse by law enforcement.

      Jesus, how fucking stupid do you have to be to not realize that power is inherently corrupting, and anybody that can wave their hands at any criticism by saying "national security" is going to be overwhelmingly corrupt.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    11. Re: Narrator: by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      The FBI was abusive back when J. Edgar was sucking up dirt like another kind of Hoover.

      Totally. This is why I hate doctors, personally; they used to be insanely ignorant and abusive back when they were treating people with bleeding and trepanning. If there's one thing I've learned in life it's that judging people and organisations based on the actions of their predecpredecessors is the surest path to truth. A historical example or two are far more convincing than any actual evidence of contemporary wrongdoing!

      This is also why I hate the Jews; because they killed Jesus. Bet they'd do it again in a second, the heartless bastards.

      even counting things like almost destroying the goddamn world during the Cuvan Missile Crisis, we've even got the recent LoveInt within the NSA. We've also got parallel construction for the abuse by law enforcement.

      I have no idea what that meant, but I'm sure you're very passionate about it.

      Jesus, how fucking stupid do you have to be to not realize that power is inherently corrupting, and anybody that can wave their hands at any criticism by saying "national security" is going to be overwhelmingly corrupt.

      I've waived my hands and said "national security" many a time. That whole corruption thing was really great to me. I made less than the public sector, had more fucked up rules to deal with, had more hoops to jump through, and had paranoid nutbags questioning everything I said and did. I totally miss all those benefits; should have never left the public sector.

    12. Re:Narrator: by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      and on a forum like this, perfection isn't necessary.

      I think, personally, that on a forum like this, precision in language is very important. On facebook, maybe not. On youtube, certainly not. But on Slashdot - I guess I'm old-fasioned - we should strive for, if nothing else, at least spelling correctly.

    13. Re:Narrator: by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Iceland.

      Snowden was actually on his way to South America for some reason... Ecuador was supposed to give him asylum, but I think I'd much rather live in Iceland.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    14. Re: Narrator: by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I once tried to drive from new York to Los Angeles but accidentally got stuck in Abhu Dhabi.

      The real news here is that you've got a goddamned flying car and you're keeping quiet about it.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    15. Re:Narrator: by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Ecuador was supposed to give him asylum, but I think I'd much rather live in Iceland.

      I don't know that Ecuador actually could have done the job. That area is kind of the USA's special ops playground.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    16. Re: Narrator: by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      A historical example or two are far more convincing than any actual evidence of contemporary wrongdoing!

      Yeah, because it's not as if those kinds of policies haven't persisted and continued. It's not like there is a long list of governments the US has tried to overthrow. And of course, parallel construction, which was using surveillance data in an illegal way, and covering it up by creating a different way to find the info, was cited post-Snowden, on top of all of the programs like PRISM that he leaked info on.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    17. Re: Narrator: by quicks0rt · · Score: 1

      Then pass through he would have, until his passport was revoked.

      Nice try.

  2. You hear that Mr. Anderson? by zlives · · Score: 1

    That is the sound of inevitability... o wait maybe i confused inevitability with futility...

  3. Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Snowden gave up everything for a bunch of morons that for the most part don't give a shit. They deserve whatever comes next.

    1. Re:Hero by ArylAkamov · · Score: 1

      You're not wrong.

    2. Re:Hero by Maltheus · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I remember him once saying that he'd regret what he had done, if no reform ended up coming out of it. Not only did we not get any reform, the American people seem to have fully embraced it. Every bill that increases the power of these agencies, sails through without a hiccup.

    3. Re:Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, the only thing that could happen happened: a change of government. But probably this had little impact.

      It's really a failing of (US) democracy that all possible society issues are funneled through only two choices that offer 90% the same thing. Personally, I'm a proponent of the smallest possible federal government, not because I'm into small government but because there's no democracy at the federal level. Another solution would be to elect the secretaries individually.

    4. Re:Hero by Gr8Apes · · Score: 2

      Umm, that's because a certain minority representative party has gamed the system for 30 years to enable this end-game. And end-game it is, just not the one they wanted. The GOP will disintegrate over the next year or two. It's going to be interesting.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    5. Re:Hero by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The GOP will disintegrate over the next year or two.

      People keep saying that, and then their supporters keep embracing ever-greater levels of hypocrisy and corruption.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:Hero by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      The GOP will disintegrate over the next year or two.

      People keep saying that, and then their supporters keep embracing ever-greater levels of hypocrisy and corruption.

      I'm not sure they can get any worse than today and still retain the dressings of democracy.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    7. Re:Hero by wyHunter · · Score: 1

      Isn't it unfortunate that BOTH party supporters do this? Sorry, but if you look at the actual policies of both parties, they are virtually identical.

    8. Re:Hero by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Isn't it unfortunate that BOTH party supporters do this? Sorry, but if you look at the actual policies of both parties, they are virtually identical.

      Only if you ignore racism, sexism, gay, trans, and women's rights, which I notice is what you've done there

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:Hero by wyHunter · · Score: 1

      With the exception of a few nuts in BOTH parties, nothing ever changes, it's rhetoric. I'm saying what do they DO, not say.

    10. Re: Hero by CoolDiscoRex · · Score: 1
      Yes, but until recently, the Democrats at least offered the illusion of intellectual superiority and the moral high ground. Who knew that they were every bit as succeptible to moral panic as the far rightest of right wingers? I didn't actually think that they were as easy to manipulate as they've proven themselves to be, nor did I think that they would so easily take positions which were outright cruel. Alas, all it took for them to devolve into a cauldron of pathological hypocricy, was for the ruling-class to play to their narcissism. Once they did that, it was game over.

      Now we have people with IQs of 125 running around calling themselves "tolerant" before reeling off an ever-growing list of people they steadfastly refuse to tolerate. You know, because they won't tolerate intolerance.

      People who wag their fingers about Climate Change to people that don't own cars, before hopping a plane back home so mommy and daddy can pamper them for a week, before they fly back before work starts.

      They get away with it because they can always count on the ruling-class to give them a pass and look the other way. So long as they vote right and talk right, they can actually DO whatever they want.

      Both parties are duly fucked. There are no occupants of the moral high-ground anymore.

    11. Re:Hero by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      With the exception of a few nuts in BOTH parties, nothing ever changes, it's rhetoric. I'm saying what do they DO, not say.

      You can compare voting records and see that there are substantive differences between the parties in these areas. You can also see that there are no differences between them in other areas, but that doesn't change the first fact.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    12. Re: Hero by wyHunter · · Score: 1

      You have said it!

  4. So is it better by bobstreo · · Score: 1

    to not know, and continue to be blissfully ignorant, or suffer the pain of knowing, and being unable to do anything about it?

    1. Re:So is it better by zlives · · Score: 1

      there are things you can change... like not use facebook or smart phones....
      at least you make that choice knowingly.
      on the other hand.... lalalalalala... i can't hear you may be more to the liking of some.

  5. Reminder: You're not totally powerless by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

    There are things you can't change, things that only our legislators can affect, but you can still take back a measure of your privacy moving forward -- you just have to be willing to do what it takes to make that happen.

    1. Re:Reminder: You're not totally powerless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. When the TLA can use even your TV to spy on you, how would you even know what they're using to spy on you?

      So, no TV's, routers, smart devices, phones, or electronics of any kind.

      Surveillance tech has become so miniaturized that it could be in anything. Even if you think you don't have any devices that could be spying on you, you could still be wrong. It should would be nice if the government just followed the rules that it creates.

    2. Re:Reminder: You're not totally powerless by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Wow, and people have accused me of being a tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy nut. Or are you trolling me? Either way you're dumb and/or wrong, depending on what part of your rant I want to address -- and I can't be bothered to sit here and pick it apart. Calm down.

    3. Re:Reminder: You're not totally powerless by eaglesrule · · Score: 2

      Vault 7, learn what it is. "Weeping Angel" in particular turned smart tvs into spy tvs.

      When it comes to domestic spying, being a "tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy nut" just means you're paying attention.

    4. Re:Reminder: You're not totally powerless by sarren1901 · · Score: 2

      AC may be paranoid but that doesn't make AC necessarily wrong. Most TV's can spy on you. Your smart phone most certainly can spy on you. All those voice assistants are of course listening. We have seen different articles over the past months and years that show just that happening.

      Unless you give up modern life, you are going to be spied on. Maybe if you move to a less technical part of the world and give up all your fancy computer tech, you may gain back privacy.

      Is privacy really worth giving up that much? I may hate that the 4th is dead in all but name, but I'm not going to go live in a cave in Afghanistan just to say I have privacy. Likely that wouldn't even be true. Probably satellites watching the entire country anyway.

    5. Re:Reminder: You're not totally powerless by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Re 'things that only our legislators can affect"
      That was attempted in the 1970's. The NSA and CIA one into a private room with US politicians.
      The use of budgets and the US legal system attempted to stop illegal domestic spying.

      The CIA just went full Iran Contra to get new funds and outpace any US changes to CIA funding.
      Nothing changed to domestic US collection.

      But the world now knows about PRISM, the junk US big brand crypto. The social media spying.
      The telco spying. The illegal domestic collection.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    6. Re:Reminder: You're not totally powerless by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Can't speak for the majority but neither I nor anyone I know fell for the 'smart TV' meme, and the few who bought one don't ever connect it to the internet for any reason.

    7. Re:Reminder: You're not totally powerless by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1
      Yes yes yes I KNOW all that already and tell others the same regularly. I do not have a 'smart TV', or a smartphone, or a voice assistant, or any of the other useless toys that have been leveraged into being surveillance devices, and I have not 'given up modern life', and it's wrong of you to characterize it that way. You can be smart about some things and take back SOME of your privacy moving forward. Stay off 'social media'. Don't use a smartphone. Don't buy things with cameras and microphones that are 'always on'. Don't buy most 'IoT' devices for the same reasons. Pay CASH for all purchases you possibly can, and write checks for things you can't, instead of using plastic (which is also safer right now anyway because of constant data breaches; electronic payment systems are NOT SECURE and like having unprotected sex the more you expose yourself to them the higher your risk of getting your data stolen).

      Is privacy really worth giving up that much? I may hate that the 4th is dead in all but name, but I'm not going to go live in a cave in Afghanistan just to say I have privacy. Likely that wouldn't even be true. Probably satellites watching the entire country anyway.

      Listen, buddy: I want to slap people when they say shit like that. If you GIVE UP then THEY WIN; is that what you want? To live like an animal in a zoo, or a convict in prison, watched 24/7/365 cradle-to-grave, every move you make, word you say recorded logged scrutinized and analyzed? Is that the world you want your kids growing up in? Don't even accuse me of the 'Appeal to Emotion' fallacy because it's a real question: Do you want your own children growing up in a world where having NO PRIVACY WHATSOEVER and being surveilled constantly is the NORM? If you say anything other than a resounding "NO!" then I say you need to THINK HARDER and try again.

      If you think I'm being too harsh then consider this: It takes at least this much to get through to most people, and 'most people' are what it's going to take to reverse this trend and take back our lives.

  6. We are aware but overloaded. by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    We are swarmed with real and fake information all the time. Real information may be used out of context, Fake information can be made to sound realistic, and if it fits into your particular world view it makes a lost of sense.

    We are no better off knowing the truth, when it is mixed in a bunch of lies, except for the fact we are now anxious about it.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  7. Re:People in Russia are powerless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The real agents are the people who expose Russian agents for what they are? Sure...

    I'll bet you think it's treasonous for me to point out that Trump has blatantly committed treason in his election campaign and his protecting and rewarding Russia for attacking our country.

  8. Re:Thief and a traitor! by ChromeAeonuim · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Privacy is Treason." Straight out of 1984 right there.

  9. Willful Ignorance proves things are worse. by geekmux · · Score: 3

    Sorry, but nothing has really changed. In fact it's probably worse now.

    Users used to be unaware, and they didn't give a shit about security or privacy. Now they're fully aware, and they STILL don't give a shit about security or privacy. It's willful ignorance.

    And what people are truly powerless over, are their own internet addictions and peer pressure. It's FAR more important to overshare and generally be the internet narcissist society expects you to be than it is to recognize and respect any risk involved with that activity.

  10. Aware of what? by jfdavis668 · · Score: 3

    Did I miss something?

    1. Re:Aware of what? by ArylAkamov · · Score: 1

      I can't hear you over all the government cock you're choking on.

    2. Re:Aware of what? by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      PRISM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      DROPOUT JEEP https://www.cnet.com/news/nsa-...
      BULLRUN https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      Lots of ways to get around junk big brand encryption and collect it all.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  11. Re: People in Russia are powerless by ArylAkamov · · Score: 1

    I know that Trump colluded with the Russian government's attacks on our country, and continues to serve and protect the Vladimir Putin.

    You do? Amazing! Everyone will want to see this!
      Where's the evidence you have of this? Can I see it?

  12. Re: People in Russia are powerless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Trump Jr's treason-meeting at was explicityly to collude with the Russian government's attacks on our country.

    Donald Trump's campaign manager is under house arrest likely headed to prison for witness tampering during his house arrest.

    You can pretend not to notice the mountains of evidence of treason laid out before us, but Donald Trump's campaign manager is wearing an ankle bracelet and will soon be wearing a jumpsuit in prison.

  13. Re: Not privacy left to be had in the US. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    You Sir, are a frog on the boil.

  14. Re: People in Russia are powerless by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

    Trump isn't smart enough to collude with himself, and Russian intel wouldn't want an operative like him, because it jeopardize the operation.

    Russian interference in the election, for which evidence is limited to a modest budget of shit-tier memes, generally trends more anti-Clinton than pro-Trump, but overall, it's just low-level trolling. Thus, people who keep repeating "Trump is a traitor" ad nauseum are the real useful idiots.

    And for the record, my stance is that the greatest insult to American democracy was the lack of an option on the ballot to send both Clinton and Trump on a rocket headed towards the sun.

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  15. Re:Not privacy left to be had in the US. by GoTeam · · Score: 1

    To be fair, your chances of sleeping with a supermodel greatly increase when you win the lottery. Not saying it's a 90% chance, but it is much higher than the 0.0000000000000000001% chance I have right now.

  16. Re:The most important change? by MikeDataLink · · Score: 1

    Never being able to go home. Right, Snowden?

    With that said, Snowden deserves his exile and more. Whatever your arguments are the fact remains that Snowden is in fact a low life thief and a traitor.

    If you're wife were cheating on you and giving her lover money from your checking account, setting up cameras in your office at work to spy on you, and sending your kids to Nazi school instead of homeschooling them like you thought...

    Would you be pissed off and ready to hang the person that told you? Get a grip man. Snowden did the right thing, and the only thing he could do. He's more American than 99% of our politicians.

    --
    Mike @ The Geek Pub. Let's Make Stuff!
  17. Re: People in Russia are powerless by Narcocide · · Score: 1

    There is good evidence in either direction at this point.

    Stop arguing as though these two things are mutually exclusive. It's just as possible that he's helping Putin on purpose because he's incompetent, rather than in spite of it.

  18. No offense, but by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 1

    being aware and powerless isn't much different than having power, yet being unaware.

    The end result is the same.

    Nothing changes.

    1. Re:No offense, but by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      People can now LOL at the "crypto" experts the big US brands use.
      The academics that assured the world their special crypto was a standard, tested and totally safe.
      The legal teams who invited "other agencies" to connect their brand up to US collect it all spying.
      The power of spying is gone.
      People cannot change the illegal domestic spying but the academics and big brands experts are now a joke.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  19. Re:Google and Facebook are laughing all the way to by Narcocide · · Score: 1

    We don't know that for sure.

  20. Re:Aware as ever by Narcocide · · Score: 1

    +1 funny

  21. Re: The most important change? by c6gunner · · Score: 1

    Would you be pissed off and ready to hang the person that told you?

    No. I would get pissed off and ready to hang the fuckwit after he copied all of my personal documents, banking/financial info, browsing history, chat histories, and home-made porn collection, dumped a bunch of it randomly on the internet, and then fucked off and offered it to my neighbour in exchange for getting to hide in his house.

  22. Re:Snowden bashers are all AC by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    The AC with day jobs that have security clearances can only use the AC part of sites like this.
    To put their side of the collect it all story.
    The color of law fiction they got told that makes decades of illegal domestic spying feel legal.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  23. Re: Snowden bashers are all AC by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

    The Snowden bashers are all hired trolls. All decent red blooded Americans admire national hero Snowden, and demand he be awarded the Medal of Freedom he deserves.

  24. Re:Thief and a traitor! by another_twilight · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law." - Martin Luther King Jr.

  25. Da, Comrade! by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

    Comrade Snowden has spoken and thus it is true!!

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  26. Re:Thief and a traitor! by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

    He didn't say that so you are a lying sack of shit. He rightly pointed out that Snowden is a traitor in the pay of Russians who have been interfering in U.S. politics and using the information they got from Snowden to do it.

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  27. Re: Not privacy left to be had in the US. by CoolDiscoRex · · Score: 1
    Not only that, but we feel confident that, statistically, in a country of 300 million people, it will be a very long time before they come for us personally. I mean, it's hard to persecute the entire population at once, you have to be selective. By keeping your head down, chances are, other people will be targeted first. It's like those animal species that move in groups of hundreds of thousands though dangerous territory. The lion has a very easy time catching it's dinner, but the sheer numbers mean that, statstically, most animals will survive the journey. The lion just can't catch them all. Safety through obscurity. That's the mentality that many of us have. We know that things are messed up, and that we live in a police state.

    The police can't punish everyone, though, so if you go along with it, chances are very good that you can maintain a reasonable quality of life, even in a police state. Speak out, and your risks of being noticed by the machine go up exponentially.

    Currying favor with the machine is the best defense when you no longer control the machine. This si much easier to do when we convince ourselves that the machine is righteous and the dissenters are evil. Such notions become a very easy sell to the people when aquiesense is inevitable anyway. We all live in varying degrees of delusion. It's how we survive.

  28. Re: People in Russia are powerless by CoolDiscoRex · · Score: 1
    lol, one of two corporate-owned puppets != control

    it's the illusional of control

    The average IQ of the USA is 98. Those with IQ's > 120 represent single digit percentages of the population.

    True critical or abstract thinking begins around 110.

    Roughly 2/3rds of Americans are under this. They far outnumber the votes of those who think critically. How do people without critical thinking learn? Via repetition. This is why candidates buy ads, and run them frequently.

    Democracy is idiot rule. Okay, that's a bit extreme, it's actually rule by those of average intelligence. That's kind of scrary in and of itself, though, as history has proven repeatedly that masses cannot effectively govern themselves, and their ability to choose governors is not significantly better. Some of the worst actors have been popularly elected.

  29. Re:Not privacy left to be had in the US. by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

    Wait, wait, RECORD high labor non-participation rates and this is "Good times"?
    Not in any reality anywhere

  30. Re: Don't start your sentances in the Subject. by CoolDiscoRex · · Score: 1
    Not all of them. 10% of people are very bothered by it, 10% are moderaly bothered by it, 10% are concerned by it, and 70% don't care. The 66% of Americans that are below the critical thinking threshold of ~IQ 110, plus a little.

    The problem is, that 70% is the solid majority.

    Ruling elites love Democracy because it's easily corruptable, and they can effortly dilute the votes of the smartest citizens by out-voting them 2-1 with citizens of average and below cognition.

    Democracy gives the most intelligent segments of society quite a bit less say in governance than it does those of average and below average intellect.

    That "the masses" accept abuse is nothing new. They always have. We've just sold the smart people on the notion that Democracy somehow prevents such abuse, when the truth is, it does no such thing. Evil people will always find it trivial to manipulate the average majority, and once they've done so, those in the higher tiers who care are powerless to do anything. You know, because "the people had their say at the ballot box".

    Smart-than-average people are forced to accept what the bottom 70% will accept, and they're usually quite upset at having to do so.

    It's not a new problem.