What's funny is that that statement seems to accurately describe most all the officials we seem to be talking about. Much of the government is paranoid of it's people and the world in general, and are willing to sacrifice the trust we need to keep society functioning in order to preserve their unobtainable security goals.
Look, I'm not saying I mistrust everyone in government. As much reason as they've given me too, I know there are least some Representatives and Senators that still have the interests of the American people at heart, and others that believe that siding with the American people is in their own best interests. I don't trust the officials of any secret organization, or organization that trucks in secrecy as part of it's primary methodology or has a history of abusing secrecy to protect it's own status and members at the expense of the public at large - and for good reason. It's no secret what sort of individual you need to be to rise to the top of that sort of organization, and "trustworthy from the perspective of an American citizen" is most assuredly not one of those qualities (even though it should be). Would you seriously argue that trust the head of the NSA, or taking any official NSA spokesperson at their word, would be a smart thing to do or a good idea?
Also, how can this be described as "partisanship"?
Again, as many problems as Reagan had, "trust but verify" is a useful tool. We cannot, and should not, trust the government to act in our best interests. That is one of the founding premises of this country and one of our core ideals. It is why we set up systems of checks and balances, and adversarial structures, because we can't trust people to act in our best interests, without a way to verify that they are doing so. It's not paranoid - it's realistic. There needs to be structures in place to keep the various parts of the government honest, because we need to be able to trust those who hold power to function effectively as a society. At that means working against all the incentives government employees have to do exactly the opposite.
I want to see the structures that served this purpose (but have been dismantled), rebuilt. I'd like to see new structures put into place that recognize the modern world we live in. I want to believe in effective government, and there's not actually a whole lot that would need to be done to restore that belief in myself and a lot of other people.
I don't think it's likely to happen to the extent I want. I don't know if we'll even manage to move in that direction - there are plenty of powerful folks who very much like the way things are going now. I think it's possible. I do think we can improve.
But change requires people to care. And the primary argument of most of the anti-Snowden people in this thread, like MrHappy, is that we shouldn't care. And that is, yes, pretty damn infuriating. Because improvement is possible. The recently barely defeated legislation in the House shows that. But as long as people believe and argue that we honestly shouldn't care, change is going to be impossible to the extent that their arguments gain traction. All that's required to keep most people trustworthy is the right environment, but it's an environment certain components of the Federal government seem pretty intent on undermining.
It's basically the problem with many police departments writ large. Lack of oversight, protection of bad apples, growing corruption shielded from the public gaze and immunity to prosecution except for those who shake the boat and risk exposure of the departments problems. There are solutions to these sorts of problems, but it's not going to come from within the organizations involved. It needs public outcry and public pressure if reform is to be possible.
People arguing, as MrHappy does, that we need to avoid this sort of oversight in order to let these people do their jobs seem to fail to understand exactly what the job these people are supposed to be doing is. They are supposed to be working to make our country a better place. And the things they are doing, while they may serve the micro-goal of these organizations, don't serve the abiding focus that our government exists to support. They do not serve the public good effectively as they are, and this is a serious issue, and sweeping it under the rug, ignoring it, or saying they need these corrupting powers to do their job effectively is just going to leave us worse off.
Author
Topic: NSA Leaks - GHCQ in court for violation of human rights (Read 103562 times)