Trying to write a response and have already scrapped several revisions. I just can't wrap my head around this. The assertion is that living under the threat of terrorism is equal to living under an oppressive government, although I think you meant to imply that terrorism is worse. You also seem to be implying that you believe terrorism could become just as prevalent in the U.S. as it is in Iraq if not for that oppressive government. And you seem to be admitting that it is oppressive, if not tyrannical. So what you're saying is... that nothing really matters? Life's just going to suck no matter what? Or that given the choice, you'd prefer oppression? What am I supposed to take away from this?
And I'm still going to need a lot of convincing to believe that the threat of terrorism is so high. The places where it seems most prevalent are places where the U.S. fed into it, or places where there is a long history of political bad blood between two populations that live in close proximity. Meanwhile, death by acts of terror in the U.S. could triple, and I would still be many times more likely to be killed by a government actor, mainly due to the way government institutions have evolved under the premise of preventing terrorism. Which says nothing of a whole host of other issues.
Personally, I'd rather face the threat of terror, anyway. Terrorism means there is a chance that something might happen to me as I go about my life, which is true anyway no matter what. Oppression means ever-present restrictions on the ways in which I am able to go about my life. The threat of terrorism is something I have some power over. In a confrontation with a terrorist, I can have some chance of defending myself. If I witness something suspicious, there are things I can do. When the government decides it wants to fuck with me, I am completely and utterly helpless. Literally the only self-defense I have against an oppressive government is civil opposition to the efforts of government to become oppressive.
Crazy dude: "I think the government is doing this!"
Normal person: "Haha that is crazy and impossible!"
Government: "We are definitely NOT doing that!"
Leaks/Media: "Yeah you kind of are."
Government: "Well, uh, it's for your own good, stop thinking about it too much!"
Crazy Dude: "Validation!"
Normal Person: "Huh... maybe crazy dude isn't so crazy after all..."
You forgot something...
Government: "Well, uh, it's for your own good, stop thinking about it too much!"
Crazy Dude: *list of abuses and other ways in which people have been wronged by ____ and comparison, both quantitative and qualitative, of the consequences of ____ vs the thing that ____ is supposed to prevent"
Government: *refuses from that point forward to acknowledge the existence of crazy dude to the public, declines comment when asked to address crazy dude's arguments, and adds crazy dude to a list of people to monitor more closely and harass at every excuse and opportunity*
The way I look at conspiracy theories anymore is that, besides the really obviously ridiculous stuff like lizard-people or faked moon landings, there is at least an element of truth to most of them... and that conspiracy itself is a constant. Just look back at the last century. There is now-established fact of conspiracy present in every decade prior to the 80's. They are established fact now because documents become declassified, people make confessions on their death beds or when decades of guilt simply breaks them, and active efforts to guard secrets fade away as those secrets become less relevant. As time marches on, this remains a continuous process. Most recently many facts have been established and confirmed regarding U.S. operations in South America in the late 70s/early 80s. Several years from now, I expect we'll be digging up similar things on the late 80s/early 90s. If you went back in time and told people during those periods that those conspiracies were taking place, how many would believe you? How many U.S. citizens in the 50s believed that their government was performing gruesome human experimentation in unwilling and even unwitting subjects? And the most important question is
what reason do I have to believe that things are any different right now? We have yet to hit a point where, as years fade further into history, less conspiracy-like facts are revealed about those years than the ones before. Do you believe that the future will find less dirt on our present than we continue to dig up on our past? Why? And given this perspective, how can I possibly trust one of the most pervasive, secretive, and unaccountable institutions of information control in human history?
Author
Topic: NSA Leaks - GHCQ in court for violation of human rights (Read 103542 times)