Re:We Only Have Hours Left to Stop the NSA Expansion Bill
by mindslight on Wednesday December 20, 2017 @02:39PM
(#15972968)
> Rand Paul ... Bernie Sanders made similar promises from the far opposite end of the spectrum.
Referring to Libertarian and left-libertarian as opposite ends of the spectrum is a grave disservice, and feeds directly into our contemporary fallacious polarization.
Either view it as a two-dimensional circle, or just ignore the secondary "Left"-"Right" marketing and analyze the primary characteristic of libertarian-authoritarian.
Re:We Only Have Hours Left to Stop the NSA Expansion Bill
by Bartweiss on Thursday December 21, 2017 @11:09AM
(#15979863)
I chose 'spectrum' since the comment I was referring to was starting from a "which party" question - the spectrum I was envisioning was "fringe to mainstream" within a given party.
I certainly agree that framing political beliefs themselves as linear is misleading, though. I should have been clearer about that.
Trump's views on privacy are obvious and awful, yes - he has Sessions as AG.
But Dianne Feinstein is one of the fiercest surveillance advocates in Congress. Hillary Clinton had vastly more support from intelligence agencies than Trump did, and refused to condemn what was described in the Snowden releases.
Meanwhile, Rand Paul ended bulk phone record collection for a few hours in 2015, defying much of both parties to do so. He filibustered over drone strikes, and promised to restrict NSA searches if he was elected.
There's a lot to dislike about Rand Paul, and libertarians aren't the only people opposing surveillance - Bernie Sanders made similar promises from the far opposite end of the spectrum.
But I think framing this as "bad under Democrats, hopeless under Republicans" makes it harder to address the problem. The mainstream of both parties are similarly awful, even if the Democrats talk a bit more softly about it, while the fringes of both parties are often strong surveillance opponents.