Apologies for the long and somewhat inflaming post. I've got a few things to get off my chest (not against any of you, though!)
TIMESWORDSMAN said:
I've been telling people about it, as many as I can, but the most I can seem to do is convince them to put electrical tape over any device with a webcam.
Hold on, I thought the problem was the Gov. snooping on private conversations, not literally spying on people through their own devices? That seems like it'd be rather pointless, you know?
DoveAlexa said:
Though really, while I like to be able to keep my person safe from BS like this, it seems like most people completely deserve whatever they get.
That's a rather harsh viewpoint. I mean, the only "crime" they've committed is not caring enough. If it bites them in the ass then it shouldn't be a surprise, but I wouldn't consider it a justice.
Taurus Vis said:
For so long, the populace has been asleep. The media will never let you understand the slow but cancerous changes that have been changing America for freedom to enslavement since the 1970s. They are on the governments payroll, taking stories pre-written for them by "government officials" who write both the left wing and right wing side of the story. They keep those even partially invested in government distracted by wedge issues like gay marriage or whatever else pushes buttons, all the while working to disarm the populace and sending young men to war to die for old men's money. It has to stop, but it can only stop if you decide to act. Please watch this, and please get involved.
I don't buy it. There's so many outlets for news and communication, from newspapers to television to the world wide web, that it would be remarkable if the government could actually control it all. Not that it's impossible, just seems like such an enormous (and, if you're videos prove anything, futile) effort. Finally, accessible foreign newspapers like the Guardian are more than willing to report on our scandals and affairs, so rest assured those "young men" were capable of educating themselves on their country's motivations before joining the armed forces.
Monster_user said:
Are the "tin foil hat" guys the problem? Spend a hundred years screaming 1984, and let people get used to the concept. Then when it actually happens, well,... So the tin foil hat guys were right all along? That's cool.
Probably more likely that people are living in their own self-reinforcing bubbles, rather than discussing things with those they disagree with. Because disagreements are unpleasant.
There are a lot of questions to be asked, and discussions to be had. Who is discussing the benefits and ramifications of "Big Brother"? Who is coming up with solutions for real world problems, that don't create a high risk of a police state later?
Well from my experience people who take the stance against government on these issues tend to be quite arrogant and self-reinforcing. It's probably just a result of poor communication-you can't exactly be kind when telling someone they're being exploited beyond their control- but its rather irritating and distracting.
Frostbite3789 said:
thaluikhain said:
Likewise, the US is, as a whole, very big on democracy, and how it makes them the greatest nation on Earth. And yet half the voters don't bother voting, and massive slabs of the nation truly despise other massive slabs.
It's like you don't understand that's part of the system and what makes it good. I didn't agree with either big candidate in the last Presidential election, so I didn't vote for either. And I'm not going to waste chunks of my day when I'm a poor college student and was working or studying instead, standing in line to throw my vote away on a third party candidate.
I've never thought of it that way, actually. Perhaps our apathy is a result of more than just human laziness! That's the type of thing we should be doing studies on.
Quick! Someone show me the poll turnouts from the UK's last election!
Therumancer said:
If you want to have your arguments taken seriously, you're gonna have to have some sources to back it up; otherwise it's just a bunch of broad claims anyone could make.
omegaweopon said:
Oh yeah, and also, so many people have so much apathy to this thing it's incredible. Seriously. The media sweeping it under the rug. The government witch hunt. Which celebrity is marrying whom. This place is the worst. I swear. (Lucky me. I just so happen to be residing in what I feel is the worst state of this terrible country. Also, I called this country terrible. I'm a terrorist now according to a lot of Americans.)
The way I see it, everyone's gonna have to stop caring about the world's problems at SOME point. Whether they draw the line at themselves, world hunger or government surveillance, people can only worry so much before turning apathetic. Of course, when all sorts of problems everywhere never get taken care of (how're those chocolate slaves [http://thecnnfreedomproject.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/16/chocolate-explainer/]holding up?), then yeah. it's fucking disgraceful.
Abandon4093 said:
What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egotism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy. As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions." In 1984, Orwell added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that our desire will ruin us.
It seems simple, but it really isn't. The main problem I see is separating distractions from legit issues. We can all agree that sex, drugs, or rock n' roll are just wastes of time, but what about things like education, religion, or parenting? Even the aforemented rock n' roll could be a force for good if it highlights social issues in society. Of course, laziness is still a huge factor in apathy, which most people agree is a bad thing. Problem being they already see themselves as "doing enough".
Wenseph said:
Also, I wasn't propagating peace or acceptance. I don't care. I don't despise any single type of person. I hate everyone equally.
Genuine question: What would have to happen to humans to be worthy of respect or at least acquaintanceship?
DrunkOnEstus said:
We have more distractions now than during the mass levels of protest the US experienced in the 60's and 70's as well. Back then, they didn't have a cell phone ringing or texting every minute, and they didn't have an MMO to get back to as soon as work was over. I imagine more people did their conversations and meetings in person and in groups far more often than we do today, where something like this NSA thing would spark a fire and mob mentality would make more people feel comfortable about "doing something about it".
I think most "slacktivists" honestly don't care about the issues they support, and would contribute nothing to the cause otherwise. People who honestly care still get out there and protest like always. If they don't convince anyone join them, odds are they wouldn't of even without social media.
Greni said:
Let the wishes of the few outweigh the needs of many -
In this land where money talks we have little chance if any.
Bring the nation back to basics -
Lionize Dickensian dreams,
Hide a heart that's grey and cold behind an image squeaky-clean.
This type of stuff has been going on since the Gilded Age. Considering how far we've come in the century since (like the existence of regularions, for starters) and the huge amount of support humanitarian causes get in the Western world, I'd say, bar complete social collapse, people won't let these tyrannies last much longer. It's not gonna be anytime soon, but the spark is certainly there.
tofulove said:
i am very morally against prism, but at the same time i want to play devils advocate just a little bit for fun.
im not talking about the justification of we need it to stop the terrorist. no im talking about if the worse thing i have to worry about is some one sitting in a room listening and watching me have phone sex, we as a society have came a long way. in the industrial revolution the worse thing we had to worry about was a long list, mutilated limbs, damaged lungs, working 14 hours a day 7 days a week and not making enough to feed my kids. in medieval society the worse thing to worry about was also a long list, being forced to fight in some lords war i care nothing about, being raped and pillage by said lord or another lord cause they wanted some thing i have, a huge portion of my children dieing at birth.
life sucks, and this is a gross abuse of our government. if you take a step back and look at the big picture you will see prism is bad, but it ant rapping you and steeling your food yet. we must be ever vigilant, because if they could get away with it you could bet your ass they would.
Agreed. Glad I'm not the only one with some perspective!
Doesn't validate PRISM, though.