Monday Links
- US offensive cyberwar policy. Clearly, other nations will respond by doing the same to us (to the extent they haven't already). One good outcome of these leaks - Bruce Schneier used to be a sceptic who argued that cyberwar was an overhyped threat. That seems to be changing.
- More surveillance revelations. It appears that the British government is vacuuming up even more of the world's communications than the US government, but of course, sharing freely with its best friends.
- I agree wholeheartedly with this Glenn Greenwald essay. I have to say that, in the long tradition of second terms of presidents being consumed with scandals, it now appears that the second Obama term will be consumed with scandals about surveillance and civil liberties. Given the President's extremely poor record and attitude on these subjects, that seems appropriate (and I say this as someone who voted for him in both 2008 and 2012). It's very unfortunate that the President has been so corrupted by the power of his office. This is certainly not the change I was hoping for when I first voted for him.
Is it that the President has been corrupted by power? It could be that he never meant what he said in the first place. Or maybe the problem is that the whole position is now so corrupt that no person can take on the office without giving in completely to the dictate of the money-men.
ReplyDeletebetween-the-lines wrote:
ReplyDelete"Is it that the President has been corrupted by power? It could be that he never meant what he said in the first place. Or maybe the problem is that the whole position is now so corrupt that no person can take on the office without giving in completely to the dictate of the money-men."
I think the latter is closest.
But as regards the first I think people tend to want to put leaders, particularly Presidents on a pedestal. Very rarely they live up to that.
But make no mistake about it, it takes money to win any of the big races particularly the Presidency. And if you want that money, you are going to play ball.
Just as musing, some of the people we think of as great Presidents would not be electable in a media age. I think Lincoln would have looked odd and awkward, and FDR was in a wheelchair (that couldn't have been covered up or ignored in today).
Neither would be electable if they had to campaign in front of a tv camera.
Noone climbs to the top of a constraint free social ladder, unless their sole motivation is looking out for number one.
ReplyDeletePower corrupts not because "good people" magically change when given power. But rather because getting into power in the first place, is simply a test of who is the most willing and able to do what is necessary in looking out for number one.
The US Founders figured that out, and also realized the only solution to this, is to avoid grating anyone much i the way of power regardless of which "title" they happen to hold. But in a world where said power also includes the power to shape almost all children's education, I guess it's not surprising that that particular insight seem to have been largely forgotten.
While Snowden does a "Where's Waldo?" I'm skeptical given what I'm reading. If it has only prevented 50 events, not saying that isn't beneficial, just incredibly expensive & invasive.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, if it could be demonstrated that it could reduce 7 million annual cases of identity theft or rising elder fraud with more prosecutions and/or less fraud, it might have a more rational basis.
In an age of ad servers facilitating billions of transactions a day there's a very low probability that there can be any depth of thought, just annoying intrusion.
Maybe it catches some unaware, nominal levels of skill & millions of communication platforms & information tools say people with bad intentions are hard to ferret out.
I too voted for Obama & have gotten what I expected, a climber or achiever, not a strong leader for change, still much better than the 'other' choice.