Um, I Think It's Time for a Thread on WikiLeaks

you guys sure have a lot of faith in people

xp to shakey: I think what he means by that is that no solution is forthcoming, not that he expects any magic to occur. The accusation that people dissatisfied with the administration are asking for miracles is a popular one, though.

Destructive to US power, possibly. It seems like a very possible scenario, and as many problems as I have with US governance (stuff like torture, overthrowing democratically elected governments, etc), I'm not so convinced that there's significantly better models out there. I subscribe to the position that Europe is able to curtail many of their military needs because the US has stepped up to that role globally (I first read this in Zizek's new book and later in a few other places), not to mention that different countries have varying historical and even contemporary levels of responsibility (like in the UN). So the question is, assuming US power is limited, who steps up to fill the gap? (To paraphrase Zizek, should our only choice be between American-style civilization and the emerging Chinese authoritarian-capitalist form? If the answer is no, then the only alternative is Europe... But can Europe deliver such a thing?) xp to above

J0hn, I think it's pretty clear that's where his positions lead him. He is not merely dissatisfied but unable to understand how the system itself functions. You have a similar problem -- you've let idealism get in the way of actually understanding how Democracy works. Being idealistic is good, but letting that blind you to the world is silly. The lesson of Watergate wasn't that Presidents had gotten progressively and progressively more corrupt until the contemporary era when they were all bad and so we should go back to the time of honorable men. The lesson of Watergate was that we now have the tools + media infrastructure to expose government corruption. A thoughtful person feels bad about when things don't work in the world and when bad things happen, and then tries to figure out the best way to work within a system to move them. Morbz says that no one can do anything good, everyone is evil and corrupt, and it's not worth playing -- but that something better exists. Except he won't show the steps to get to something better, just his principled feeling that he can. This is not different from the positions of religious people who believe in following a moral, ethical code and that when the Messiah comes, everyone + the world will be transformed.

like, my immediate assumption re: a hypothetical disclosure of the American military being complicit in doing bad things to random groups of dark people is that the average American will shrug and go "oh well, it's not here; pass me my cheeseburger"

those with the power to make things secret will do shitty things! because they can!

hi dere I'm not sure that this can be fairly described as an example of one person having "a lot of faith in people" but it may be that I'm not clear on what faith means in this context

can we not discuss people who are not posting to this thread plz

it would be best if we didnt veer into mordys pet theories about dr morbius

xp

Ok, so apply everything I said to j0hn. It serves as the same critique.

Er, Smith. Sorry.

oh i like where this is going

I should probably just drop the whole thing.

you are assuming that the American people will somehow magically stop being a large group of self-involved xenophobic assholes and care that the government is using the military to hurt people tens of thousands of miles away

like, no one will care unless those people also kill a whole bunch of US military men, in which case the reaction won't be "oh we should pull out of there", it will be "we should thoroughly destroy them"

J0hn, I think it's pretty clear that's where his positions lead him.

I want to be clear and open with you about how I feel about this line, and why I think you say it: it means you don't have to answer anything directly from him, or from anybody who persistently expresses total & permanent suspicion of the admin (or of all admins). your position is essentially an elegant ad-hom. It is not at all clear that "that's where his positions lead him"; it would be odd, indeed, for a person whose positions lead him in a clear way to never articulate that position, even once. Your accusation is essentially "you want a Messiah, you just don't know that that's what your positions mean"; what an insulting accusation that is to make, and baseless.

Ok dude -- how do you feel we should get from here to there?

You're right, maybe there's another ahistorical break, but I think my critique is super solid and not ad-hom at all. You are looking to alter the rules of the world but you won't say how we're going to do it.

I don't understand how thinking, "Since politics is a dirty business, we shouldn't trust anything our legislators and presidents say" is synonymous with "I have a quixotic, Emerald City vision of what perfect representative democracy looks like."

you are assuming that the American people will somehow magically stop being a large group of self-involved xenophobic assholes and care that the government is using the military to hurt people tens of thousands of miles away

oh man you should not get me wrong, I think we are twinned on our actually optimism - I don't think most people will do anything besides eat more pizza & I'll probably be one of the pizza-eating multitude myself - I think I'm maybe a tad less convinced of the total narcissism of the species than you are, but just a tad, and that's just 'cause I like poetry

it's a nice thought to think that Americans would only be nice and peaceful if they knew THE WHOLE STORY but that is ignoring both the culture of willful ignorance that fuels our society and the smug, authoritarian principles on which our country was founded

That's not the synonym, Alfred. The synonym is "Since these politicians are completely corrupt and can't do any good" = "Some other politician will be better, who isn't here right now," = "Who will be coming in the future." If you started with, "I'll work with what I have," then you'd leave in a different direction.

Some other politician will be better, who isn't here right now,"

No one here has said this!

for fuck's sake Mordy, stop trying to win ILX

Ok dude -- how do you feel we should get from here to there?

this question 1) doesn't pertain to the discussion, and is a separate disccusion; 2) doesn't preclude or invalidate even one criticism: "don't complain unless you have a solution!" is woeful management-speak; and 3) is a dishonest conversational move. I don't have any solutions at all, I am just a guy eating a pizza. Do you know what my lack of solutions says qualitatively about any criticism I might make? Nothing whatsoever, that's what. You're advancing the "don't criticize the music unless you can make better music yourself" model of politics. It is absurd, in my opinion, in both spheres.

I mean, the real critique is, "Great, you're idealistic. Who the fuck cares?" because the idealism as practiced that way has no impact on the world. It's just screaming into the wind, or to ask what the stakes are of that idealism, it's just to look good on a message board. You're not changing the world by saying how bad the US government is, you're just complaining.

If you have the time to peruse those exhausting 2008 political threads, you'll find few Obama "stans" – most people said he was the best candidate to come along in their lifetimes, with the talent to keep some longstanding promises. That's not at all the same as thinking there's a magical candidate out there. That's how Republicans think: they're always searching for another Reagan.

btw the pizza in my examples is entirely theoretical, there is no pizza where I'm at, much to my dissatisfaction. but maybe I shouldn't complain that there's no pizza here unless I have an idea about how I might go about making one myself.

That's really what I should post whenever one of these discussions come up. "Yep, morally rightitude on ILX! Rock on!" because clearly any attempt to ever engage that idealism into questions about practical practice are always hunted down for being too conservative.

If you have the time to peruse those exhausting 2008 political threads, you'll find few Obama "stans" – most people said he was the best candidate to come along in their lifetimes, with the talent to keep some longstanding promises. That's not at all the same as thinking there's a magical candidate out there.

The problem, actually, with political discourse around here is that other people then flipped that around to say that everyone thinks Obama is infallible and totally the magic n*gger we can believe in, which seriously pisses me off every time I see it.

that's how Republicans think: they're always searching for another Reagan.

― balls and adieu (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, July 27, 2010 3:35 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark

long may they search! fred thompson '12

Like, when I'm thinking through these issues, I'm not trying to think through them like a man eating a pizza. Maybe that's the big difference. From the pizza-perspective, it's easy to just take the hardline on any given moral issue. "Should we make all information free? Sure, why the fuck not. Information rocks."

I mean, the real critique is, "Great, you're idealistic. Who the fuck cares?" because the idealism as practiced that way has no impact on the world. It's just screaming into the wind, or to ask what the stakes are of that idealism, it's just to look good on a message board. You're not changing the world by saying how bad the US government is, you're just complaining

Yeah but you only use this argument to duck out of defending positions like "it's OK to censor information that might be damaging at some future point to theoretical negotiating interests with unknown parties." It is not "idealism" to call people out on their bullshit; your cries of "idealism," again, are just ad-homs meant to discredit the people making reasonably formed cases against your position.

oy

You're not calling me out on anything tho, Smith. You're just stating that my position doesn't hem to some perfect unconsidered consideration about information. No law will ever be instituted that says, "All information is free." That's not how any of this works. So my trying to figure out what information should be free, shouldn't, why power may require some sorts of information to maintain power, whether that power is good, and to what extent -- that's all thinking through the actual implications. You saying, "the principle is it should be," is reading off the ten commandments.

and let's be clear, Mordy. You are taking the hard line, you just don't want to cop to it. Your hard line is "if there is doubt, we must trust the state." That's as pizzariffic as anything else on this thread.

I didn't say that once.

this entire fucking thread is like a textbook definition of people taking hard-line immutable positions, let's not kid ourselves

for fuck's sake Mordy, stop trying to win ILX

― measuring of the waist (HI DERE), Tuesday, July 27, 2010 1:34 PM

Mordy, I am personally really sick of you shitting all over every single ILX politics thread with your crypto-fascist bullshit, please stop.

I didn't say that once.

Mordz I think it's pretty clear that's where your positions lead you.

HI DERE, I disagree. I think that's what the argument has been about from the beginning -- whether you should be taking hard-line immutable positions or not. I think saying WikiLeaks may be good or bad depending on the circumstances is about as mutable as position as can be posited.

No law will ever be instituted that says, "All information is free." That's not how any of this works.

It's becoming true whether there is a law or not. It's the long march of information technology towards more and more transparent systems, from being in the hands of only the Pharaoh's private scribes to where we are now.

this entire fucking thread is like a textbook definition of people taking hard-line immutable positions, let's not kid ourselves

I'm exempt from this charge because of my impeccable sartorial style tho right? that was my understanding of the ground rules going forward

Hey sleeve, you're right, I apologize for cluttering the thread with my crypto-fascist bullshit. I'll stop.

calling obama 'a pharaoh' is sorta racist dude

I suspect the american public would be more inspired to action if they found out about bad stuff in strategic doses rather than a constant bombardment of transparency, which would obviously fatigue anyone, and this sort of dynamic is at least recognized by wikileaks, who chose to release their info accordingly.

There was an interesting article on spycraft where the more information any side got, the less reliably they could determine the truth of anything, to the point where it would have been paradoxically better not to engage in espionage at all, and I feel like we are entering a climate where things constantly being leaked do more to obfuscate than clarify, and one in which the right wing is more adept at maneuvering.

um just to be very clear here, I am not at all opposed to Mordy arguing his political viewpoint; I am opposed to him inventing positions for other posters in an attempt to shame them away from threads

so, like, please do not quote me if you are looking for backup to bolster your calling someone fascist

All this talk of cheeseburgers and pizzas is making me mad-hungry, gents. Shut the fuck up.

guys can't we just all agree that pizza/the Beatles are awesome

I kind of want to create an I Love Politics board and give it the board description "Shut the fuck up."

guys can't we just all agree that pizza/the Beatles are awesome

the beatles suck! ffs shakey. er....

gonna start a political arguments tournament so we can figure out canon politics