Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> there are more courteous and productive ways to express yourself than yelling "bullshit".

I disagree. When chatting with Faust, I think it's better to avoid the drawn out conversation and just tell him to fuck off. This Alexander guy is a liar and a felon (lying under oath to congress) and has earned our collective disrespect. He deserves a lot more than "bullshit!" He's a domestic terrorist that's infiltrated the government as far as I'm concerned.



It does not matter what Alexander deserves.

What matters is choosing a strategy that will be effective in exposing this intel-gathering to public scrutiny. One person shouting is not such a strategy.

It's the difference between individual catharsis and effective political strategy that produces an outcome.


So what would be a winning strategy in this scenario?

I don't think there is one. So let him know you think he's an arsehole while you have the chance because nothing you can say or do is going to change the general's stance on this issue. He's above the law and completely unaccountable. But he's not beyond being called out for being a bad person by another person, and I suspect that's the closest you're going to get to justice on this issue.


Well, you have to be prepared, and think out the consequences. You should have some leaders who are used to acting disciplined in public protest.

If you choose to shout him down (e.g., for a messy and still-controversial example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_Coalition_to_Unleash_Power...) you'd better have a united message and a goal, and media present. And it might still be a bit of a mess. (I had the privilege of attending a lecture on organizing by one of the leaders of this action.)

Other choices are to turn your backs on the speaker, or to walk out en masse.

I'm not sure there was time to prepare for this one, because these revelations are so fresh.

*

By the way, you seem pessimistic that this state of affairs can change due to grassroots action. I don't share your pessimism. When people find out the NSA has been scooping up their e-mail and Facebook chats?


We shall see. I hope you're right.


Standing up and turning your back to him, and remaining in that position would have been a classy way to let the general know you disagree.


I wholeheartedly agree, and I made a similar point in another comment.

But no matter what you do, it's totally futile. The NSA knows what you think, and they don't care.


What has he done that makes him a terrorist? Or are you just inferring that mass spying is a form of terrorism?


It was kind of a flip thing to say; I was on a bit of a roll.

The argument, such as it is, would go something like this: Instead of physical terror, the policies Alexander pursues create a psychological terror that jeopardizes "our way of life". Instead of a fear of being blown up, we have a fear of persecution for what we say.

A terrorist thinks he is beyond the law and uses his limited power to create fear in a population in order to achieve his ends, which the majority does not support. That's a description that seems to apply to Alexander.

I know he's different, but he's definitely not as different as he thinks.


Making people feel insecure in their business and daily lives might count as a kind of terrorism.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: