And yet it amazes me that people are still pushing for more government power and more government controlled services.
HN's audience of all people should be keenly aware of the US government's tendency towards authoritarianism.
HN's audience of all people should be keenly aware of the US government's tendency towards authoritarianism.
If you want to see what violence the private sector is capable of, look up the Nisour Square massacre : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nisour_Square_massacre
Anyone acquainted deeply with American history would be aware that yes, the government can tend towards authoritarianism, and often goes fully into it. But the American private sector is even more enthusiastic to commit atrocities and enforce the authority of the few on the many.
> But the American private sector is even more enthusiastic to commit atrocities and enforce the authority of the few on the many.
Shows a keen misunderstanding of American history. The US government commits far more atrocities on a yearly basis than the private sector ever has. I could fill up this whole page with links describing absurd infringements on our constitutional rights by the US government, many of them ongoing to this day.
I spoke of enthusiasm, not volume. The private sector commits less atrocities insofar as the government prevents them to. If you want a good historical example, recall that one of the main reasons for the American Revolution was that the private sector was angry at the Crown that they couldn't commit as much atrocities and steal as much land from the natives as they wanted to.
Never heard that one. Sources?
Also during the Revolution, the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sullivan_Expedition lead to atrocities against the natives and the later acquisition of a large amount of land for American settlers.
I wouldn't consider this in the top 10 motivations for the American Revolution. (In fact that complaint was the 27th of 27 complaints.)
But as a motivation, it was not exactly absent either. And the economic consequences of this particular item did prove, in hindsight, to be immense.
The espionage act which got used against Daniel Hale is also what the US is using in Assange's case.
This is one of those claims that's basically impossible to prove. I have no doubt you could link hundreds of constitutional infringements, but at the same time some reports suggest ~25% of workers regularly encounter some form of wage theft.
Or let's use this stories drone strikes as an example. Hale's revelation was that the military vastly underreported the number of civilian deaths to drone strikes. But I don't think private contractors would even be required to publish a bs number of casualties caused (I can't find any reporting requirements, but my search was hardly thorough.) Many private injustices can be very effectively hidden.
This is one of those claims that is self-evident after taking a highschool or college level US history class.
Also, wage theft is not nearly on the same scale as literal war crimes.
It really isn't. That class should also bring up the Pinkerton's, which is just an example of what shady shit the private sector engages in.
I brought up two examples, wage theft and private military contractors. One of the two very much is the same scale as literal war crimes.
Let's not compare which class of entities is more evil than the other.
We can't ignore that East India Company which ran drugs worldwide or I.G. Farben (maker of Nazi weaponry & Zyklon B), which later became Monsanto (maker or Agent Orange, DDT, etc.), Bayer, BASF. How about Corporate Sponsored "Tobacco Science" extolling the virtues of smoking? What about the various industrial complexes supporting the even more evil government?
With the Government infiltrated by agents who are connected with corporations & vice versa, is there any difference anyways? Are corporations & government inherently evil or are there contexts of corporations & government that are more evil than other contexts? Can criminal factions gain power over the government & corporations? Would corporations & government be less evil if honest people ran them instead of criminals?
Perhaps it's social phenomena, that we all participate in. Of course much if this phenomena is instigated by various cartels managing systems and hacking human consciousness & desire to consolidate power & curtail individual freedom & rights.
Im sure a lot of Americans have no idea what their government has been doing to other sovereign nations. Even Obama went on a world tour to disarm smaller nations like South Africa of their Nuclear Weapons. He certainly didn't go to Russia or China or North Korea. After South Africa made that deal about 2011~2012 - an influx of American imported food ravaged the local food production industries bringing one of the biggest poultry producers in the SADEC region to it's knees. Thats not a conspiracy theory. Thats just politics.
If you have 3 hours to spare, this is a good Epistemological explanation...
> "People in the U.S. seem able to recognize that China’s censorship of the internet is bad. They say: “It’s so authoritarian, tyrannical, terrible, a human rights violation.” Everyone sees that, but then when it happens to us, here, we say, “Oh, but it’s a private company doing it.” What people don’t realize is the majority of censorship in China is being carried out by private companies.
> Rebecca MacKinnon, former CNN Bureau chief for Beijing and Tokyo, wrote a book called Consent of the Network that lays all this out. She says, “This is one of the features of Chinese internet censorship and surveillance—that it's actually carried out primarily by private sector companies, by the tech platforms and services, not by the police. And that the companies that run China's internet services and platforms are acting as an extension of state power.”
> The people who make that argument don’t realize how close we are to the same model. There are two layers. Everyone’s familiar with “The Great Firewall of China,” where they’re blocking out foreign websites. Well, the US does that too. We just shut down Press TV, which is Iran’s PBS, for instance. We mimic that first layer as well, and now there’s also the second layer, internally, that involves private companies doing most of the censorship."
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/meet-the-censored-matt-orfalea
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28011353
> Tor Browser might help with mass data collection by businesses like Google, but it's the worst choice for threats by government or by others who have extra-legal powers: First, it signals that you are hiding something; it attracts attention: not everyone using Tor Browser is a dissident, but the proportion of dissidents among the Tor Browser population is much higher than among the Chrome and Safari populations. Second, it is based on a relatively insecure browser, Firefox, and then it is modified by a team that simply lacks the resources to design and implement proper security. Again, security is complex, expensive, and difficult. The obvious tactic for the attacker is to infect every Tor Browser visiting dissident resources.
> Seeing as how can very obvious to your ISP when you use Tor, I would take this advice with caution. I agree that you should download Tor Browser and get used to using it, but also think hard about whether it would be a problem if you were found to be using it, say from home.
So not sure how good the Tor advice is?
Agreed. If only HN collected a fee to read comments... /s
Linking to a private company that was killing for the government isn’t really a great example.
Damn the private sector and their evil ... of wait the government was stumping up the cash. Was the government perhaps acting in its private capacity when hiring mercenaries to "support democracy" in oil rich nations?
This is not even particularly a private-public thing (look to the East India company for what a private company is capable of, although the situation was complicated). The invasion of Iraq wasn't a private enterprise. There were private interests involved, but I think most people would agree that is curruption.
Obviously foreign invasions were not purely private enterprises. But American history is full of private interests pushing for war, the American Revolution itself was caused in large parts by the American private sector being much more enthusiastic to ethnically cleanse the land from natives and steal their land than the crown.
Private interests lobbying the US Government isn't really corruption, it is the way things are sadly intended to work.
My point is that the reason these atrocities are made by the government and not private companies is only that the government prevents the private sector from committing them. So giving power to the private sector instead of the government in general is not a good course of action despite these events because there is no reason to believe it is any less enthusiastic to do atrocious things.
You're putting up evidence that they are also hiring vetted thugs and sending them over to massacre people - also indiscriminately. Again, it is probably illegal at some level to report on how many massacres actually happen so presumably this case is more common than people think.
And the take away here is that the government is protecting us from private sector malfeasance? The private sector would never get funding for this sort of insanity! The only reason money is going to this is because paying taxes is mandatory. A tiny minority of people support this bloodshed. They just happen to have plum positions in DC. And even then, only because it isn't their money being used to vaporise brown people.
That doesn’t follow, if the private sector decides to do something of it’s own volition then that’s on the private sector.
It’s the same deal here, the company is 100% at fault, the government might also share some responsibility or not depending on the specifics. As to drone operators, “I was only following orders” isn’t a free pass though I was given bad information might be, the government can also be responsible at the same time.
Which isn’t to say these drone operators are going to end up at The Hague, but they and their superiors should at least be invested.
Did Trump pardon them in his capacity has a private sector businessman?
It doesn't look like these are rogue agents. It looks a lot like the government (and, specifically, the military) is supporting their actions at the highest levels.
The 'oh they're private contractors, nothing to do with the US military here!' line doesn't really fit.
To not put any blame on the US government for giving these companies the reach that they have is to turn a blind eye to the source of the problem. Not to mention that these mercenary companies are made up to a huge degree by ex military.
When you hire a Hitman to do your dirty work, sure, the Hitman is responsible, but the guy who hired him at least shares some blame.
It is, but this isn’t a US trait. Look at the UK and it’s record. The British East India company were truely outrageous and set the standard for centuries of brutality and immense profit. Pretty much everything else is small fry in comparison.
Let’s just say Amazon and the government are both equally evil. You get to pick one to have more power. Are you going to pick the one who has given us the wonderful invention called the dmv, or the one who will let me order whatever I want and get it to me in a reasonable time at a reasonable price. Amazon does a better job at serving the populace than the government does. They both act like rulers, but at least one gives you something worthwhile for it.
What is especially galling about it is that the entire monstrosity was constituted specifically in order to maintain the structures of private power and profit and has never deviated from that goal. The entire murder machine exists to benefit the corporate power that you absurdly imagine as some kind of countervailing force.
How do you account for the fact that military and CIA involvement overseas is systematically in the service of imposing minimal-government orthodoxy, from Chile 1973 to the Contras, Grenada, Iraq, Cuba, etc?
"Government power", "private power" -- it's power that's the problem, not what we call it.
Why are we still so wrapped up in this Reaganite semantics about "government" decades later?
You think you can start an LLC and bomb people in Afghanistan?
You're right. He did it as a soldier, then as a contractor.
> You think you can start an LLC and bomb people in Afghanistan?
If you're an elite, then yes, absolutely. Spoiled rich kid and SEAL dropout Erik Prince and his buddy started a two-bit training seminar company for red state keystone kops that was on the edge of going under when the USS Cole was bombed in 2000 and the firm scored its first federal contract. 9/11, Afghanistan ... the Pentagon turns on the money spigot and a few short years later Blackwater is murdering civilians in Iraq at a steady clip with not only zero lasting consequences but increasing success.
It's not an exaggeration to say that Prince is a mass murderer, but he walks free today, a billionaire without a care in the (not to mention a self-proclaimed "libertarian" who's spent the bulk of his adult life profiting off taxpayers). Not a bad run!
So it goes to show: if you've got a silver spoon, a decent rolodex, and some good timing, you can kill whoever you want in this world after filling out some forms on LegalZoom.
because no one is calling for more private power but a ton of people are constantly calling for more government power
Many discussions about gov't control are usually within the context of private power already existing. Of course those same people insist on a hyper-atomization of the topics to make it less clearcut. That's why context is important folks
Unscrupulous, power hungry liars work just as hard as any of us. Possibly more so because the rewards of power are higher for someone who is willing to abuse it.
If the strategy is to centralise power, there is not a system nor a will in the world that can stop that power being abused. It is really just a matter of how long and how badly.
Terrible government services are hardly ever allowed to fail and disappear
13 Baltimore City High Schools, Zero Students Proficient in Math:
Baltimore is 2nd in per pupil spending:
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2013-05-21/news/bs-md-ci-ce...
We replace the dinosaur one time election with a "change your vote whenever you like" system something like a coalition needs 51% to be eligible to take office and less than 40% to lose it.
Salaries should be glorious and the officials shall be [financially] accountable beyond death.
People will not care much and not modify their vote very often until things get bad enough.
The military [for example] can go to war without the usual bribing of senile old men but if you take the country to war you probably wont be in charge of the war effort and if people really don't want the war they will rappidly cycle though different formations until they are rid of it.
So it's just mindless cynicism to argue "more government" / "no less government" / blablabla.
The specific American infatuation with anything that kills is, well, specific. Using all that wasteful killing/incarcerating/surveilling as an argument not against the Military-Industrial-Complex but, yet again, to diminish policies that might actually help people, is part and parcel of exactly the approach that ends with dead civilians domestically and abroad.
America is militarized due to 20th century European "killing/incarcerating/surveilling." Europe perfected these methods.
Don't leave thoughts unfinished, if you have something interesting to add you should share with the rest of the class.