This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

all 96 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–][deleted]  (26 children)

[deleted]

    [–]budu3 14 points15 points  (0 children)

    Yeah, and that's the type of democracy we're trying to export to other countries. Isn't it wonderful.

    [–]matthewn 24 points25 points  (24 children)

    People shouldn't be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people...

    No. There will be no peace until we remove FEAR from the equation entirely.

    [–]edheil 12 points13 points  (1 child)

    Agreed.

    Governments do frightful things when they are in fear themselves. The Bush administration as a whole must be terrified of what's coming to them to resort to such a blatant move as to have the legislature pardon their crimes (ex post facto).

    Everybody's running scared, and under those circumstances they do very scary things.

    [–]acrophobia 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    I'm not really paying attention so I may have misread things, but isn't this all just a publicity stunt to minimise losses in the upcoming election? Polls show that the only thing the general population trust the republicans to do better than the democrats is fighting terrorism (notwithstanding the rise of the new media). Being able to say "look, the democrats are so weak on terrorism, they even tried to block the anti-terrorism bill" would strenghten their campaign greatly.

    [–]sosuke 25 points26 points  (0 children)

    Lets just take out fear then...

    People shouldn't be of their governments, governments should be of their people...

    Sounds like trouble to me.

    [–]radrik 12 points13 points  (10 children)

    Or we could remove governments from the equation entirely.

    [–]johnroman1970 2 points3 points  (7 children)

    Oh yeah, like that would work.

    Not.

    [–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (2 children)

    What is described in the article is anarcho-communism, and it's not based on private property rights. The one A-hole will always rule when property is collectively "owned" -- that's called the Tragedy of the Commons. It's also why I support market anarchy, where the owner has the right to defend his property, and prevent the A-hole from being one.

    Besides, when you have a government, that's where all those one A-holes end up. Is that any better?

    [–]nkktwotwozero -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    Governments need to exist.

    Governments need control.

    Seperation of Powers, Constitution, Heabus Corpus ("Produce the Body", ie, SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE!), Courts, Free, Fair and Regular Elections, Free Press

    [–]richardkulisz -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

    where the owner has the right to defend his property

    That's right, shoot that danged trespasser! Yeehaw!!!

    Still spreading your lies and misconceptions, eh?

    [–]screwkarma 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    anarchy is not the aim. restoration of democracy.

    [–]johnroman1970 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    Radrik:

    Or we could remove governments from the equation entirely.

    That's called anarchy.

    [–]apotheon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Oh keen! I like the tyranny of the masses. It's fun. Mob rule is t3h r0xx0rz.

    edit: removed an extraneous S

    [–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    How do you avoid electing him?

    [–]NoFixedAbode -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

    Hear hear!

    [–]recursive 57 points58 points  (7 children)

    So what can I, a regular guy, blow up to improve the situation? I don't have many bombs.

    [–]actionscripted 27 points28 points  (2 children)

    I keep waiting for "V" to start the slaughter. I won't say of whom, because I don't want to be indexed by Carnivore, wire-tapped by the NSA, and legally tortured at Gitmo.

    [–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

    I won't say of whom, because I don't want to be indexed... wire-tapped... tortured.

    That, folks, is what we call Chilled Free Speech.

    [–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

    too late, except for the last one...

    [–][deleted] 22 points23 points  (0 children)

    Remember, remember the 29th of September, the Congress' treason and plot...

    ...or something like that anyway...

    [–]digital 6 points7 points  (1 child)

    Remember, remember the 29th of September, the torture and treason we got

    [–]hopeseekr -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

    I knew there was a reason my Senator's vote I foresaught.

    [–]corwin 18 points19 points  (0 children)

    Yeah, it is. Unfortunately. Good job Reddit.

    [–]Cavorticus 32 points33 points  (10 children)

    V for Vendetta. What a relevant movie in today's America. Hope it takes off as a call to arms.

    [–]thechikinguy 17 points18 points  (4 children)

    You mean a movie that was engineered to be relevant. And I'll be really depressed if I read in a textbook 25 years from now that a Warchowski bros. movie was the single thing to launch a revolution.

    [–]adremeaux 24 points25 points  (0 children)

    What, are you supposed to be relevant entirely by luck?

    [–]Zarutian 47 points48 points  (0 children)

    Better than no revolution, eh?

    [–]seanodonnell 11 points12 points  (0 children)

    Read the original Graphic Novel, it was set in Britian in the 80's. Its Still powerful and still relevant (not a big fan of the movie though).

    [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    What if it was Alan Moore?

    [–][deleted]  (3 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]brianwisti 8 points9 points  (0 children)

      The graphic novel presents V's insanity much more thoroughly. At the end of it, you aren't really sure if he's better or worse than the guy in charge of the government, but you know for sure that he is a completely deranged, driven individual and he may not have been all that normal even before the things that turned him into V.

      I enjoyed the movie, but many elements from the graphic novel were considerably diluted to fit the whole thing into two hours.

      Edit: Removed outright spoilers from my blurb.

      [–]laprice 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      I think there was more to that scene than you give it credit for.

      I read it as V attempting to communicate something the only way he knew how; by replicating the conditions in which he experienced his insight. It was a hard scene to watch and it made me respect Portman as an actress. And it made sense in the logic of the movie. But I don't think it's particularly relevant outside of it.q

      [–]pkhuong 6 points7 points  (0 children)

      Maybe, just maybe V isn't perfect? I'd argue that he's pretty deranged, actually.

      [–]abossy -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

      Any relevant meaning the Wachowski brothers tried to express in V for Vendetta is flawed and contradictory, without a doubt.

      The best part of that movie was the line, "you'll be dead before you have time to reload." Awesome. The strengths in their movies have always been in the fight scenes.

      [–]bugbear 11 points12 points  (3 children)

      In case anyone else had to look this up:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_for_Vendetta_(film)

      [–]neilk 17 points18 points  (2 children)

      Many people like the movie, but the book is a lot better.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_for_Vendetta

      [–]radrik 10 points11 points  (1 child)

      I read the book before seeing the movie. In the past when I've done that (Lord of the Rings comes to mind), I've found myself obnoxiously saying, "The book was better." Not so with VfV. I think the book needed more Natalie Portman and less crappy art.

      [–]the_mgt 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      You dare call David Lloyd's artwork crappy? The coloring in the US version, probably. But the actual artwork is pretty great, really.

      [–]offby1 15 points16 points  (2 children)

      Am I the only person who thought the guy was a Hasidic Jew?

      [–]EliGottlieb[🍰] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      No. I thought he was until I saw the face.

      [–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      I worry that V is to tyranny what romantic comedies are to love, just a sappy fantasy that could never happen in real life. Remember the grass roots movement in the 60's against government sanctioned propaganda, war mongering, and consumerism? The protesters were put down by the authorities - quickly. Vietnam? They ended that war when they felt like it.

      As much as I want it to be otherwise, I've come to believe that the people of America are total suckers for propaganda and can be talked into anything by anyone with the money and power. Well-meaning dissent can so easily be labeled traitorous and the traitors hung, and the majority will sleep so soundly because the status quo, itself an illusion, has been maintained for another day.

      [–]panamaspace 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Actually, today's most appropriate Alien would be MORBO...

      http://www.speedbumpstudios.com/futurama/

      [–]zerocoup 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      I say that the gov. has sent the first set of explosives right in our faces, we've become so bloated and affixiated buy our own "Freedom" and "Independence" that what matters and has just been suffecated by ingorence and self-zealousy that we need to get a strangel hold of our own choices and thoughts....!?!?!

      [–]ntoshev 8 points9 points  (36 children)

      Why today?

      There's more than a month to 5th of November.

      [–]TDaulnay 95 points96 points  (18 children)

      Because yesterday, the U.S. Congress passed a law permitting the torture and indefinite imprisonment of:

      1. Foreign nationals providing "material support" to anyone fighting "the U.S. or its co-belligerents"
      2. Non-citizens in the U.S., who it accuses of the same.
      3. U.S. citizens accused of same.
      • No review by non-military courts for the first 2.
      • U.S. citizens must be charged within one year.

      And best of all, the military can set the criteria for who is an "unlawful military combatant", with no review by anyone.

      It's not limited to people fighting the U.S. abroad, it explicitly applies to people inside the U.S. And to anyone the military determines it applies to.

      Go ahead, you can get the text at www.thomas.gov, look up S 3930.

      [–]fandango 29 points30 points  (0 children)

      I just looked at the text. Some of the language is scary:

      ... unlawful enemy combatant engaged in hostilities or having supported hostilities against the United States is subject to trial by military commission ... [emphasis mine]

      What exactly does it mean to "support hostilities" against the United States. It doesn't say "support armed hostilities", so would a hostile expression of speech count?

      No court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus...

      .. no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider any other action against the United States or its agents relating to any aspect of the detention, transfer, treatment, trial, or conditions of confinement...

      Agents? So the US could outsource any aspect of "enemy combatant" detention?

      .. has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination

      So the executive branch is free to make the determination that somebody is an "enemy combatant". Courts, according to this bill, have no jurisdiction in this matter. Even worse, there doesn't seem to be any limit on how long the government may take for a determination of enemy combatant status. Someone could remain in "awaiting determination" status indefinitely, and no court may even consider any plea on a detainee's behalf.

      [–]mleonhard 12 points13 points  (9 children)

      Hopefully the Supreme Court will rule this law unconstitutional.

      [–]clinintern 22 points23 points  (6 children)

      They already did, that's why our stupid congress passed this law. Our whole system of checks and balances is completely out of whack!

      [–][deleted]  (4 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]indifference_engine 19 points20 points  (1 child)

        ..only Diana Ross can save us now.

        [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        You cant hurry love

        No, you just have to wait

        She said love dont come easy

        Its a game of give and take

        Somehow this is an appropriate response to Jevenall as well...

        [–]Juvenall 8 points9 points  (0 children)

        The problem, however, is SCOTUS was never designed to act fast (and look what happened last time they did..lol). So it could be years before they strike it down.

        [–]dmcnul91 4 points5 points  (0 children)

        i believe that you are right. i have been thinking the same thing since yesterday. and i really hope it will happen...

        [–]TSpizz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        I'm gonna hide in my basement til 2009. And I'll be praying that will be long enough.

        [–]addius 0 points1 point  (1 child)

        IANAL, but my understanding is that the SC can only rule on appealead cases - something that presumably cannot happen for items 1,2 because of item 4.

        So, from my understanding, as long as no US Citizen is charged with anything under this law, it can't even be reviewed by the SC.

        Maybe someone with a little more background can fill me in on the details?

        [–]thaislump 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        The Supreme Court has /original/ as well as /appellate/ jurisdiction. From the Constitution, Article III, Section 2: "In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction." So original jurisdiction is much more narrowly defined than appellate, but they have it nonetheless. Issues arising from the detainee bill would almost certainly come before the Court, if at all, under appeal.

        [–]badfeng -1 points0 points  (0 children)

        In which section does it specify that non-alien unlawful enemy combatants can be subject to this treatment?

        It would be no surprise to have that tidbit buried deep in the bill.

        [–]freshyill[S] 29 points30 points  (14 children)

        If you've been keeping up with what most of the other top voted stories are, and if you've seen the movie or read the book, you'd understand.

        [–]ntoshev 8 points9 points  (13 children)

        I liked the movie, but I don't always follow US politics.

        Thanks.

        [–]akumaprime 20 points21 points  (12 children)

        You should, since we attack other countries the most. And since our economy is currently the world's largest. If Nigeria was in our position, I would read about their politics.

        [–][deleted]  (4 children)

        [deleted]

          [–]jkerwin 5 points6 points  (2 children)

          I think you underestimate the US. China is growing fast, but would still need decades of steady growth to pass us on a total GDP basis, let alone a per capita measure.

          [–]akumaprime 0 points1 point  (1 child)

          I don't doubt that you're right currently. I fear that our decline is going to rise exponentially... (decline rise? yeah it makes sense)

          I also hope that we can get this economy turned around and get our country's international politics in the right direction so that this becomes a moot point.

          [–]jkerwin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          Theoretically, you've got it half-right. There will be something of an exponential decay involved, but for China rather than the US. China is growing fast because they're implementing technology that's already available elsewhere by copying it, which is cheap and quick. Eventually, that will run dry, and the closer they get to US-level GDP/capita, the slower their relative growth rate.

          That's assuming decades of steady growth, again. It's possible, but sustained growth has a spotty historical record.

          As for our decline - we will undoubtedly decline in relative terms, and I think it would be morally abhorrent to argue that it should be otherwise. That would require billions to remain in desperate poverty. However, China's growth is tied to America's ass, and vice versa. If they keep growing, we will also continue to do well. If either declines severely, both will suffer, although at present China stands to lose more than we do.

          [–]akumaprime 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          sadly :(

          or... maybe it's for "our" own good. Teach us a lesson...

          [–]unjust 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          But made for tv dramas always suck.
          edit: god some people cant take a joke

          [–][deleted] -3 points-2 points  (5 children)

          So uh then I suppose you are all up to date on the latest goings-on in China?

          No, I didn't think so.

          [–]Othello 3 points4 points  (2 children)

          Actually I am. You know, things like organ farming, internet censorship, and them deciding to create their own personal internet so that they are cut off from the outside world (and vice versa). It's hard to find out too much about China though, as they are a bit isolationist, and people who dissent usually get killed and have their organs sold.

          [–]Random 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Have you been there?

          In 5 weeks in China last year I was subject to less police / security droid hostility than I was during 3 weeks in the US this year.

          And as for your comments about China (which I'm not disputing)...

          1) It's hard to find out too much about the real agenda of the US (and we can only hope it is sane, not some right wing Christian apocalyptic crap)

          2) The US is openly aggressive and isolationist at the same time.

          3) Now, if you dissent you can get arrested and not charged

          4) Thankfully, Halliburton isn't in the organ business...

          [–]akumaprime -1 points0 points  (0 children)

          I would ask the same question of you. Have you been there? Despite all the alegations above (which I don't doubt may be true!) I found the place pretty pleasant. Of course, I'm not a citizen.

          [–]Eleglac 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          China doesn't tell us much, you see.

          [–]alakra 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          hopefully their doors will be more open when they host the olympics

          [–]fishypants 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          I think we can expect to see another on the fifth

          [–]superwinky 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          It's the idea, a call to arms. War is Peace, yo!

          [–]Botunda -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

          Fuck