Yes, I try to be a good liberal every chance that I can, but honestly, I can't help but think that this NSA surveillance business is a big yawn. We live in an electronic, connected world. We provide information via phone, cable TV, Internet, e-mail, texts, check boxes (especially after we've all thoroughly read the 28 page privacy statement that all website provide us with), billing address is same as mailing address online forms when we buy something, credit card information (stored on a third party server), Facebook, Twitter, Skype, Tumblr, picture sharing sites and on and on and on.
Now we learn that the government, in the name of national security and with the acquiescence of the executive, legislative and judicial branches, has gathered this data (I believe that "scooped" is the reigning cool-person way to describe it) and could use it to discover patterns in our behavior. If they wanted to. It's disturbing, but I cannot share the outrage. I saw it coming, and when I was a corporate technology trainer in the 1990s, I made a point of warning every student who sat in my class that everything they did on a computer, whether on the Internet or in a Word document, was fair game for any eyes that wanted to pry. This is ever more true today. People ignored or minimized this at their peril. And this was before September 11, when the corporations and government had even less of an excuse to watch us.
Okay, perhaps I'm being naive and obtuse and blind and I'm ignoring dangers that other can clearly see, but I don't think so. Maybe this article is absolutely wrong, but again, I don't think so. Yes, I understand that there's a difference between willingly giving your data and the government mining for it, and I certainly don't want the government to get used to taking data that citizens have not freely given it, but in a way, we have.
This is also part of our history, and has been going on since the Alien and Sedition Acts. And the 1917 Espionage Act. When we signed on to Truman's Doctrine of containing Communism, we tacitly agreed that the government could check that we were loyal. Joseph McCarthy went too far and was too reckless. Richard Nixon did similar things, but he was elected VP and president and had J. Edgar Hoover to both support and threaten him. When they went too far, the Congress reined them in. So it will be today.
The problem now is that the threat of attack is too real and the consequences too terrible to let our guard down for even a second. The Chinese and Iranians are conducting cyberattacks that threaten our systems. How would you like the government to respond? By only following the bad people? That's like asking the police to only shoot or arrest bad guys. Most times it happens, but when it doesn't we react with a fury that sometimes ignores facts or circumstances. The same is true today. The NSA's job is to conduct information-gathering and use that data to find patterns of behavior that might lead to terrorism. To say that they should not be gathering all of the data that they can is counterproductive.
That the press has reported this story based on a whistle-blowers actions shows that our system still works. The government will be held accountable. At this point, that's good enough for me.
For more, go to www.facebook.com/WhereDemocracyLives and on Twitter @rigrundfest
Friday, June 7, 2013
Thursday, June 6, 2013
Xi Loves You Yeah, Yeah, Yeah
Yes, that would be the number one hit on Radio Beijing this week as Chinese President Xi Jinping visits the United States on Friday to meet with President Obama. Their agenda will not be full of arms control or contentious issues like North Korea, Iran or who owns which teensy islands in the South China Sea, but rather, personal diplomacy. That's right; President Xi (or is it her...I can never remember) is traveling thousands of miles to meet the chilliest, most standoffish, least huggable American leader since Richard Nixon in order to establish a personal connection on the superpower stage.
Further, Mrs. Xi (is that redundant? OK, I'll stop) won't be accompanying the Mr. to the Republican Dude Ranch, which is a shame because I'm sure there are many Americans who would like to meet her. Mrs. Obama also won't be in attendance because it's getting near the end of the school year and the Obama girls surely have some last minute exams to take. So, it will just be the guys at the Sunnylands retreat, where Ronald Reagan and other GOPers used to sun themselves and cavort with wealthy people who loved them.
As with all meetings between key world leaders, both sides will need to measure the success of the summit. It will be difficult to tell if Xi achieves his goal of making friends with Obama, but I give him credit for making the personal, instead of the political, his particular goal. China isn't ready to take the lead on the world stage. Their economy is large and growing, but subject to volatility brought on by too much state meddling and the ever-present threat of shoddy, or even deadly products. Militarily, they could rival the US in sheer numbers, but their eyes are too big for their stomachs when it comes to how much they can push or bully other countries to do their bidding. At this point, they can't even dissuade North Korea to make significant changes to their behavior. How are they going to challenge more savvy, well-connected and wealthier countries to take them seriously? Xi is most likely aware of this and is taking a slow growth approach to the United States.
Xi is also a member of the generation that came of political age at the time of the June 4th democracy movement in Tienanmen Square. The military crackdown on democracy protesters was a critical turning point, and presumably today's Chinese leadership has learned the dangers of allowing too much freedom along with the warning that too much repression brings. Letting people to get rich in return for agreeing to a one-party state is a risky proposition because the truth is this: Not everyone can get rich, but everyone will be subject to the censors, the police and the Internet trackers. Xi must be looking at Turkey, Syria and Egypt and wondering how he can keep the lid on his country. In the end, it's only a matter of time.
Let's hope that President Obama can establish a connection with our main rivals in the world, and engage Mr. Xi in a productive dialogue that the two men can use when relations get difficult, because they ultimately will. Then both of them can say that they found success.
For more, go to www.facebook.com/WhereDemocracyLives and on Twitter @rigrundfest
Further, Mrs. Xi (is that redundant? OK, I'll stop) won't be accompanying the Mr. to the Republican Dude Ranch, which is a shame because I'm sure there are many Americans who would like to meet her. Mrs. Obama also won't be in attendance because it's getting near the end of the school year and the Obama girls surely have some last minute exams to take. So, it will just be the guys at the Sunnylands retreat, where Ronald Reagan and other GOPers used to sun themselves and cavort with wealthy people who loved them.
As with all meetings between key world leaders, both sides will need to measure the success of the summit. It will be difficult to tell if Xi achieves his goal of making friends with Obama, but I give him credit for making the personal, instead of the political, his particular goal. China isn't ready to take the lead on the world stage. Their economy is large and growing, but subject to volatility brought on by too much state meddling and the ever-present threat of shoddy, or even deadly products. Militarily, they could rival the US in sheer numbers, but their eyes are too big for their stomachs when it comes to how much they can push or bully other countries to do their bidding. At this point, they can't even dissuade North Korea to make significant changes to their behavior. How are they going to challenge more savvy, well-connected and wealthier countries to take them seriously? Xi is most likely aware of this and is taking a slow growth approach to the United States.
Xi is also a member of the generation that came of political age at the time of the June 4th democracy movement in Tienanmen Square. The military crackdown on democracy protesters was a critical turning point, and presumably today's Chinese leadership has learned the dangers of allowing too much freedom along with the warning that too much repression brings. Letting people to get rich in return for agreeing to a one-party state is a risky proposition because the truth is this: Not everyone can get rich, but everyone will be subject to the censors, the police and the Internet trackers. Xi must be looking at Turkey, Syria and Egypt and wondering how he can keep the lid on his country. In the end, it's only a matter of time.
Let's hope that President Obama can establish a connection with our main rivals in the world, and engage Mr. Xi in a productive dialogue that the two men can use when relations get difficult, because they ultimately will. Then both of them can say that they found success.
For more, go to www.facebook.com/WhereDemocracyLives and on Twitter @rigrundfest
Sunday, June 2, 2013
Lose the Young, Lose the Future
It shouldn't have taken a report like this to uncover what's wrong with the Republican Party, but now that it's been released, it would be great if the power brokers on the right will heed its call. The problem is that this is the other major American political party and their dysfunction is having a profound effect on our political life. Their obstruction has robbed us of a robust economic recovery from a downturn that they planted the seeds for, with Democratic help in many cases, and their lack of identifiable, fair, economically feasible ideas caused the sequester and downgrade of United States' securities.
But there's more. Here's a summary of how young people see the Republican Party on some of the issues of the day.
Gay marriage: “On the ‘open-minded’ issue … [w]e will face serious difficulty so long as the issue of gay marriage remains on the table.”
Hispanics: “Latino voters … tend to think the GOP couldn’t care less about them.”
Perception of the party’s economic stance: “We’ve become the party that will pat you on your back when you make it, but won’t offer you a hand to help you get there.”
Big reason for the image problem: The “outrageous statements made by errant Republican voices.”
Words that up-for-grabs voters associate with the GOP: “The responses were brutal: closed-minded, racist, rigid, old-fashioned.”
How many national elections do you think the right can win with perceptions like these? We can ask President Hillary after 2025.
The truth is that most people in this country are trending leftward. Not in overwhelming numbers and not by leaps and bounds, but it is happening. Marriage equality will be the law in significantly more states over the next ten years and the health care law will result in broader insurance coverage, technological improvements in health delivery, and a system that encourages and rewards innovation and cost-cutting.
If you were a young adult in 1985, you know how much the country has changed since then politically, economically and culturally. Imagine what the United States will be like in 2035 after an era of expanded equality, more access for more people to the nation's wealth, less expensive higher education opportunities and a fairer tax code.
Yes, we will have our problems and we could become enmeshed in any number of foreign conflicts (we will get involved in Syria somehow. Mark my words.) and will have our share of domestic disturbances. But if the GOP can reform itself and make the party more responsive to what we need to improve the country, then we will all benefit.
For more, go to www.facebook.com/WhereDemocracyLives and on Twitter @rigrundfest
But there's more. Here's a summary of how young people see the Republican Party on some of the issues of the day.
Gay marriage: “On the ‘open-minded’ issue … [w]e will face serious difficulty so long as the issue of gay marriage remains on the table.”
Hispanics: “Latino voters … tend to think the GOP couldn’t care less about them.”
Perception of the party’s economic stance: “We’ve become the party that will pat you on your back when you make it, but won’t offer you a hand to help you get there.”
Big reason for the image problem: The “outrageous statements made by errant Republican voices.”
Words that up-for-grabs voters associate with the GOP: “The responses were brutal: closed-minded, racist, rigid, old-fashioned.”
How many national elections do you think the right can win with perceptions like these? We can ask President Hillary after 2025.
The truth is that most people in this country are trending leftward. Not in overwhelming numbers and not by leaps and bounds, but it is happening. Marriage equality will be the law in significantly more states over the next ten years and the health care law will result in broader insurance coverage, technological improvements in health delivery, and a system that encourages and rewards innovation and cost-cutting.
If you were a young adult in 1985, you know how much the country has changed since then politically, economically and culturally. Imagine what the United States will be like in 2035 after an era of expanded equality, more access for more people to the nation's wealth, less expensive higher education opportunities and a fairer tax code.
Yes, we will have our problems and we could become enmeshed in any number of foreign conflicts (we will get involved in Syria somehow. Mark my words.) and will have our share of domestic disturbances. But if the GOP can reform itself and make the party more responsive to what we need to improve the country, then we will all benefit.
For more, go to www.facebook.com/WhereDemocracyLives and on Twitter @rigrundfest
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)