"Journalists are terrorists...truth-telling is violence." I'm calling bullshit.

[nashville_brook]

Last edited Tue Aug 20, 2013, 11:23 PM - Edit history (1)

(h/t DirkGently from his comment here, with my own comments)

So. Threats of truth telling should be treated like threats of violence?

This is exactly the rationale applied by every despicable authoritarian regime in history.

He's too nice to say it, but I will. "The rationale" of "every despicable authoritarian regime," referenced here calls to mind some really nasty times in history such as:

Chile under Pinochet
China under the Chinese Communist Party
Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge
Saudi Arabia under the House of Saud

And many more. Something they have in common is need to control information to protect their crimes. It's just too inconvenient to have reporters running around reminding people they're being spied on or worse.

This isn't to say that we're there, or even headed in that direction. I believe we're going in a completely different direction...but I'll save that for later.

Congratulations. This post bulls-eyes the absolute bottom of the philosophical barrel.

The argument that embarrassing the state with truthful information that is threatening only in its likelihood of raising the public consciousness of government wrongdoing is precisely the most anti-democratic, purely vile and evil sentiment possible, on not only the subject of press freedom, but as to civilization or government of any kind.

It's the absolute bottom of the philosophical barrel precisely because we're not any of these authoritarian regimes. Not even close. It's historically been a point of patriotism that we fought wars for our freedom, and ostensibly for the "freedom" of other countries (although, that's rarely true -- we fight wars in other places for resources).

Dirk hits the nail on the head when he says that the threat level of truth-telling is proportional to the wrongdoing of the governments threatened by it. This is plain as day to most people. Uncontroversial. In the civilized world we know that we fight to keep things transparent in order to keep things civilized and working for the people. Otherwise we get trampled. We see it on school boards, county commissions and in the U.S. Senate -- when we're locked out, that's when bad things happen (which, I thought was the whole point of electing Democrats...to keep things open, transparent, and working for the people).

This is how you get to dictators and genocide and everything else Americans and all decent people everywhere oppose.

Repellant. Filthy. Indefensible.

Like I said, we're not there now, but letting this djinn out of the bottle is NOT something that patriotic Americans cheer for. We're not subjects under King George. Our forefathers fought and died for these freedoms. It is filthy, repellant and indefensible to argue for their demise when they are figuratively written in blood in our Constitution.

I am deeply saddened and ashamed to see Democrats willing to dismantle that which makes us uniquely American. And for what? What is possibly so threatening about Greenwald, Gellman or the truth of the domestic spying program, that you would be willing to burn the Bill of Rights?

Shame. Seriously. We should all be ashamed of this.

Talk about being detrimental to the party: how fast will people run from the Democratic brand when they see party members proudly shouting to lock up journalists?

The good news is that we're talking about a tiny but noisy minority of voices carrying this repellant message. Together we're shining a light and turning down the heat on this nonsense. This shit isn't going to stick -- not if we have anything to say about it.

[DirkGently]

1. In the middle of all of this -- they just say it. Truth is the enemy.

Like it's just another talking point to toss out there. Yeah, maybe embarrassing the government IS just like blowing up a plane.

That's the ticket.

Is it though?

Is that something reasonable people even contemplate?

WTF?

[nashville_brook]

24. this is the meta-discourse taking place here lately...nobody thinks that

and so we're left to wonder who the voices are behind the avatars and screen names. no one i've ever talked to real life thinks that way.

reasonable people do not think that. we imagine that only the fringes of the RW would dare say some such out loud. but here we see people who are ostensibly PEOPLE and ostensibly dems "catapulting" this propaganda as if it's something to be proud of.

it's not.

we have a chance to take back the House in 2014. the GOP has done the math and they're scared shitless. if we as a party pull some kind of stupid authoritarian stunt like framing journalism as terrorism, then we'll blow it.

it makes you wonder. why would anyone come here and spread that kind of bullshit.

[DirkGently]

27. No one trying to defend "Democrats" or democracy would

speak this way.

[nashville_brook]

34. clearly. so what are they "defending"?

[mick063]

2. I'm calling for the removal of Godwin's Law.

If there was ever a time to do it, this is it.

No, we aren't committing genocide yet, but the infrastructure is in place. You don't prevent fascist oppression by waiting to verify that it is happening first.

[winter is coming]

3. No need to remove it. It's only intended for specious comparisons to fascism. n/t

[DirkGently]

6. "Lock up the journalists" is the pure source.

We really do have "freedom of the press" (in this country) for this express reason. Press control and intimidation is necessary oxygen for any kind of police state nightmare we care to contemplate.

If Rachel Maddow can't say "Journalism isn't Terrorism" without a major debate, we are already in deep trouble.

[nashville_brook]

8. specious comparisons tend to fall on their own accord

[backscatter712]

16. Yep. It's not hyperbole anymore. n/t

[nashville_brook]

46. i remember having a bit of controversy during Bush years over "good germans" narratives

holy crap, to think it's even more applicable now makes my head spin.

[Scootaloo]

29. Naziism, actually

Yeah, Fascism comes in flavors. Like the shittiest Baskin Robbins that you can imagine (it's all brown, none of it's chocolate)

[nashville_brook]

30. !!

nice!

[DirkGently]

40. Exactly.

[DirkGently]

4. The jackboot fits as soon as you equate journalism with terrorism.

And you're right. It doesn't happen in one step. Authoritarianism creeps. But it's a ratchet that's hard to ratchet back down once it's taken hold.

Seriously, who's going to be a whistleblower now? Who's going to give us the next Pentagon Papers?

Who will risk this insane level of harassment and contempt?

[RobertEarl]

9. Whistleblowers are brave and smart

They will find a way to let the truth become known.

The idea that we as a people should sit and wait with rose colored glasses to get smacked with a government smack down before we act to protect ourselves, reminds me of Bush and how he went about 9/11.

Anybody saying we should relax in the face of this growing government threat is quite blind to reality, aren't they? On the one hand they are begging for protection of some kind and on the other claiming there is nothing to worry about.

[DirkGently]

10. Hard to stomach "democrats" identifying with these tactics.

Who cheers for the thugs snatching up journalists' families and demanding laptops be crushed in front of them?

Demented, dangerous, and wildly stupid.

[RobertEarl]

12. It is crazy

The idea that journalists are a threat but the NSA is not, is crazy.

I never imagined DUers would ever feel journalists' friends and family should be detained. They must have some kind of bush disease?

[DirkGently]

13. Definitely the same flavor of authoritarian worship.

Suggesting journalism might be the equivalent of terrorism is a quantum leap downward though.

[nashville_brook]

15. you couldn't do a better job of running Dems away from the party,

than to associate us with the destruction of the Bill of Rights. seriously, you have to wonder what's going on in the heads of people making these outrageous arguments.

[RobertEarl]

17. They are like PUMAS

Party Unity My Ass - PUMA

They are violating the key core principles upon which our system of government is founded. Frankly I think they are just idiots. They can't even debate the situation.

9/11 changed them. They are scared, even tho it was not a failure of intelligence that allowed 9/11, it was a political decision to ignore intelligence.

Now they are supporting another political decision which ignores basic human rights. Really, and I hate to say this, they should just STFU and get the hell out of the way of people trying to make sure the political decisions hold to, and support the constitution.

[nashville_brook]

20. precisely! they are PUMAs. thank you!

i'm afraid this is the sort of thing that will crush our chances in 2014 and 2016.

[DirkGently]

41. THAT. Is an excellent point.

No one argues "unity" over core principles like press freedom in good faith. There's no "party" to defend if Dems are selling this swill about journalists needing to expect they will be snatched by thugs confiscating and smashing their laptops.

We already have a party for that point of view.

[nashville_brook]

44. it's a special kind of craven partisanship that sells out our basic rights for...

i'm not sure what. i can't imagine what the gain is. what's the upside?

[DirkGently]

47. Some don't care what's done to "them" under the assumption the

same can never be done to "us" apparently.

As though reality has ever worked that way.

[nashville_brook]

50. i think that's a function of power vs powerlessness

those who feel powerless don't think they'll miss any common basic rights b/c they can't imagine ever having the need for them...'just getting by' is hard enough. who has time for exercising rights?

but the thing is it's a downward arc. look at where the pressure is applied using these technologies: on drug offenses. who are they being applied against? those who have the least amount of power.

[TM99]

53. Of course they are scared.

What we saw on 9/11 was terrifying.

However, how many of seen what occurs first hand under a police state? If they had, then they would know it is a different fear.

I was an exchange student on the pilot Congress/Bundestag Youth For Understanding program during the early 1980's. I traveled to Checkpoint Charlie and through to East Berlin. You want to know scarey? Try going through a ghost subway station under the wall that still stops but you look out. What do you see? Young men not much older than yourself pointing very large machine guns at you knowing that they will shoot you if you were to stray from that subway car.

I got a Visa to visit Poland and Czechoslovakia on my own. At the crossing in, I was detained for over 4 hours while my visa was verified. On the way back, I was detained for over 6 hours again while my visa was verified. The world of 'papers please' is far more terrifying than the chances of another terrorist attack on the United States like 9/11.

Sometimes I wonder if that was our 'Reichstag fire' moment in American history. The world did change after 9/11 just not out there but sadly in here in our country.

[RobertEarl]

54. Yes TM99

You have experienced it. Most of the rest of us have just read about it. Tales from people like you may just be the cream in their coffee that wakes them up. Don't ever stop.

The NSA has been way too secret. Thankfully the Democratic Party has many members who voted against many of the Bush moves toward the fourth reich. We still stand a chance and have some hope to alter the course. Folks like you are very important to our freedom. Thanks.

[nashville_brook]

11. no matter how brave or smart, it's worth protecting them.

[RobertEarl]

14. Yes, they are worthy

If we allow the whistleblowers to be treated like criminals while letting the real criminals like Bush walk, then we can no longer call the US a free country.

[nashville_brook]

21. we've ceded too much ground on our rights and on liberty issues

it makes me sick that Tea Party "Teahadists" have *been allowed* to stake out that territory. and you know how it happened, is we let our leaders sell us out to big business interests. we were told that we had to be "new dems" or "blue dogs" or "third way" dems -- anything but f*cking real, true blue Democrats with a big D and boot in the ass of the republican nutjobs.

(i really shouldn't let myself get so worked up before bedtime...but this is a giant hypocrisy and a giant problem for the grassroots).

[RobertEarl]

26. That is an interesting take on the TB

They did fill a void left by the contraction of our party's stance on upholding core principles. Of course they have screwed the pooch by getting all concerned that Obama was going to use government to spy on us. Hey, wait!

Damn... Obama better get off his ass and uphold his vows to uphold the constitution or he is in danger of making their worst conspiracy theory come true.

Gawd, this whole thing is getting out of hand. Let's both go to different beds together.

[nashville_brook]

28. deal :)

[nashville_brook]

5. i'm not a huge fan of Godwin's Law b/c

ideas should be examined on their own merit rather than an arbitrary rule of thumb. it's not a subtle distinction as to whether something is fascistic or not.

[DirkGently]

7. Plus, I heard they locked up Godwin for whistle blowing.

[JoeyT]

31. Godwin's law only ever stated

that as an argument on the internet progresses, the likelihood of someone being compared to Hitler approaches 1.

It's not a trump card that means you win if your opponent mentions fascism, and it was never meant to be that. It's *used* that way, but that's not what it is.

It was only funny to begin with because it was true of even the most banal of conversations: Argue dogs are better than cats long enough, and sooner or later someone is going to remind you Hitler was a dog person.

Godwin's law is fine. People just need to stop misusing it.

[nashville_brook]

33. +1

[MisterP]

18. for 12 years they've been stumping for "Democratic victory" only if it meant Dems with GOP policies

they've never been right about anything substantial, they've never had a retraction or breaking story go in their favor--not once in 12 years
they just get more and more Bushlike, while at the same time 1) claiming that the "far left" is as bad as the "far right" since "they only work to get Pubs elected" and 2) are themselves used as examples of "the left" being as bad as the right: if MSNBC shills for Dems as much as FOX for the right, it's "the left distorts facts for its parties"

[nashville_brook]

19. yet, when GOP'er adopts a Dem stance on rights/liberty, suddenly we're called

Last edited Wed Aug 21, 2013, 12:00 PM - Edit history (2)

a Paulite libertarian. as if the 1st and 4th amendments of the constitution were penned by Ron Paul.

There's dems here apparently forcing the bill of rights out of our platform.

i have to wonder about that. how can it be sincere?

let's be as right-wing as possible on economic justice (pro-business!), b/c that somehow is supposed to #win elections. but somehow, if you want to defend the constitution you're to be expelled as some sort of RWNJ.

[mick063]

22. The desperation to save legacy here is proportional to the desperation to save legacy up there.

Get it?

[nashville_brook]

25. that's my fear.

[MisterP]

23. that's their attitude to primaries: they're the only option, and real Dems aren't allowed to use 'em

[nashville_brook]

45. oh primaries. i can hardly wait.

[blackspade]

32. Well said.

[Octafish]

35. K&R for Truth Tellers

Thank you, nashville_brook!

Thank you, DirkGently!

Bravo!

[nashville_brook]

36. did you ever think you'd see the day when you had to defend journalism against charges of terrorism?

[woo me with science]

39. +100000

[Fire Walk With Me]

37. It's right out of "1984"!

[nashville_brook]

38. hyperbole or literary license not necessary

[Fire Walk With Me]

42. Can we at least sue them for copyright infringment? :(

[nashville_brook]

43. i think this dystopia is in the public domain

at this point

[DirkGently]

48. Watching Elysium, I just thought, "Well

of course." "Of course (TINY SPOILER ALERT) we'll be working on unshielded radioactive factory floors, assembling our robot oppressors. So where's the fiction in this 'science fiction?' "

[nashville_brook]

49. that's the story of my entire professional life.

the immigration theme cut pretty close to the bone as well.

[gopiscrap]

51. Yup I agree

[nashville_brook]

52. thanks! it's nice to see those who agree check-in...helps keep the faith.