Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> True, but so what? that's how things are in a democracy.

Using fear and emotion of a recent disaster to push an otherwise controversial law really has nothing to do with democracy. Any type of government would use this technique because it's so easy.

And you should demand your government to be better than that. I know I do. Even if you don't believe they'll listen (fair enough), the moment you stop complaining and bitching about it, is the moment you're saying "well, okay then, if you persist, I give up".

Additionally, I expect human beings to be bound by more than just laws or constitutions, but also by ethics, a will to stand up for what's right and against what's wrong. That's why governments and corporations are not persons. But you are, and as soon as you say "I'm okay with this because it's legal/constitutional", without being able to argue why it is also right (in your opinion, we can still disagree about this, but that's another matter entirely), you fail that test.




Governments and corporations are just agglomerations of persons, who act with varying ethical standards. Treating them as monolithic entities leads on astray into all sorts of fallacies.

As for my own ethical position, I think the US needs a constitutional amendment that creates an explicit right to privacy, rather than an inferred one. But I also think the head of the executive branch is bound to serve conflicting imperatives regarding defensive issues, and that it's foolish to expect government actors to tie their hands hands in fulfilling that mandate.




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

Search: