A hidden world, growing beyond control

#1

The Washington Post that discovered what amounts to an alternative geography of the United States, a Top Secret America hidden from public view and lacking in thorough oversight. After nine years of unprecedented spending and growth, the result is that the system put in place to keep the United States safe is so massive that its effectiveness is impossible to determine.

https://projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america/articles/a-hidden-world-growing-beyond-control/
part 2 https://projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america/articles/national-security-inc/

#2

Wastefulness? In my government? Its more likely than you think.

In all seriousness though, if the government tries to do anything it will be horribly wasteful, which is one of the reasons why I don’t like the government doing anything. The story is hardly surprising.

As a side note, this should be in the hall.

#3

why? there’s not much to debate about the actual article, it’s exhaustively researched. We can debate your insane anarchist libertarianism if you want, but that’s kind of OT : D I think the general idea behind the article if you read it is that when we allow the government to operate in secret that’s where the corruption and waste happens, whereas transparency would serve as a check on the surveillance state.

#4

Sounds like a thrilling and exciting idea that definitely hasn’t happened before.

I feel I should note at this point though that the effectiveness of the program will never be known as defenders can always say that we never know about the attacks that have been avoided.

#5

i think you’re confused and quite possibly didn’t RTFA, we aren’t talking about a “program.” we’re talking about the totality of the undemocratic national security apparatus installed since 2001. It’s basically become it’s own branch of government that is totally unaccountable to anyone. In a democratic society, it doesn’t really fly to argue for the “effectiveness” of a system that is totally opposed to the fundamental tenets of our society. Especially when the “effectiveness” of the system is a hypothetical.

#6

This just turned into a discussion thread.

#7

that’s why it’s in the “off topic discussion” forum

#8

I don’t actually support its extent, as I’ve said I believe the more government you throw at something the less productive it becomes. I was just saying its hard to actually judge the effectiveness of this “branch” of government, I am just assuming based on the governments track record. But that is irrelevant.

In any case, I think that the government is already too complex for transparency to work as an effective improvement in efficiency, and decrease in corruption. When your average bill in congress is well over 1000 pages, it gets to the point where no one really knows all the complexities of how the government is supposed to work. Without this understanding, problems can’t be fixed, and even if problems are attempted to be fixed, the 1000 plus pages legislation attempting to fix them would inevitably create more problems.

#9

yah but half the problem is caused by guys w. idiotic ideas about “big government” its how they get away with delegating everything out to incompetent contractors at ridiculous expense

#10

This is not the thread to be parroting GOP talking points. I know you’re going to whine that you’re an “independent” but the fact is that the standard GOP talking point against the Health Care Reform bill was that it was “1000 pages - too long to read” repeated ad nauseum (and you’re referring to that as “the average bill” when in fact the average length is 15 pages, which kind of indicates you’re recycling talking points). Btw normal people can read 1000 pages… kids reading Harry Potter books, for example.
Second, you keep on parroting the classic Reagan Republican “the government that governs best governs least” talking point. We get it, you’re a Republican, but even you admit it’s not relevant to anything. The fact that your reaction to a news article about a massive un-budgeted surveillance apparatus that functions outside of our democratic government is to badmouth our democratic government just goes to prove how much of an ideologue you are.

… gibberish.

#11

Talking points are talking points for a reason usually: They make sense. 1000 page bills written in legislative language inhibits understanding. A lack of understanding of how the government works, especially by the people who run it (how many senators and congressmen who voted for health care actually read the whole thing? Very few, guaranteed. Most probably have it summarized for them) prevents the fixing of problems, as the source of the problems cannot be found. People can read 1000 pages of a well written book. Legislature is confusingly written, and few actually want to read it.
Also, your claim that the average bill is 15 pages is irrelevant. Important spending, and regulatory bills usually cross the 1000 page line, and it is bills that, for example, give awards to astronauts that bring that average down.

As to strange claims of “badmouthing” the democratic system, pointing out flaws in our current government does not indicated some strange hatred for the democratic system. I oppose this expansion partially because, it being part of our government, it is inefficient. As such, the criticism applies to both sections of the government.

Try to argue against arguments, not act like a stuck up person to whom all of these arguments are beneath.

#12

By all means, bring up an argument relevant to the topic of this thread! I’m in favor of discussing it, that’s why I made the thread in the first place.

Your arguments so far:

  • government is bad
  • government transparency is pointless because bills are long
  • democrats didn’t read the health care bill

I’m more than willing to respond to arguments if they are relevant to the topic. If they aren’t I’ll continue to ignore them, not because I’m stuck up but because I’m fighting a losing battle to keep this shit on topic. I’ll argue against your anarchist libertarian beliefs all day, if you start an “ask a libertarian” thread. But it’s got nothing whatsoever to do with this thread, as you’ve already admitted.

#13

I don’t really see much of a point for this thread then. I doubt anyone will come forward saying that they love unseen expansion of government.

#14

i read an interesting article thanks to this thread. thats a good raisin in my book

#15

That’s why A- I intentionally didn’t start the thread in the debate subforum and B - I specifically said the following:

#16

But then what is the point of the thread…

#17

you’re right, what purpose could there possibly be to discussing current events other than political/ideological flame wars? I mean obviously it’s impossible to view media reporting in any way other than thru the lens of pre-existing ideological bias, so naturally any conversation has to focus on twisting facts to support your worldview. And if we’re not allowed to explain how a given topic confirms our worldview (which it always does, because we are always right) there is no reason whatsoever to make or post in threads.

#18

You seem to think that on the internet there is a difference between discussion and flame wars. Also, everything you see is influenced by your bias, thats what a bias is, so of course those who read this will see it with their bias.

But fine, continue with your thread, but I have nothing to add that you would agree with and wouldn’t provoke a flame war.

#19

part two of the series: https://projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america/articles/national-security-inc/

Founded in 2004, Leakfree.org became one of the first online communities dedicated to Valve’s Source engine development. It is more famously known for the formation of Black Mesa: Source under the 'Leakfree Modification Team' handle in September 2004.