I really don't want to see the social experiment of the United States end in a failure, and every day our rights are eroded, we get closer to that.
If you watch television, you will think that the world is becoming worse. After all, news is only when rare things happen, and usually very bad things at that. Now, I am not saying that that criminal justice system is in need of a huge overhaul. It is a real human right problem that needs to be fixed.
But what you're saying is that you think that we are losing rights. Are we really? Consider that in the last 50 years or so, we are gaining more rights. Even animal gains more right. Perhaps this is not the case in the last 10 years or so. Maybe we really are losing rights.
Consider this: When somebody brings a human right problem, that is a good omen. That mean somebody acknowledges the problem. If a human right problem remains hidden from view, our perception will be wrong, because it means we think we have more right or freedom than we really have and we can't do anything about it. So the Snowden revelation is good news, but the bad news is that Snowden is necessary in the first place and the fact that it had remain hidden across two presidency.
So if the media is openly reporting abuses done by prosecutors and other agents. That is a good thing. It means that our error correction mechanism is starting to work, which will hopefully lead to a change that curb the abuse and prevent it from happening.
But what about our freedom over the last ten years? What's the reality? One of the freedom index graph says that our freedom across the world is quite stable, maybe increasing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_in_the_World#Trends
I have yet to look at other graph. But if you're going to say that we are losing our rights, maybe it's a good idea to quantify how much over what time period.
You are forgetting there is a difference between the perception of freedom and actual freedom. While someone may be free to write about the problem, if there is no change in the system, is there actual freedom?
People in the US often equate the freedom of the press, which is under attack as it is, with freedom. The freedom to speak is not the freedom to act, and for many reasons rightly so. In this case, if the justice system doesn't uphold justice, we end up with only an escape valve for the pressure, but no change in the fundamental system.
Looking at the last 50 years, I would find it hard to say that everyone has it better. Look at the convictions for possession of crack cocaine versus cocaine powder. Things have gotten better for some people, but for many others, the world hasn't changed that much, especially for minorities in criminal cases.
I don't disagree with your analysis, but people don't gain or lose rights based on government whims. People have inalienable rights that can be respected or violated. This may seem like a semantic point, but I think it's important that to remember that fundamental rights, like the right to to a fair trial, exist no matter whether the law and its agents honor those rights.
When governments fail to respect inalienable rights, they lose legitimacy.
Inalienable rights is verbage that sounds good, but means practically nothing.
Do you have a right to life? Well no - America is one of the only first world nations to still have the death penalty.
Liberty? The standard faire of our justice systems is to remove that.
Pursuit of happiness? This is the only one I'd argue everyone does have, that actually is inalienable. The loss of that tends to actually cause problems.
But everything else comes stamped with some big provisos about one's place and actions within society, and a discussion where we hamstring ourselves over what is and isn't a right ultimately is what erodes those we do have - worrying too much about whether something is a right, rather then if what we're doing is right.
I sounds like you agree that what is right exists outside of legal definitions, which was my point. The point being that moral authority does not derive from the legal code. To the extent that governments can be blamed for failing to protect the rights to life, liberty, property, conscience, etc., they can be found to be immoral or unjust. And at a certain point, the laws of the government (or even the government itself) loses legitimacy.
This was really the thesis of the Declaration of Independence.
I agree with what you said, but I actually quit watching TV (I got rid of cable like 3+ years ago, Netflix only nowadays) because its just talking heads on the news and no actual news.
I'm 30. What happened 50 years ago I wasn't here for. What happened 20 years ago I didn't really understand. All I know is what has happened over the past 10-15 years.
What I see is a worldwide communication network (the Internet) slowly being criminalized because of the actions of a few people: the big bad pedo/piracy/terrorist boogie man that some elected officials keep dragging out to shove anti-free speech and anti-small business legislation through the system.
Those who give up liberty for safety deserve neither.
Popular issues like environmentalism and LGBT rights may be advancing, but more niche yet equally important issues, such as excessive privacy intrusions (mass surveillance, TSA), software and "DNA" patents are not. And these are important issues that will shape the future.
If you watch television, you will think that the world is becoming worse. After all, news is only when rare things happen, and usually very bad things at that. Now, I am not saying that that criminal justice system is in need of a huge overhaul. It is a real human right problem that needs to be fixed.
But what you're saying is that you think that we are losing rights. Are we really? Consider that in the last 50 years or so, we are gaining more rights. Even animal gains more right. Perhaps this is not the case in the last 10 years or so. Maybe we really are losing rights.
Consider this: When somebody brings a human right problem, that is a good omen. That mean somebody acknowledges the problem. If a human right problem remains hidden from view, our perception will be wrong, because it means we think we have more right or freedom than we really have and we can't do anything about it. So the Snowden revelation is good news, but the bad news is that Snowden is necessary in the first place and the fact that it had remain hidden across two presidency.
So if the media is openly reporting abuses done by prosecutors and other agents. That is a good thing. It means that our error correction mechanism is starting to work, which will hopefully lead to a change that curb the abuse and prevent it from happening.
But what about our freedom over the last ten years? What's the reality? One of the freedom index graph says that our freedom across the world is quite stable, maybe increasing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_in_the_World#Trends
I have yet to look at other graph. But if you're going to say that we are losing our rights, maybe it's a good idea to quantify how much over what time period.