|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
United Kingdom10024 Posts
On October 05 2018 04:17 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 04:11 Jockmcplop wrote:On October 05 2018 03:07 Nyxisto wrote:On October 05 2018 00:09 Jockmcplop wrote:
Is Putin really that much of a special case here?
'Russian cybercrime' is no different to Chinese cybercrime, the NSA, MI5, corporate cybercrime etc. etc.
Yeah unless China or the US decide to annex parts of Europe I think it's very different They annexed parts of Europe using cybercrime? Why is Russia messing with my country's election any less acceptable than Facebook messing with my country's election? Both are unacceptable. But Facebook is a private company that the UK can regulate. Russia is a sovereign nation that the UK has no power over. And it is pretty unlikely that Facebook will assassinate anyone in the UK, like ever.
I don't have to say that the assassinations are bad, obviously, as is annexing your neighbours. I'm not defending Russia.
For me though, if you're looking at the cyber-espionage or whatever you want to call it, neither the UK nor the US has a moral high ground to stand on.
My government was caught spying on EU leaders just a few years ago. The US is literally sending right wing guys out to fund and promote right wing groups across Europe.
The context is different, but everyone's doing it.
|
On October 05 2018 04:25 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 04:17 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2018 04:11 Jockmcplop wrote:On October 05 2018 03:07 Nyxisto wrote:On October 05 2018 00:09 Jockmcplop wrote:
Is Putin really that much of a special case here?
'Russian cybercrime' is no different to Chinese cybercrime, the NSA, MI5, corporate cybercrime etc. etc.
Yeah unless China or the US decide to annex parts of Europe I think it's very different They annexed parts of Europe using cybercrime? Why is Russia messing with my country's election any less acceptable than Facebook messing with my country's election? Both are unacceptable. But Facebook is a private company that the UK can regulate. Russia is a sovereign nation that the UK has no power over. And it is pretty unlikely that Facebook will assassinate anyone in the UK, like ever. I don't have to say that the assassinations are bad, obviously, as is annexing your neighbours. I'm not defending Russia. For me though, if you're looking at the cyber-espionage or whatever you want to call it, neither the UK nor the US has a moral high ground to stand on. My government was caught spying on EU leaders just a few years ago. The US is literally sending right wing guys out to fund and promote right wing groups across Europe. The context is different, but everyone's doing it. Bannon is not the US government.
|
United Kingdom10024 Posts
On October 05 2018 04:30 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 04:25 Jockmcplop wrote:On October 05 2018 04:17 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2018 04:11 Jockmcplop wrote:On October 05 2018 03:07 Nyxisto wrote:On October 05 2018 00:09 Jockmcplop wrote:
Is Putin really that much of a special case here?
'Russian cybercrime' is no different to Chinese cybercrime, the NSA, MI5, corporate cybercrime etc. etc.
Yeah unless China or the US decide to annex parts of Europe I think it's very different They annexed parts of Europe using cybercrime? Why is Russia messing with my country's election any less acceptable than Facebook messing with my country's election? Both are unacceptable. But Facebook is a private company that the UK can regulate. Russia is a sovereign nation that the UK has no power over. And it is pretty unlikely that Facebook will assassinate anyone in the UK, like ever. I don't have to say that the assassinations are bad, obviously, as is annexing your neighbours. I'm not defending Russia. For me though, if you're looking at the cyber-espionage or whatever you want to call it, neither the UK nor the US has a moral high ground to stand on. My government was caught spying on EU leaders just a few years ago. The US is literally sending right wing guys out to fund and promote right wing groups across Europe. The context is different, but everyone's doing it. Bannon is not the US government.
I know, I was talking about Richard Grenell, for example, the Ambassador to Germany:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/04/new-us-ambassador-to-germany-under-fire-for-rightwing-support
|
On October 05 2018 04:25 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 04:17 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2018 04:11 Jockmcplop wrote:On October 05 2018 03:07 Nyxisto wrote:On October 05 2018 00:09 Jockmcplop wrote:
Is Putin really that much of a special case here?
'Russian cybercrime' is no different to Chinese cybercrime, the NSA, MI5, corporate cybercrime etc. etc.
Yeah unless China or the US decide to annex parts of Europe I think it's very different They annexed parts of Europe using cybercrime? Why is Russia messing with my country's election any less acceptable than Facebook messing with my country's election? Both are unacceptable. But Facebook is a private company that the UK can regulate. Russia is a sovereign nation that the UK has no power over. And it is pretty unlikely that Facebook will assassinate anyone in the UK, like ever. I don't have to say that the assassinations are bad, obviously, as is annexing your neighbours. I'm not defending Russia. For me though, if you're looking at the cyber-espionage or whatever you want to call it, neither the UK nor the US has a moral high ground to stand on. My government was caught spying on EU leaders just a few years ago. The US is literally sending right wing guys out to fund and promote right wing groups across Europe. The context is different, but everyone's doing it.
When the US or Germany spies on you, it isn’t to find out where the US or German traitors are so they can assassinate them. We all do it, but we don’t escalate. The US isn’t trying mess with your democracy, Russia is.
And people need to get over the moral high ground. No nation is a moral actor and no nation ever has been. This is about self interest and the preservation of stability. Russia would love an economic crisis right now, because it would allow them to back the efforts of even more extreme parties and movements that would arrive.
|
The US government in partnership with private business has a long history of attempting to manipulate public opinion in foreign countries up to and including sponsoring coups, dictators, and assassinations. Spying and digital infiltration has been a part of that so long as it's been a part of the countries we're doing it to. This also includes assassinating US citizens standing in opposition to their international influencing.
The US is worse by pretty much any measure (save doing these things in Europe) than Russia imo.
|
When the US or Germany spies on you, it isn’t to find out where the US or German traitors are so they can assassinate them. We all do it, but we don’t escalate. The US isn’t trying mess with your democracy, Russia is.
Grenell would like to have a word with you.
You know. Doing the exact opposite of what you just stated the US doesn't do. Openly.
Oh, and yeah. Moral high ground is stupid - but being in denial is worse. Something that many americans suffer from. I said it before and will say again in the future: the US isn't better than Russia in regards to foreign actions of any sort. I'd even argue that it's worse than Russia. To go apeshit over alleged assassinations (though pretty sure they did it) by Russia, ignoring the fact that the US assassinates their own citizens as well if they perceive them as threat, seems kinda weird. Has nothing to do with moral high ground but massive double standards.
|
On October 05 2018 04:11 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 03:07 Nyxisto wrote:On October 05 2018 00:09 Jockmcplop wrote:
Is Putin really that much of a special case here?
'Russian cybercrime' is no different to Chinese cybercrime, the NSA, MI5, corporate cybercrime etc. etc.
Yeah unless China or the US decide to annex parts of Europe I think it's very different They annexed parts of Europe using cybercrime? Why is Russia messing with my country's election any less acceptable than Facebook messing with my country's election?
First off because Facebook is a business and not a country with an army, secondly because Zuckerberg isn't manipulating anything. Countries using Facebook (again, predominantly Russia) however is an issue.
And yes, cyberwarfare including propaganda was part of the Crimean annexation. (as well as the greater Ukranian destabilisation effort overall)
|
On October 05 2018 07:59 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +When the US or Germany spies on you, it isn’t to find out where the US or German traitors are so they can assassinate them. We all do it, but we don’t escalate. The US isn’t trying mess with your democracy, Russia is.
Grenell would like to have a word with you. You know. Doing the exact opposite of what you just stated the US doesn't do. Openly. Oh, and yeah. Moral high ground is stupid - but being in denial is worse. Something that many americans suffer from. I said it before and will say again in the future: the US isn't better than Russia in regards to foreign actions of any sort. I'd even argue that it's worse than Russia. To go apeshit over alleged assassinations (though pretty sure they did it) by Russia, ignoring the fact that the US assassinates their own citizens as well if they perceive them as threat, seems kinda weird. Has nothing to do with moral high ground but massive double standards.
We can’t object to both? Again, I have no control over Russia or it’s actions. This isn’t about who is right, it is about avoiding escalation of efforts to undermine our democracies.
And I do sort of tire of the argument no one can critique of other nations because somewhere in the world our nation is doing something bad. It leads to this circular argument that ends with all bad acts being justified because none of countries are without sin.
|
On October 05 2018 09:55 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 07:59 m4ini wrote:When the US or Germany spies on you, it isn’t to find out where the US or German traitors are so they can assassinate them. We all do it, but we don’t escalate. The US isn’t trying mess with your democracy, Russia is.
Grenell would like to have a word with you. You know. Doing the exact opposite of what you just stated the US doesn't do. Openly. Oh, and yeah. Moral high ground is stupid - but being in denial is worse. Something that many americans suffer from. I said it before and will say again in the future: the US isn't better than Russia in regards to foreign actions of any sort. I'd even argue that it's worse than Russia. To go apeshit over alleged assassinations (though pretty sure they did it) by Russia, ignoring the fact that the US assassinates their own citizens as well if they perceive them as threat, seems kinda weird. Has nothing to do with moral high ground but massive double standards. We can’t object to both? Again, I have no control over Russia or it’s actions. This isn’t about who is right, it is about avoiding escalation of efforts to undermine our democracies. And I do sort of tire of the argument no one can critique of other nations because somewhere in the world our nation is doing something bad. It leads to this circular argument that ends with all bad acts being justified because none of countries are without sin.
Sure you can, the post you're responding to doesn't suggest otherwise. But to that point, wise people say "First remove the beam out of your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother's eye."
|
United Kingdom10024 Posts
On October 05 2018 13:21 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 09:55 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2018 07:59 m4ini wrote:When the US or Germany spies on you, it isn’t to find out where the US or German traitors are so they can assassinate them. We all do it, but we don’t escalate. The US isn’t trying mess with your democracy, Russia is.
Grenell would like to have a word with you. You know. Doing the exact opposite of what you just stated the US doesn't do. Openly. Oh, and yeah. Moral high ground is stupid - but being in denial is worse. Something that many americans suffer from. I said it before and will say again in the future: the US isn't better than Russia in regards to foreign actions of any sort. I'd even argue that it's worse than Russia. To go apeshit over alleged assassinations (though pretty sure they did it) by Russia, ignoring the fact that the US assassinates their own citizens as well if they perceive them as threat, seems kinda weird. Has nothing to do with moral high ground but massive double standards. We can’t object to both? Again, I have no control over Russia or it’s actions. This isn’t about who is right, it is about avoiding escalation of efforts to undermine our democracies. And I do sort of tire of the argument no one can critique of other nations because somewhere in the world our nation is doing something bad. It leads to this circular argument that ends with all bad acts being justified because none of countries are without sin. Sure you can, the post you're responding to doesn't suggest otherwise. But to that point, wise people say "First remove the beam out of your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother's eye."
Yeah I mean I'm not telling anyone not to critique Russia. Its not the coverage itself of this hacking that annoys me, its the quality of the coverage, the faux outrage that Russia would dare do something terrible like try to hack their political enemies, while my government does the exact same thing, and is still trying to argue with the courts in my country that they should be allowed to do so.
This is about how we judge the actions of a country not on the merits of those actions, but in the context of a propaganda war. Its about how the standards we are holding the Russians to are standards that we refuse to meet ourselves - and how those exceptions to the rules are built in to our own political systems. The assumption that doing bad stuff is ok when we do it due to the greater context of our 'western values' is so deep within liberalism that it seems like its invisible to most people.
|
I suppose that hypocrisy is rooted in the belief that our free democracies (which for the most part, they really are) are superior to dictatorial regimes.
Is meddling with a dictatorship in an attempt to move towards democracy just as bad as a dictatorship trying to dismantle other democracies? (Im definitely NOT saying that's what the 'the West' is doing, just posing a hypothetical).
|
On October 05 2018 17:48 solidbebe wrote:
I suppose that hypocrisy is rooted in the belief that our free democracies (which for the most part, they really are) are superior to dictatorial regimes.
Is meddling with a dictatorship in an attempt to move towards democracy just as bad as a dictatorship trying to dismantle other democracies? (Im definitely NOT saying that's what the 'the West' is doing, just posing a hypothetical).
Depends on the "dictatorship" and "democracy" but generally (and practically) yes, or at least close enough to make them both unacceptable imo.
|
I think ppl are being a bit dense here though. Russia would be outraged if they caught people hacking some important network. They'd probably shoot the perpetrators.
The fact that we do it to "political enemies", doesn't mean we should just be ok with them doing it to us. We should expect it, and clearly the AIVD die, and intercepted them. We should not accept it.
Especially as Russia continuously puts on the mask of the aggrieved innocent when they are guilty as sin.
|
United Kingdom10024 Posts
On October 05 2018 18:22 Acrofales wrote:
I think ppl are being a bit dense here though. Russia would be outraged if they caught people hacking some important network. They'd probably shoot the perpetrators.
The fact that we do it to "political enemies", doesn't mean we should just be ok with them doing it to us. We should expect it, and clearly the AIVD die, and intercepted them. We should not accept it.
Especially as Russia continuously puts on the mask of the aggrieved innocent when they are guilty as sin.
Russia aren't unique in this at all though. In fact, my government puts on the very same mask. That is exactly the point I'm making. Why is it worse when Russia do it than it is when we do it? You seem to be accepting the double standard and promoting it as an obvious truth.
"Its worse because its happening to me" isn't an argument that makes sense.
|
On October 05 2018 18:28 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 18:22 Acrofales wrote:
I think ppl are being a bit dense here though. Russia would be outraged if they caught people hacking some important network. They'd probably shoot the perpetrators.
The fact that we do it to "political enemies", doesn't mean we should just be ok with them doing it to us. We should expect it, and clearly the AIVD die, and intercepted them. We should not accept it.
Especially as Russia continuously puts on the mask of the aggrieved innocent when they are guilty as sin. Russia aren't unique in this at all though. In fact, my government puts on the very same mask. That is exactly the point I'm making. Why is it worse when Russia do it than it is when we do it? You seem to be accepting the double standard and promoting it as an obvious truth. "Its worse because its happening to me" isn't an argument that makes sense.
Stop playing morality and start playing realpolitik. It is ALL morally wrong. And we should hold our government to a higher standard. Stop electing those fuckers who do illegal shit. But you won't, because it's too important to keep getting cheap oil and minerals to maintain the high quality of living. So yeah, from an ethical standpoint we can indeed not say anything about this. But from a political point of view, we can and should fight back. I'd rather live in a world where everyone is happy, but given a world with mutual exclusion between Vladimir's happiness and my own, I choose me.
|
United Kingdom10024 Posts
On October 05 2018 19:10 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 18:28 Jockmcplop wrote:On October 05 2018 18:22 Acrofales wrote:
I think ppl are being a bit dense here though. Russia would be outraged if they caught people hacking some important network. They'd probably shoot the perpetrators.
The fact that we do it to "political enemies", doesn't mean we should just be ok with them doing it to us. We should expect it, and clearly the AIVD die, and intercepted them. We should not accept it.
Especially as Russia continuously puts on the mask of the aggrieved innocent when they are guilty as sin. Russia aren't unique in this at all though. In fact, my government puts on the very same mask. That is exactly the point I'm making. Why is it worse when Russia do it than it is when we do it? You seem to be accepting the double standard and promoting it as an obvious truth. "Its worse because its happening to me" isn't an argument that makes sense. Stop playing morality and start playing realpolitik. It is ALL morally wrong. And we should hold our government to a higher standard. Stop electing those fuckers who do illegal shit. But you won't, because it's too important to keep getting cheap oil and minerals to maintain the high quality of living. So yeah, from an ethical standpoint we can indeed not say anything about this. But from a political point of view, we can and should fight back. I'd rather live in a world where everyone is happy, but given a world with mutual exclusion between Vladimir's happiness and my own, I choose me.
I'm not 'playing morality'. In fact, its 'playing morality' that I'm arguing against. You can't proliferate and perfect something illegal and then act upset when it happens to you. You can't spy on foreign governments, your own population and, well, everyone, and then complain that you are being spied on. Its not worse because it was done by Russians. I'm trying to take the stupid moral indignation out of this.
Its simply a case of Russia doing what everyone does, and getting caught because they were stupid about it.
|
On October 05 2018 19:18 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 19:10 Acrofales wrote:On October 05 2018 18:28 Jockmcplop wrote:On October 05 2018 18:22 Acrofales wrote:
I think ppl are being a bit dense here though. Russia would be outraged if they caught people hacking some important network. They'd probably shoot the perpetrators.
The fact that we do it to "political enemies", doesn't mean we should just be ok with them doing it to us. We should expect it, and clearly the AIVD die, and intercepted them. We should not accept it.
Especially as Russia continuously puts on the mask of the aggrieved innocent when they are guilty as sin. Russia aren't unique in this at all though. In fact, my government puts on the very same mask. That is exactly the point I'm making. Why is it worse when Russia do it than it is when we do it? You seem to be accepting the double standard and promoting it as an obvious truth. "Its worse because its happening to me" isn't an argument that makes sense. Stop playing morality and start playing realpolitik. It is ALL morally wrong. And we should hold our government to a higher standard. Stop electing those fuckers who do illegal shit. But you won't, because it's too important to keep getting cheap oil and minerals to maintain the high quality of living. So yeah, from an ethical standpoint we can indeed not say anything about this. But from a political point of view, we can and should fight back. I'd rather live in a world where everyone is happy, but given a world with mutual exclusion between Vladimir's happiness and my own, I choose me. I'm not 'playing morality'. In fact, its 'playing morality' that I'm arguing against. You can't proliferate and perfect something illegal and then act upset when it happens to you. You can't spy on foreign governments, your own population and, well, everyone, and then complain that you are being spied on. Its not worse because it was done by Russians. I'm trying to take the stupid moral indignation out of this. Its simply a case of Russia doing what everyone does, and getting caught because they were stupid about it.
Well, if you're not claiming the moral high ground, then you're down in the dirt playing politics with me. And the way I see it, Russia just got caught iwth their hand in the cookie jar. That we all steal cookies doesn't mean it's allowed. The whole point is to do it without getting caught. Or, in the case of that Chinese article on the previous page, make off with the entire cookie factory. If you get caught, you get beaten with a stick. So welcome to the beating with a stick part.
Righteous indignation that "we all steal cookies, so why bother beating that poor crook with a stick" is beside the point. We're beating them with a stick because we don't want our own cookies stolen.
|
You can't beat Vladimir with a stick because Vladimir has nukes.
Solidarity is not a question of moral high-grounds, solidarizing against everyone who uses these methods is a simple, liberal value. Fair competition under equal rights. If you don't want it done to you, you must under no circumstances do it against someone else.
You can't pretend you are liberal while you play with double standards.
|
On October 05 2018 17:48 solidbebe wrote:
I suppose that hypocrisy is rooted in the belief that our free democracies (which for the most part, they really are) are superior to dictatorial regimes.
Is meddling with a dictatorship in an attempt to move towards democracy just as bad as a dictatorship trying to dismantle other democracies? (Im definitely NOT saying that's what the 'the West' is doing, just posing a hypothetical).
Considering how Iraq has panned out I'd say at times it's about equal.
It's always a matter of context. For one, as you note, it begins from the precept that Democracy is fundamentally better, which isn't really something you can do because defining 'better' is itself next to impossible (what frame of reference do you even use?) for two it depends entirely on the historical context. Would it be bad for a dictatorship to undermine a stagnant, stifling Democracy that's not making any progress?
From a historical point of view, no. In fact, that's the root of most (reasonable) people on the right's hatred of the EU, the sense that it stifles and suppresses.
But Russia is a particularly complicated question because so many people are so ignorant about Russia and Russian culture, and the media doesn't really do much to enlighten because they're the enemy, and Vladmir Putin is a particularly complicated figure to assess because of how legitimately popular he has always been in Russia. Even now at his least popular he's got approval ratings Trump would tweet for.
Side note, I found this page very interesting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_image_of_Vladimir_Putin
If you look at the positions on the globe where you find these countries.
|
On October 05 2018 19:35 Big J wrote:
You can't beat Vladimir with a stick because Vladimir has nukes.
Solidarity is not a question of moral high-grounds, solidarizing against everyone who uses these methods is a simple, liberal value. Fair competition under equal rights. If you don't want it done to you, you must under no circumstances do it against someone else.
You can't pretend you are liberal while you play with double standards.
Well, beating with a stick doesn't mean literally beating with a stick, just as he isn't literally stealing cookies out of the cookie jar. There's plenty of things we can do that won't provoke a nuclear retaliation, and we are doing some of them.
As for the second part, "being liberal" isn't an on-off switch. There are many liberties and we can be in favour of some of them, and against others. Also, we're basically in agreement: we are ALL in agreement that stealing cookies is bad. Yet we are also all secretly plotting to steal cookies, because cookies are delicious, and the more we have the happier we are. Funnily enough, the one doesn't rule out the other. We can both (1) agree that stealing cookies is bad and agree to beat everybody with a stick who is caught stealing, and (2) steal cookies, because we think we are sneaky enough that nobody could possibly catch us! Or even accept that occasionally we'll get beaten with a stick, but cookies are too delicious not to steal them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
