Freedom Requires Whistleblowers: The Importance of Transparency | Learn Liberty

"Freedom Requires Whistleblowers: The Importance of Transparency" by @LearnLiberty
► Get Learn Liberty updates in your inbox!

Does it bother you that government agencies are able to spy on everything you do online? The power we give to one set of leaders continues to the next, whether you agree with them or not. Prof. James Otteson says we should be concerned about government overreach. The government should be accountable to the citizens, not the other way around. Whistleblowers play an important role in making sure the people know when the government is doing things it shouldn't do. Maybe you haven't done anything wrong. Maybe you have not done anything today's government officials would find problematic. Can you be sure tomorrow's leaders will feel the same way? We need whistleblowers to take a stand and point out when the government is not acting in the people's interest. We need the government to answer to us. The government should get permission from the citizens for everything it does. How do you feel about being spied on by government agencies? What do you think of Edward Snowden and others who have spoken out about secret government programs and policies?

**Prof. James R. Otteson currently teaches at Yeshiva University, but in September 2013 he will be starting a new position at Wake Forest University!**

[LearnLiberty]

[NEW VIDEO] The government of a free society needs to ask its citizens' permission for everything it does, not the other way around.


#Snowden   #NSA   #privacy   #Manning   #libertarian  

[rbc]

Thank you. The moment one group of people is given the power and right to force themselves on you, it automatically stops being a "free society".

[ZombieTex]

There was a great quote from Aesop, "We hang petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office."

[bn]

I think we will have to agree on disagreeing. Thank you for the friendly exchange. Have a great Day!

[lxwolvrinexl]

couldn't have said it better myself  

[TheScourge]

What people who say "I've done nothing wrong" forget is that there are so many laws out there everyone has likely broken quite a few and greater surveillance can reveal that. The government obviously isn't going to arrest everyone, but with greater surveillance powers they do have the ability to choose to prosecute certain people whom they find annoying for political reasons. I think it's a point worth remembering on this question.

[chris]

so, have you volunteered for front line yet

[largeshake]

Joining the marine core if or when it happens.

[RedElmoe]

This guy made a good point about the double edged sword of voting

[gtaeverrr]

If the president has the senate, "In his pocket", so to speak, there's nothing you can do. The only legal way to get a president out of office is impeachment and the senate ultimately decides whether the impeachment leads to removal from office.

[gilbet]

He meant to say a government's enforcement branches should be limited to protecting people, with their permission. As opposed to an entitynthat controls people, which is what it actually has become.

[bluo]

As long as people feel complacent, they won't care one iota about freedom. By the time they do want more freedom, they won't be able to do a darn thing.

[shadyparadox]

"Government of a free society" is an oxymoron. The institution needs to be abolished.

[xXGwAxHaRdScOpEsXx]

The problem here is that freedom is only a concept. More importantly, it is a concept which cannot be quantified. This means that freedom means whatever the government means at any one time. Freedom ranges from being lawless to being able to leave the country if you don't want to be oppressed. If there's one thing that politicians are good at, it's twisting words to suit them.

[chris]

i would think some canisters did not ignite, they would have source on them, all investigators need do is read the lable

[ZombieTex]

That's actually not the case at all. Ireland existed in Anarchy for over 1000 years. It was a millennium of peace and prosperity. They fought no wars of conquest. Repelled numerous invasions successfully. They had roads, and schools, and courts, and a common system of law, but no taxes or coercive government to force anyone to do anything they didn't want to do.

[CrazyIvanovich]

I would say it's more academic than you'd give it credit for. If you consider the actual definition of freedom, or consider human liberty as a sum of the degrees of freedom the person has, then every time an outside entity of any kind restricts behavior, it removes some degrees of freedom. That seems to me to be a fairly sound argument from a logical point of view.

[rawheas]

of course you need government as a means of protecting your basic rights.

If one looks at history when a government is dissolved power is usually simply transferred to local warlords or city states who can protect people in exchange for some sort of good. If we got rid of government such a system would arise inevitably.

[allintexaholdem]

I agree.
But I think there certain pieces of information, notably pertaining to national security that do need to be kept secret.

Mr. Snowden- Good guy
Mr. (or Ms. now?) Manning- bad.

[AlaskaFinal]

There needs to be a gauntlet, some sort of pushback, so that we separate the legitimate instances of abuse and personal conscience, from those with less chaste motives.