So let me see if I understand this subject with some degree of clarity. There would be no point to Chinese Communists attempting to slip some nefarious software onto a returning American’s computer. This is because that computer, and every other device being carried by said American, was built by Chinese Communists who could at any time have embedded in said devices whatever nefarious software/programmed hardware they wished when they were building it. Unless, our noble servants in the DHS carefully scrutinize every disk drive, smart phone, tablet, laptop, memory chip imported into this country everyday. Which seems unlikely. Plus the agents of Communist China seem of late to express little interest in bringing data/software into this country, and have a great interest in taking it out. I refer of course to the recent unfortunate loss of security clearance information, nuclear weapons technology, ad-infinitum. Therefore, the purpose of examining electronic devices brought into this country by American citizens is to examine data that originated in the United States, not Communist China. The idea being that such a search conducted while the citizen is in our country would be unconstitutional, but once a citizen leaves our country and wished to return to the bosom of our free land, such constitutional protections could be circumvented and said devices could be searched at leisure.
It is interesting how in our current age, constitutional protections (such as they are) cease at our nation’s borders. Any citizen who leaves our country may without due process be searched against their will, imprisoned, or even executed, by agents of their own government. A truly tragic state of affairs! I sincerely hope that following our next presidential election our leadership will address this and see that our country once again becomes a beacon of justice and freedom to guide a beleaguered world.
It wasn’t always that way, and it doesn’t have to stay like that. If we don’t fight this battle, and point out that there are other ways then only the Republicans and the US Libertarian party will gain from it.
I think this ties into what is going on in the Defining Socialism thread. If socialism/communism/anarchism are poisoned terms and libertarianism is only associated with the right, then should we come up with a new term to describe that area of politics, knowing that we will have to do it all again when that is inevitably poisoned/taken away from us? Or do we make a stand and fight for how we identify ourselves?
The Lib-Caps have no right to stop us from calling ourselves Libertarian-Socialists/Communists/Marxists if we identify that way, and we shouldn’t let them.
Well, you have to forgive me if my understanding of what you are saying isn’t crystal. You drive by, fire a few inflammatory shots about race wars and political pawns, and then I am the bad guy for not understanding any nuance to your statements.
I also don’t understand if you are are using “you” as me personally, or “you” as in third person libertarians. But it does seem to me you have a very clear pictures of what a libertarian is, which I don’t feel reflects reality at all. Yes, there are some who fit your stereotype. There are those who claim to be libertarians that I find extremely radical and I dare say crazy. But there are a lot of people who are moderates who if they took one of those political tests, find their views align with the libertarian view, even if they don’t consider themselves that, or they don’t consider themselves part of any specific sect of libertarians or part of any movement. You’re caricature of libertarians being Rand worshipers waiting for a civil war to reset the nation is just that.
I am curious what I have said that could be considered “against liberty”. Unless sarcasm taken out of context, I don’t recall me supporting “many things against it”.
Though you are right. I have no legitimacy. I am just an internet commando spouting off my opinion. I try to make my very, very small sphere of influence a better place, but I am not marching in the streets, writing letters, or having any real impact on the world.
That’s “prostate” if you want to update that phrase for our modern times.
That’s not a bug of the nation-state system… it’s a feature.
I’m not sure it ever actually was.
“We” and “us?”
I’m a socialist but I don’t identify as a libertarian of any sort and don’t care about the term.
Being on mobile and consequently packing my ideas more tightly does not seem like a legitimate complaint for you to make.
No self respecting company will let a border guard in their network just because America, and they know it.
Exactly. It isn’t my laptop and not my permission to give.
Until they tell you, “Do it anyways. We’re not letting you go until you do. And no contacting anyone either.”
Am I being detained? I want my lawyer.
“You’re not being detained and you don’t get a lawyer. No contacting anyone.”
If I’m not being detained, then I’m free to go, right?
“You’re not being detained, but you’re not free to go until you give us access to these devices.”
Well we’re at a standstill then, because if I’m not under arrest, and I’m not being detained, then I’m free to go. So which is it?
Either I’m free to go, or I’m being detained or arrested. Which is it?
“I’ll see you in court, where you won’t be able to charge me with anything. Then I’ll see you in court again when first my company, then I will sue you personally. Not the TSA, YOU. Is it worth it? The only thing that’s going to stop me is killing me. Do you want to try and cover that up? They’re expecting me at home.”
“None of the above. What are the passwords to the devices?”