SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Ingrid Burrington writes in The Atlantic about a little-remembered incident that occurred in 1992 when activists Keith Kjoller and Peter Lumsdaine snuck into a Rockwell International facility in Seal Beach, California and in what they called an "act of conscience" used wood-splitting axes to break into two clean rooms containing nine satellites being built for the US government. Lumsdaine took his axe to one of the satellites, hitting it over 60 times. The Brigade's target was the Navigation Satellite Timing And Ranging (NAVSTAR) Program and the Global Positioning System (GPS). Both men belonged to the Lockheed Action Collective, a protest group that staged demonstrations and blockaded the entrance at the Lockheed Missiles & Space Co. test base in Santa Cruz in 1990. They said they intentionally took axes to the $50-million Navstar Global Position System satellite to bring the public's attention to what they termed the government's attempt to control the world through modern technology. "I had to slow the deployment of this system (which) makes conventional warfare much more lethal and nuclear war winnable in the eyes of some," an emotional Kjoller told the judge before receiving an 18-month sentence. "It's something that I couldn't let go by. I tried to do what was right rather than what was convenient."
Burrington recently contacted Lumsdaine to learn more about the Brigade and Lumsdaine expresses no regrets for his actions. Even if the technology has more and more civilian uses, Lumsdaine says, GPS remains “military in its origins, military in its goals, military in its development and [is still] controlled by the military.” Today, Lumsdaine views the thread connecting GPS and drones as part of a longer-term movement by military powers toward automated systems and compared today’s conditions to the opening sequence of Terminator 2, where Sarah Connor laments that the survivors of Skynet’s nuclear apocalypse “lived only to face a new nightmare: the war against the machines.” "I think in a general way people need to look for those psychological, spiritual, cultural, logistical, technological weak points and leverage points and push hard there," says Lumsdaine. "It is so easy for all of us as human beings to take a deep breath and step aside and not face how very serious the situation is, because it's very unpleasant to look at the effort and potential consequences of challenging the powers that be. But the only thing higher than the cost of resistance is the cost of not resisting."
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Sunday March 08 2015, @05:00AM
First they got rid of the draft so the average american no longer has to worry about the personal consequences of militarism.
Not infringing upon people's fundamental liberties is not a bad thing; it's a good thing. The government simply should not have the power to call for drafts to begin with, as government thugs forcing people to serve in the military is not something any truly free country would do. The importance of protecting people's fundamental liberties far outweighs the importance of teaching people the personal consequences of militarism by drafting people. I only wish we passed a constitutional amendment to completely forbid the government from creating drafts at all, as it's still technically possible for them to do so.
(Score: 1, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 08 2015, @07:13AM
> Not infringing upon people's fundamental liberties is not a bad thing;
What makes the right not to be physically drafted more important than right not to be drafted via taxation?
> The government simply should not have the power to call for drafts to begin with, as government thugs forcing people
> to serve in the military is not something any truly free country would do
Of the people, by the people, for the people. The ironic thing about your attitude is that it enables those "government thugs" by letting them separate the consequences from their actions. The more government is abstracted out from the daily lives of regular people, the less accountable it will be to regular people.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Sunday March 08 2015, @10:28PM
What makes the right not to be physically drafted more important than right not to be drafted via taxation?
The severity is far different, but yes, I would say being forced to pay for unjust wars is a bad thing. Do you seriously not see *any* difference between a voluntary army and government thugs drafting people into fighting in wars?
Of the people, by the people, for the people.
Governments should not be able to violate people's fundamental liberties, popular support or not. If the people don't care about the nation enough to join the war, and it should fall, so be it.
The ironic thing about your attitude is that it enables those "government thugs" by letting them separate the consequences from their actions.
No, it doesn't. The only thing that does that is unwillingness to stand up against them, and *that* is a personal choice. You can't blame that on not having a draft. And even if you could, the ends wouldn't justify the means.
The more government is abstracted out from the daily lives of regular people, the less accountable it will be to regular people.
Then "regular people" need to stop being apathetic and get involved with their governments. You are suggesting we violate people's fundamental liberties so that people will apparently be more willing to take action against the government. It's like suggesting that we violate people's fundamental liberties so that we can protect people from the 'terrists' who want to violate our liberties; it's cowardly and meaningless. I think our fundamental liberties should be protected from the government at all costs, so your solution is disgusting and unacceptable to me.
Your ends don't justify the means, regardless of whether or not your 'solution' would work.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 08 2015, @11:30PM
Your argument is naively circular.
You want to just declare that the people stop being apathetic but designing a system of government that encourages people to do just that is unacceptable.
All government does is "violate people's fundamental liberties." The difference between good government and bad government is how much and under what circumstances. Your fundamentalism blinds you to the way the world actually works.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Monday March 09 2015, @01:08AM
Your argument is naively circular.
No, it isn't. You just lack understanding of basic logic.
You want to just declare that the people stop being apathetic but designing a system of government that encourages people to do just that is unacceptable.
I want to encourage people to stop being apathetic through means other than violating their fundamental liberties and giving government powers it shouldn't have. That is not circular, and you are illogical for suggesting that it is.
But let's assume there is no other way. Let's say if we don't draft people, they'll be apathetic, and you'll wind up with more unjust wars (despite us drafting people before and it not making much of a measurable difference). I still would oppose the draft, since it violates people's fundamental liberties in utterly unacceptable wars. Freedom is more important to me than safety from initiating unjust wars. I am not willing to let governments have such draconian powers.
All government does is "violate people's fundamental liberties."
Agreed. And I seek to stop that. You clearly do not know what I mean by "fundamental liberties." I want a government that actually respects the fourth amendment, for instance. You probably think that by "fundamental liberties" I mean no government at all, but I do not consider every action you can possibly take to be a fundamental liberty, so that's a silly misunderstanding of my position.
The difference between good government and bad government is how much and under what circumstances.
And to you, the government apparently should have the power to enslave people. I would say that's almost unlimited government. I wonder if you even have a problem with the TSA, mass surveillance, making drugs illegal, DUI checkpoints, or any number of the things the government is doing now that violate our fundamental liberties (and most also violate the constitution).
Your fundamentalism blinds you to the way the world actually works.
Your profound ignorance blinds you from understanding my arguments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 09 2015, @02:28PM
Dude, I can see the spittle spraying from your lips.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Monday March 09 2015, @03:48PM
Amazing reply. I can see the spittle spraying from your lips.