Some good points being raised, on sl1shd()t no less: https://yro.slashdot.org/story/16/09/18/2023216/assange-agrees-to-us-prison-... What is a traitor? When is it appropriate to label someone a traitor? When is doing so, an attempt at manipulative propaganda? This reply, amongst others, is on point:
1. Loyalty to country / oath = precisely not ignoring illegal actions.
2. Doesn't really matter what her initial motivation was - she could have done it because she was a dirty racist who didn't like the President's color, for all I care.
2. Give evidence that she did it "deliberately, willfully to hurt [her] nation" please.
She didn't seriously injure her country or try to destabilise it or encourage war against it. She did not cooperate with a foreign nation. She was acquitted of "aiding the enemy". To stick the "traitor" label on her is ridiculous.
(Also, to stubbornly stick with "him" suggests you're not really interested in facts and are emtionally clouded.)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 09/19/2016 08:46 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
Some good points being raised, on sl1shd()t no less:
https://yro.slashdot.org/story/16/09/18/2023216/assange-agrees-to-us-p rison-if-obama-pardons-chelsea-manning
What is a traitor?
It is a label indicating a prejudicial, emotional value judgment. Bob Wilson would probably have said it is a synonym for "a no good shit."
When is it appropriate to label someone a traitor?
When you want idiots to endorse your intention of kidnapping, torturing and/or murdering someone for political reasons.
When is doing so, an attempt at manipulative propaganda?
Every time, as in every other case where a categorically derogatory label is branded onto someone. Extreme ignorance apparently excuses anything: I have seen people call Australian national Julian Assange a "traitor" because Wikileaks published DNC and HRC e-mail dumps. :o/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJX4JfCAAoJEECU6c5XzmuqnTAH/RSxqgHnmpLPYP1vt+Xd/qgZ NdneVsYayySmgp6S5ljC3zOU8GcflIpo89l12lr/ZIuHqrtjvsgU19nIoYsqHHxL PXypvaeI69u0LF58oSMUxr+dOJKqEnngnj3jB4Yh/MwHRhOkU0DuUbuLO14e8+Wq hlzwUN1Sf2uyOzsNO1v0kkPJW8ULPBvqfZPF2YrE30ExQ8MF+NKEJhGnomUHZQun AX3VSrbGlt1KW0HPBwLfSjRHclwfHBfCPPsC4Hv4NYGl2MaHpMcjhyWT5bW5zECZ m1CTaVHkkbiOsiEMw3OUt8SdyWV/hrbv0VxlYgItrS4M/yxhnoCWcrLJd4YOP3Q= =GZDp -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 6:58 PM, Steve Kinney <admin@pilobilus.net> wrote:
On 09/19/2016 08:46 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
Some good points being raised, on sl1shd()t no less:
https://yro.slashdot.org/story/16/09/18/2023216/assange-agrees-to-us-p rison-if-obama-pardons-chelsea-manning
What is a traitor?
It is a label indicating a prejudicial, emotional value judgment. Bob Wilson would probably have said it is a synonym for "a no good shit."
When is it appropriate to label someone a traitor?
When you want idiots to endorse your intention of kidnapping, torturing and/or murdering someone for political reasons.
When is doing so, an attempt at manipulative propaganda?
Every time, as in every other case where a categorically derogatory label is branded onto someone.
Extreme ignorance apparently excuses anything: I have seen people call Australian national Julian Assange a "traitor" because Wikileaks published DNC and HRC e-mail dumps.
I completely agree with Steve on this. Morally, in my view, one can never be a traitor to the State, because to betray the State, you have to have entered into some agreement with the State voluntarily, i.e. not under duress. The State is force and violence incarnate, therefore no truly voluntary agreement with it can exist. If anything, it is those who act as an instrument of the State who are traitors against the people they dominate. Which means Trump and Clinton are vying for the position of Head Traitor.
participants (3)
-
Sean Lynch -
Steve Kinney -
Zenaan Harkness