Will Australia Follow China's Google Ban? 280
gadgetopia writes "A news report in Forbes says that China has blocked Google with its great firewall; now the world waits to see if Australia's Minister for Censorship, Senator Stephen Conroy, will do the same following his outrageous attacks on Google."
Lol? Sif it will happen. (Score:5, Insightful)
Politics might be stupid in Australia, like lots of places. But no, it won't go the same was as China.
We have transparency and rule of law.
However fucked out Communications Minister might be.
--Q
Senator Stephen Conroy == Senator Joe McCarthy? (Score:2, Insightful)
Only a matter of time until the former discredits himself like the latter did. His railing against Google makes him sound foolish.
Re:Lol? Sif it will happen. (Score:3, Insightful)
>>>rule of law.
"What's that?" - leader
"No clue." - other leader
Re:Senator Stephen Conroy == Senator Joe McCarthy? (Score:3, Insightful)
Let's hope that his "McCarthy" moment comes soon. Unfortunately these kinds of delusional windbags are all too often give far too much rope, and while their fall is spectacular, there are a lot of casualties along the way.
Re:Lol? Sif it will happen. (Score:5, Insightful)
>>>rule of law.
"What's that?" - leader
"No clue." - other leader
"Well, fuck off then." -voter in next election*
*only valid in literate and civically active cultures
Re:Senator Stephen Conroy == Senator Joe McCarthy? (Score:4, Insightful)
It took around a decade to discredit McCarthyism, and there's a small but significant group of right wing pundits who still defend him. While waiting for people like this to self destruct, it's important do your part and give them a good shove in that direction whenever possible.
Re:Lol? Sif it will happen. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Lol? Sif it will happen. (Score:3, Insightful)
Most voters don't know what rule of law is either.
Look how many of them think the Constitution is just a piece of paper,
and therefore Parliament can do whatever it wants.
Re:Lol? Sif it will happen. (Score:2, Insightful)
In the US they have transparency and the rule of law also. Problem is their government refuses to enforce the laws and claims national security trumps transparency.
Good Luck to us all Mate
Re:Senator Stephen Conroy == Senator Joe McCarthy? (Score:3, Insightful)
It took around a decade to discredit McCarthyism, and there's a small but significant group of right wing pundits who still defend him. While waiting for people like this to self destruct, it's important do your part and give them a good shove in that direction whenever possible.
A new generation of McCarthy sympathizers is possible, given that the Texas textbook requirements have now been revised to show McC in a positive light.
Re:I would (Score:5, Insightful)
What about censorship of political, religious, and controversial viewpoints? This is about Freedom of expression and Freedom of communication more than it is about any single issue. If the blocking were voluntary so that people could decide individually if their internet should be censored, I could understand. If the black list were publicly available so that people inside and outside the country could audit what is being blocked, I could maybe understand. If the previously leaked block list hadn't included material that they had claimed wasn't going to be blocked, I could maybe, just possibly agree with you.
As it stands, you have a government organization which will have the ability to block any website that they want without warning or explanation. There will be no way for people inside the firewall to know what is and what isn't being blocked. And said government organization has already been shown to be either incompetent or nefarious regarding what is being added to the blacklist. It's a bad situation, and it in fact does trample on human rights.
specifically (Score:4, Insightful)
when your economy is trashed by greedy speculation then fear and hysteria. that's what sent germany to the dogs: the great depression, the collapse of the financial world
aka, what the world just experiences in 2008 (on a much smaller scale, true)
but this historical parallel leads us to four observations:
1. the angry tea partiers, with their brick throwing and insane murderous anger, IS kristallnacht, on a smaller scale
2. intolerant deluded propagandized fools hording guns in the woods are the seeds of fascism, NOT our protectors from fascism
3. we need strong government regulation in the financial sector, and the assholes (greenspan and co) who dismantled the 1930s era (irony) protections need to be grilled a la congressional hearings and roundly castigated for their dangerous irresponsibility
4. hopefully the world, and the usa, can weather this horde of angry morons out of work, the seeds of fascism, without them crystallizing around some modern day hitler-like demagogue and mounting a political (and visceral: they love guns) challenge to civilization. and then let the retards fade away into history
interesintg note: many tea partiers receive government benefits (unemployment, medicaid)... while they rail against government aid. they go to tea party rallies... instead of looking for work. fucking ignorant hypocrites
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/us/politics/28teaparty.html [nytimes.com]
Re:Lol? Sif it will happen. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I would (Score:3, Insightful)
That's exactly what we're claiming. Google believes that information should be free, not controlled by those in power for their own ends, and it has shown a willingness to fight for that freedom.
Before you say "But it's only kiddy porn!" just ask yourself how often bad and self serving legislation is passed under the mantra that it's "for the children"?
Re:I would (Score:2, Insightful)
There's the problem right there: In a free society it's supposed to be a stewardship, not a dictatorship.
I highly doubt most citizens of a free country want their government to restrict where they can go online, much less censor via a secret list.
...let's check the facts. (Score:1, Insightful)
If you had went back to Germany in the 20's and told them that within 20 years, their country would elect one of the most intolerant demagogues and world history as dictator and begin systematically committing the genocide of a sizable portion of their population, they would have laughed at the thought.
They might not have expected actual genocide (I mean, no-one expects the Spanish Inquisition), but Weimar Germany was never a stable polity and everyone knew it. There was a monarchy before the war, which might not be Slashdot's favorite form of government, but it only got worse thereafter. The Kaiser's abdication in 1918 was immediately followed by violence in the streets between leftists and nationalists (who eventually all threw in their lot with the Nazis). There was even a short-lived "People's Republic of Bavaria" around this time, as well as the founding of the Nazi party itself. The various rebellions were eventually put down and replaced by the perpetually weak Weimar Republic, but they continued to operate. The brutal provisions of the Versailles treaty kept the country in a state of perpetual depression throughout the twenties (the famous hyperinflation was in 1923), causing widespread political discontent, characterized by street fights between socialists and nationalists. The government was already harassing leftist media outlets by the late 20's, before the Nazis even took power.
They might have been intellectually sophisticated, but politically and economically sophisticated they were not. I know Australia and the UK hate freedom a lot, so I'm not saying it couldn't happen there, but the situation in Weimar Germany is really not at all comparable.
Re:specifically (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:specifically (Score:2, Insightful)
IMHO, Tea Partiers are the ones trying to stop the full-on march to fascism, not create it. You can not create a fascist government regime by campaigning to strip the government of power! That's just stupid. Look to the ones trying to collect government power.
So which is it: are they trying to stop Communism [wikipedia.org] or Fascism [wikipedia.org]? Because it seems to me that they are equated in the minds of the Teabaggers.
I think what they are really trying to do is stop a black man from governing as President.
Re:Senator Stephen Conroy == Senator Joe McCarthy? (Score:4, Insightful)
McCarthyism was a matter of a power hungry person taking advantage of a real threat to increase his own personal power. It isn't a new thing, and has happened from time to time since the beginning of the country [wikipedia.org], and whenever it has happened, Americans have opposed it as soon as they realized what was going on. The solution is an alert and informed populace, and the result of the modern speed of communication can be seen in that Bush's attempt to consolidate power (based on the real threat of terrorism) was not nearly as horrible as McCarthy's or the federalists'.
On the other hand, if the population supports the power-hungry, then no amount of information will limit them. Fortunately for the US, the vast majority of Americans oppose this sort of thing when they are able to see it for what it is. I suspect Australians are the same.
First they came... (Score:3, Insightful)
First they blocked the child porn sites,
and I didn't speak up because I abhore child abuse.
Then they blocked all gay sex sites,
and I didn't speak up because I'm not gay.
Then they blocked all the sites that support terrorists,
and I didn't speak up because I forgot that one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter.
Then they blocked all porn sites,
and I didn't speak up because I like my sex real.
Then they blocked all the all political sites,
and I didn't speak up because who reads those things anyway?
Then they blocked all the web sites complaining about the blocking,
and I couldn't speak up.
(Apologies to Martin Niemöller)
No. (Score:3, Insightful)
why do people fear a democratic government (Score:2, Insightful)
more than they fear morons running around with guns?
its a serious, honest question
i for one would gladly outlaw guns. the result? lots less senseless deaths. increase in risk of fascism? zero
guns are not the salvation from, nor the guard against, a descent into fascism. fascism does not derive from a gunfight, nor is some gunfight going to save us from fascism. its some sort of boyscout fantasy
indeed, if anything, if fascism comes to the usa, ti will be born of the same paranoid rantings of psychotics hording guns in the woods
put it this way: if you trust to guns, more than you trust to words, that shows the extent of your commitment to civil democratic values
guns are incompatible with democracy. they do not underpin it, they threaten it
if the noble experiment known as the united states ever comes to an end, it will done at the hands of armed factions, it will not be saved by such visceral forces