ShopDreamUp AI ArtDreamUp
Deviation Actions
As US cybersecurity bill CISPA heads to the House Floor for a vote, the White House National Security Council has issued a statement suggesting that the President won't support it in its current form. "We continue to believe that information sharing improvements are essential to effective legislation," said NSC spokesperson Caitlin Hayden told the Los Angeles Times in a statement. "but they must include privacy and civil liberties protections, reinforce the roles of civilian and intelligence agencies, and include targeted liability protections... We believe the adopted committee amendments reflect a good faith-effort to incorporate some of the Administration's important substantive concerns, but we do not believe these changes have addressed some outstanding fundamental priorities."
"WE DO NOT BELIEVE THESE CHANGES HAVE ADDRESSED SOME OUTSTANDING FUNDAMENTAL PRIORITIES."
Hayden said that the Obama administration would continue to work with Congress on drafting cybersecurity legislation, something the White House has made clear is a priority. CISPA, which was reintroduced to the House in February after failing to pass the Senate last year, initially drew criticism for allowing companies to disclose user information with relatively little oversight. After coming back to Congress, the bill was debated behind closed doors in the House Intelligence Committee, which passed it yesterday after adding several amendments.
The exact text is still unknown, but The Hill has reported that it was amended to require stripping personal user information out of "cyber threat" data and remove a clause that would have let the government use data for vaguely defined "national security purposes." As the reintroduced bill gained momentum over the past weeks, it's remained unclear whether President Obama would threaten to veto it, something he warned would happen with last year's version of the bill. Now, with this statement, it appears he hasn't changed his mind.
"WE DO NOT BELIEVE THESE CHANGES HAVE ADDRESSED SOME OUTSTANDING FUNDAMENTAL PRIORITIES."
Hayden said that the Obama administration would continue to work with Congress on drafting cybersecurity legislation, something the White House has made clear is a priority. CISPA, which was reintroduced to the House in February after failing to pass the Senate last year, initially drew criticism for allowing companies to disclose user information with relatively little oversight. After coming back to Congress, the bill was debated behind closed doors in the House Intelligence Committee, which passed it yesterday after adding several amendments.
The exact text is still unknown, but The Hill has reported that it was amended to require stripping personal user information out of "cyber threat" data and remove a clause that would have let the government use data for vaguely defined "national security purposes." As the reintroduced bill gained momentum over the past weeks, it's remained unclear whether President Obama would threaten to veto it, something he warned would happen with last year's version of the bill. Now, with this statement, it appears he hasn't changed his mind.
Social Anarchism: Casper Economics
(From https://www.facebook.com/SocialAnarchistNews/posts/1561852440803730:0)
Social anarchists never quite developed an independent tradition of political economy.
This is primarily because most anarchists from Mikhail Bakunin onwards considered Marx's critique in the three volumes of Capital to be the definitive word on the subject, encouraging anarchists to study Marxian economics, but without accepting Marx's authoritarian politics or mechanistic sociology.
So since the late 19th century, social anarchists have generally outsourced their economic critique to Marxian economics and in some cases left-wing versions of Keynesian economics.
Thoughts on Mutualism?
Long time no see everyone.
I used to post a lot here, and I wanted to see what was going on.
Anyway, I was curious about your thoughts on Mutualism. I presume a lot of people here are AnComs, so I just wanted to see what y'all thought of other types of anarchism. And of course, "anarcho" capitalism doesn't count. Or national "anarchism"
Social Anarchism: Democracy or Autonomy?
(From https://www.facebook.com/SocialAnarchistNews/?fref=nf)
While social anarchists have always used the word autonomy – meaning self-directedness as well as free association – there's been a certain ambivalence about the word democracy. This can be confusing for newcomers who start reading anarchist literature and see direct democracy being described as anarchistic in one book and lambasted in another.
The term comes from two Greek root words which together mean "people power".
At the beginning, the word was synonymous with what is now called "direct democracy", and referred more broadly to the idea of a self-organised multit
Capitalism an Introduction by Libcom.org
libcom.org's brief introduction to capitalism and how it works.
At its root, capitalism is an economic system based on three things: wage labour (working for a wage), private ownership or control of the means of production (things like factories, machinery, farms, and offices), and production for exchange and profit.
While some people own means of production, or capital, most of us don't and so to survive we need to sell our ability to work in return for a wage, or else scrape by on benefits. This first group of people is the capitalist class or "bourgeoisie" in Marxist jargon, and the second group is the working class or "proletariat". See
Featured in Groups
© 2013 - 2024 Socialist-Anarchists
Comments3
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
Hay US you know the public, the people your saposed to be surveing
tipicly when ton's and ton's of people protest against it and fofill the goal set out by your officel withe house potison
that dos'nt mean Oh, people don't like this, so let's continue our discussions regarding this in private
It means you should KILL THE ****ING BILL!
tipicly when ton's and ton's of people protest against it and fofill the goal set out by your officel withe house potison
that dos'nt mean Oh, people don't like this, so let's continue our discussions regarding this in private
It means you should KILL THE ****ING BILL!