Quote:
Originally Posted by Ekaros
So you can mark whole group by actions of one of their members?
|
When the group doesn't bother to make its members accountable for their actions, yes.
Quote:
As a whole there is lot of not perfect in Anonymous. Still it doesn't stop one from supporting certain actions they have taken. It's not a movement which one must to take as a whole.
The problem is you just can't look at them in traditional way. They aren't one coherent large group, but individuals behind a mask or anonymity. Black and white thinking doesn't work in real world.
|
I can acknowledge the good they've accomplished, and even acknowledge that there was no other way to accomplish those goals, without believing they're "a force for good." They support a lot of random petty cruelty alongside the lofty goals of free speech and government accountability.
I hope we can move into an era where anonymous pushes itself out of existence--where people of all stations and roles are held accountable for their actions, so that governments don't use "national security" to excuse torture and corporations don't use lawsuits as clubs to fight their competition or to bully their customers. Where computer hardware & software manufacturers work to make machines virus-proof rather than "you MUST allow our updates, even if that leaves you open to attacks;" where end users are allowed to manage their own security instead of being required to leave it to the OS manufacturer. Where criminals get the same kinds of penalties for the same kinds of crimes, regardless of race, age, sex, or wealth.
In the meantime... we have anonymous. They're not going away unless we have a *drastic* change in political and social norms.
Anonymous is a symptom. There's no point in trying to attack or cure the symptom; if we want anonymous to go away, we need to tackle the root cause: status as a shield from accountability.