You also said 'there is legitimate procedure.' Which... Well; in this case not really, not until it's too late, and in most cases exists explicitly to obfuscate reality.
One's trustworthiness will be hurt by acquiring things illegally... But only by those who care about the legality. The legitimacy of these documents is easy to validate.
Authorities are allowed to tap our phones, to look into our history, all sorts of things on a suspicion of terrorist or even 'politically deviant' leanings that 'may lead to a breach of the peace.' Why should their privacy be privileged when ours is up for grabs, especially in something as important as misleading the public about essentially handing us over the Kreml... I mean: The Empire?
Well, TBF, we don't know there's a legitimate procedure -- I'm gonna assume a lot of what SIS does wouldn't be considered particularly legitimate, but, since they're sanctioned to do it... Sort of goes I guess.
And I don't know that it would be too late - between presenting an idea and the idea being put into practice, there's a long time (look, irl, how long Brexit took between voting and happening). That is, imagining that there would even be support and not popular outrage.
And it's not about protecting their privacy - tap them away, get all their stuff, etc. Put SIS to work. Not a problem at all. It's more about outright stealing and intimidating the guy.
I must also confess that I said that looking into the situation through the eyes of my very first character (who I first did this mission in, and I haven't done in years) - who was a Jedi. I don't think it would be as bad, politically, if the items are being stolen by a trooper and certainly not bad if it's done by a smuggler, but a Jedi stealing from someone trying to disavow The Order is terrible optics. It's more likely to turn against them than in favour. So, there is also that to be considered: if The People start to seeing as "not so different" then it becomes a problem.
It's funny that you mention Brexit as an example, an enterprise where legitimate methods were used to unearth all the hideous corruption, self-interest, racism and classism for exposure...
And the legitimate channels just either downplayed all that or even made it disappear.
And look, if a Catholic priest was the source of stolen documents that proved the State was going to persecute Catholics, I'm still going to listen. Look at... What's going on.
Again, though, the separation of Jedi and State isn't my problem. In fact, I'm all for it. A Jedi bringing me those documents wouldn't change my mind on that. No, it's the rest that's a problem.
Oh, I agree on Brexit. However, the point was more of a "look how long and bureocratic this shit is".
And - equally - my orogllem isn't convincing you, it's the impact of the information war on millions and trying to diminish the possibility of bad outcomes. For every one of you, there will be at least one with the opposing view, and the matter is convincing en masse
Don't you think (news and actualities/human interest) media has some responsibility in vetting and broadcasting information?
Fact remains that I think the law should be in service to society, and so should especially be binding to those who hold power, while in practice, the opposite is usually true. Meanwhile, the Republic is a deeply corrupt organization of which we simply cannot expect a fair process. And, yes, in this particular case this senator's secrets are going to come out anyway.... But they're going to come out too late.
As for someone who holds opposing views: Example.
Okay, so I am not a huge fan of NATO. Or of the USA as a global power. I think they (particularly the USA, in part through NATO) have too much power over other countries, can dictate what those countries can and cannot do. The USA has used its power in NATO to force smaller countries to aid and abet in illegal wars, and is still using that power for its (neo)colonial purposes. All in all: Pretty shit, if you ask me.
Now let's say there's this politician who goes 'NATO bad, we should step away, we should step away from the USA as well, be independent!' Attractive, to me. I mean; the USA would certainly follow that up with trade sanctions and pretty much economically destroy my country, but maybe we should work towards independence and find allies, and form a bloc, gain geopolitical power so the trade sanctions won't ruin us. That sounds like a pretty sweet deal.
Now let's say that pro-NATO people find out that this politician is actually on the Kremlin's payroll. What they want is to weaken NATO (yay) so that Russia can do an Imperialism and roll over countries without much resistance (ru-roh). I look at the documents, and yeah, pretty much: This politician I like, whose talking points I agree with, had entirely different motivations and is actually trying to achieve something else entirely: more Imperialism, only with a different Imperialist. That's information I need before I vote for that bag of turds. Is the person who obtained this information aligned with my political stance on NATO? No. After all, they are *pro-*NATO, and I'm... Not. But, you know, if the choice is 'NATO or tanks rolling in,' then... I might dislike NATO, but I'm gonna dislike tanks rolling in more.
Alternatively, do you also feel that the crew of the Firefly was in the wrong for sending the signal, showing the 'Verse how the Core World corporations were running experiments on humans? Should they have left that to Core World politics to just share voluntarily with the 'Verse?
1
u/TalespinnerEU Sep 13 '24
You also said 'there is legitimate procedure.' Which... Well; in this case not really, not until it's too late, and in most cases exists explicitly to obfuscate reality.
One's trustworthiness will be hurt by acquiring things illegally... But only by those who care about the legality. The legitimacy of these documents is easy to validate.
Authorities are allowed to tap our phones, to look into our history, all sorts of things on a suspicion of terrorist or even 'politically deviant' leanings that 'may lead to a breach of the peace.' Why should their privacy be privileged when ours is up for grabs, especially in something as important as misleading the public about essentially handing us over the Kreml... I mean: The Empire?