The fairness of the election

Across Europe, there is alarm not just about what happens on election day in the US, but about American democracy itself. Fewer than one in 10 think the US election will be free and fair. Yet large numbers of Europeans confess they don’t know whether Biden would be good for the world. Perhaps Trump’s legacy is to have taught us that relying on the US to guarantee global leadership is not a path to happiness. (The Guardian, U.K., 14 Oct 2020)

My comment: Back in 1963, traveling around the United States, hardly a day went by when someone – black, white, male, female, young or old – did not say “Don’t you just love this country? Isn’t it great?”. Back then I agreed every time the comment came up.

This is not a party political comment, just a reflection of my current, personal anxiety for the future. I have temporarily (?) lost peace of mind.

Siri

Every tech company with voice-activated computer assistants like Amazon’s Alexa and Apple’s Siri, Microsoft’s Cortana and Google Assistant promises to protect privacy. But it turns out that Apple has been allowing its Siri voice assistant to transmit highly personal recordings of people without their knowledge as part of a project that transcribed portions of Siri recordings to improve the feature’s voice recognition. Apple have since suspended the project and apologized.

Now a whistleblower, Thomas Le Bonniec, has revealed that Apple has been secretly listening to the private conversations of people all over Europe, talking about their cancer, dead relatives, religion, sexuality, pornography, relationships and drug use, among other topics, “basically wiretapping entire populations.

So far, all the EU has done is to say it is talking with Apple. In May, an Irish regulatory authority told Politico. It is “still engaged with Apple on a number of fronts, [and] still getting answers to questions”, Meanwhile, there is no evidence the US has done anything to determine the extent of Apple’s secret Siri surveillance program. Laws protecting private communications include not only wiretapping at the federal level but state laws protecting against invasion of privacy. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) could determine that it’s an unfair trade practice to tell a consumer you’ve protected their information and then to secretly listen in, even if it’s only snippets or anonymized. So it’s critical to investigate whether Apple’s EU-based privacy abuses also took place in the US.

What’s clearly needed now is a comprehensive investigation in the US, as well as in Europe, into what Apple did with its Siri monitoring program, and whether the other big tech companies have been responsible for similar abuses. The FTC is working on antitrust inquiries of Facebook and Amazon.  The Department of Justice is allegedly investigating (or considering investigating) Google, Facebook and Apple. And in a potential breakthrough, the CEOs of the big four tech giants – Apple, Facebook, Google and Amazon – have recently testified before the House judiciary committee about their alleged anti-competitive conduct.

Amazon’s voice assistant Alexa has also monitored consumers without their knowledge. Those investigating these companies on antitrust issues should add these reported privacy violations to the scope of their investigations into each of the tech giants.

If Apple did engage in a “massive violation of the privacy of millions of citizens”, the implications for liability to class-action suits and regulatory fines could be substantial. When a publicly traded company admits it hasn’t lived up to its promises, the company’s audit committee can – and should – order a comprehensive, impartial investigation by an outside law firm to find out what happened, and to report to its board of directors – and ultimately, to the public – as a way of coming clean with their customers.

(Ted Greenberg, a former federal prosecutor in the US justice department.)

My comment: The Russians, and probably the Chinese, are also spying on us.

Catholics and the US election

Four years ago, according to the Pew Research Center, 52% of Catholics voted for Trump, compared with 44% for Hillary Clinton. And with Biden himself being Catholic, you might expect a change in proportion of Catholic voting.

But now this Catholic vote has got a whole lot more interesting. Recently, Pope Francis travelled to Assisi to honour Saint Francis, the saint he most admires, for his dedication to the poor, and to sign his new encyclical. Encyclicals are the key teaching documents of popes in which they often focus on global issues, not just the internal concerns of the church.

In 2015, Francis produced Laudato Si’, on the environment, where he put all his moral weight behind those advocating the need to take action against climate breakdown. This time round his new document, Fratelli Tutti, published recently, describes a post-pandemic world, and the need for greater fraternity and solidarity. Its message means the pope has waded right into some of the key issues dominating the US presidential election.

Popes are supposed to be above party political matters (as are Epicureans) and Pope Francis has certainly not done anything as crass as name names in his encyclical, although he’s not above overt criticism. Ahead of the 2016 election, he described Trump’s plan to thwart migrants by building a wall between the US and Mexico as “not Christian”. (The Guardian 7 Oct 2020)

Studies have shown that attending church more frequently does not make white christians less racist. In fac, the data suggests that the opposite is true. The connection between holding more racist views and white christian identity is actually stronger among white evangelicals who attend church frequently than it is among those who attend less frequently.

Comment: I am not holding my breath. The end of abortion is more important than climate change to devout Catholics, and climate change itself is denied by too many. Vast sums are being spent by special interests to protect those special interests from having to actually do anything about the impending catastrophe,

The Second Amendment

Talking about a literal interpretation of the Constitution as written: the Constitution refers to State militias needing to bear arms, not individuals. It was a matter of States rights and local public defense. The Founders didn’t have in mind allowing every Tom, Dick and Harry to bear arms willy-nilly, endangering harmless citizens. We have departed from the intentions of the Founders, who were too intelligent to envisage mobs roaming the streets, armed to the teeth.

I never met Epicurus (revelatory comment of the Century) but I suspect he would be alarmed at the idea of Tom, Dick and Harry arming themselves, and prowling the town looking for trouble and opportunities for voter suppression. He would be appalled by the conspiracy theories, and the preying upon the fears of less-educated people. No, Epicureanism does not embrace party politics, but it does embrace peace of mind, security, opportunity for all and as much equality of lifestyle as possible. It’s common sense.