considering in a democratic system the government is a representation of the will of the governed and, you know, us governed types don't expect us to lie to ourselves.
or something.
or something.
They never did and they never will, regardless of the country.
As such they need a group able to work without scruples outside what the public think as acceptable, so that certain criminals that would never by caught playing by the book, do get caught.
Also no government is going to publically tell the others what is their official agenda.
Again, you need the sort of people able to do the right set of questions.
Yes I am harsh, but real life is harsh. Not all of us get to live in movie sets were the good guys always win at the end.
we never get any evidence of this happening, so i'm going to say "citation needed". we also don't get any oversight regarding who they decide are criminals.
>Not all of us get to live in movie sets were the good guys always win at the end.
starting from the assumption that the intelligence agencies are the good guys is very much from a movie set... these agencies exist to effect the will of the state against arbitrary targets by way of power. there's no moral content there until they actually act.
No. By this reasoning "we are all murderers."
A democratic system means that 51% of the people can legally deprive the other 49% of basic liberties.
That's an implementation quirk of some democracies, not an inherent feature. Even worse: in first-past-the-post systems like the US and GB you can elect 51% of the representatives with far less than 51% of the people.
On the other hand, "basic liberties" are usually protected by some for of constitution that requires 66% of representatives to change. Sometimes protections are even more extreme: Germany is considered democratic, but its constitution contains two articles that can not be lawfully changed, no matter how large the consens (one about basic rights, one about the form of government).
Democracies can have arbitrarily strong protections for minorities and basic liberties, there is no requirement for democracies to be governed by simple absolute majorities (and few if any are).
I don't see how people can be equal if some are taxed and the money is given to others.
I know you must be thinking that "equality before the law" is just to have a clear law like "everybody will be taxed if they meet so and so requirements" and apply that to everybody, but consider that a law could be written in exactly that same way, but instead saying "every people will be taxed if they are black". The distinctions the law make are arbitrary.
It doesn't change just because you don't like it. American citizens, pro- and anti- the American state, nevertheless gain their protections as citizens from participating in that state, large and small. Citizens are responsible for their governments, who have no powers otherwise.
And we all know: the corruption of government begins with its secrets. That we, citizens, are unwilling to deal with the secrets that corrupt us all, is very telling in this day and age ..