Source: Electronic Frontier Foundation
by Jillian C York & Eva Galperin
“The term ‘digital sovereignty’ has become ubiquitous. European officials invoke it in debates about cloud infrastructure, AI, semiconductors, and platform regulation. Governments throughout the global majority use it to argue for greater control over data and communications infrastructure and boost their economies. Companies market ‘sovereign cloud’ products designed to reassure their customers that their information stays under local jurisdiction. But digital sovereignty could be something more: an opportunity for users around the world to build more resilient, open systems and the skills and infrastructure to maintain them.” (09/09/26)
“[I]f I get to decide what information you consume, then I can control how and what you think. Indeed, this is why authoritarian regimes tightly control media and speech within their territories. The resulting consent will then not be genuine consent. What few people notice is that the above argument carries over to the modern university system. Academia, as it currently stands, has three features that, taken together, undermine the ideals of democracy.” (09/09/26)
Source: Independent Institute
by Abigail R Hall & Patrik Ward
“Federal surveillance is not new, but today’s scale and scope are unprecedented. Biometric screening is pervasive across federal, state and local agencies, which share this information. Recently, the FBI announced the development of predictive AI models designed to detect potential criminal activity before it takes place. Even the laziest researcher can find many examples of abuse or the potential for abuse.” (09/09/26)
“While it is expected that Republicans — such as Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) — would object to the rise of socialist agitation in the Democratic Party, getting Democratic leaders to object to the new radicalism has not proved quite so easy.” [editor’s note: The only reason I can think of for Republicans to object to Democratic socialism is that they don’t like having their own socialist thunder stolen – TLK] (09/09/26)
Source: The American Prospect
by Whitney Curry Wimbish
“Dio Smith had a clean record before they showed up to protest OpenAI executives’ plan to dominate American life, drain increasingly scarce resources, and otherwise steal their future. They gathered with more than 30 other students on August 10 at the artificial intelligence company’s new lobbying headquarters, just blocks from the half-destroyed White House. They dropped banners and held signs, all of which demanded that the company cease and desist. Cops closed in after two hours. They arrested 13 students, separated them by gender, sent them to two different precincts in D.C., and left OpenAI executives free to continue their $140 million-plus lobbying project to manipulate the government in their favor. Smith was in jail for six hours, taking solace from their preparation with other student organizers and reminding themselves that they were following the paths laid by their ancestors: Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, Huey Newton.” (09/10/26)
“Being involved in Texas politics for years meant I was prepared for the worst possible people to run (and likely win) as Republicans. I was also prepared for the Democratic Party of Texas to put up an uninspiring, excessively flawed, or self-interested candidate to predictably lose against the Republican ghoul. But then James Talarico got into the race. I expected that I would be letting Paxton’s trash record speak for itself, with nothing but a milquetoast Democrat or a well-meaning Libertarian to suggest against him.” (09/09/26)
Source: Future of Freedom Foundation
by Jacob G Hornberger
“One of the most disastrous consequences of the 9/11 aftermath was the pass that the American people gave to their own government. Their anger was focused entirely on the terrorists rather than on both the terrorists and the government that provoked the attacks. There were two reasons for this phenomenon. The biggest reason is that Americans bought into the rationale that U.S. officials immediately announced as to motive — that is, the reason the terrorists struck on 9/11 with their devastating attack. U.S. officials said that the terrorists had been motivated to strike out of a supposed hatred for America’s ‘freedom and values.’ … The second reason for Americans’ failure to focus on the responsibility that the U.S. government had for the 9/11 retaliatory strikes is that Americans viewed their federal government as their daddy, one that would never lie to them or put them in danger.” (09/09/26)
“America has been a great innovator in the realm of elections, introducing many methods new developments from party primaries to early and mail voting. Some innovations fall by the wayside, while others catch on and become standard. Why trade this ferment of democracy for an arrangement where permission from Washington is required for anything new? Why risk foisting a bad method on everyone because someone in Washington liked it? Above all, the Framers did it this way because they feared that a ruling national faction, whether based in Congress or a White House, might someday gain power over election administration nationwide and use it to entrench themselves in office.” (09/09/26)
“What don’t I know? I don’t know exactly how you should live or every detail of your situation. I don’t know how to solve every possible random problem in the world. I don’t know what complications might arise. I don’t know solutions I can’t see or haven’t thought of. All the variables; the consequences of any potential solution. I don’t know how, or if, society should be run. I don’t know, and I accept it. While I’m comfortable saying I don’t know, there are also things I do know. I know that no one else knows those answers, either. If they claim to, they are being dishonest. Those who make up legislation are often even more ignorant about the topics they legislate on than the rest of us.” (09/09/26)
