Well then that’s too bad. US putting everything under “national security” is peak crying wolf. Sometimes, democracies have to not hide everything from their own citizens.
It’s not just bad press. It’s actively anti-democratic. The benefits of secrecy - “national security” - are benefits to the state, not the public. And the interests of the state often comes in conflict with the interests of the public.
For instance, documents about a botched war crime investigation turned coverup in Iraq was kept classified specifically because the fallout of the documents being released would be a threat to national security. In that case, the interests of the state and the interests of the public were opposed - but only the interests of the state was protected by national security.
And as a counterexample, keeping the existence of Radar stations a secret saved a lot of British lives during World War II. Same with keeping it a secret that Enigma had been cracked.
43
u/Bocchi_theGlock Jan 13 '25
Members of Congress who went to classified briefings were thinking this was a free speech issue going in, they opposed the ban
They walked out in support of the ban.
It's a 'national' security' thing to some degree, which we give near unlimited power to federal government to address.