While I like the sentiment of the final paragraph — I will just note, as a historian of secrecy, that people have been saying the exact same thing for over 70 years. What would "fundamental reform" look like? Who makes the choices?
And how would one create a system that was robust enough to weather the appearance of bad things getting out? Because all previous classification reform efforts not only failed, but resulted in backlash, after "secrets got out" after changed policies.
-
-
(Also, framing it as "keeping [secrets] away from the public" is unquestionably TRUE in its effects, but usually you say "enemies" or something like that as the target group of secrecy! Public ignorance is *supposed* to be an inadvertent consequence, not the intentional one...)
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.