i honestly still dont get it
so what,
if the goverment knows what porn I watch why should I care?
if they know my website history why should I care?
if they know where I usually walk on sundays why should I care?
it's another thing if people I know get a hold of that info, if let's say a co-worker sees it, then I would care
but the dudes who work at the fbi and whatnot, i'll never meet them in my life (except for if I get a "re-education from the illuminati ooOOooOOo)
Ah the common "you have nothing to fear"
This is a very dangerous mindset. The Argument is frequently brought up in debates over the pro-big brother cucks and it is dangerous cowardly and dishonest.
There are at least four good reasons to reject this argument:
One:
The rules may change- Once the invasive surveillance is in place to enforce rules that you agree wit, the ruleset that is being enforced could change in ways that you don't agree with at all.But it will be too late...It is always too late.For example you may agree to cameras in every home to prevent domestic violence ("and domestic violence only")- But the next day, a new political force in power could decide that homosexuality will again be illegal,and they will use those cameras to enforce their new rules. Any surveillance must be regarded in terms of how it can be abused by a worse power than today's. (check the US constitution amendments)
Two:
It's not you who determine if you have something to fear: You may consider yourself law-abidingly white as snow,and it won't matter a bit.What does matter is whether you set off the red flags in the most-automated surveillance,where bureuacrats look at your life in microscopic detail thought a long paper tube to search for patterns. When you stop your car at the main prostitution street for two hours every friday night, the SSA will draw certain conclusions from that data point, and won't care about the fact that you help the homeless guy on the street- that comes everyday with a hot meal and more stuff to help him go throught another day not thinking about suicide . When you frequently stop at a certain bar on your way driving home from work, the DDL will draw certain conclusions form that data point and get you arrest -nevermind the fact that you just go there for the best nachos for the lowest price ever while you hang out with this girl you so much like to talk . People will stop thinking in terms of what is legal,and start acting in self-censorship to avoid being red-flagged out of pure self-preservation. (It doesn't matter that somebody in the right might possibly and eventually be cleared - after having been investigated for six months , you will have both lost the custody of your children,your job, and even your fucking home)
Three:
Laws must be broken for society to progress: A society which can enforce all of its laws will stop dead on its tracks.The mindset of "rounding up criminals for the good of society" is a very dangerous one,for in hindsight,it may turn out that criminals were the ones in the moral right.Less than a human lifetime ago,if you were born a homosexual and a criminal from birth.If today's surveillance level had existed in the 1950s and 60s, the lobby groups for sexual equality could have never been formed, it would have just been a matter of rounding up the organized criminals ("and who would object to fight against organized crime?"). If today's surveillance level had existed in the 1950s and 60s, homosexuality would still be illegal and homosexual people would be criminals by birth.It is an absolute necessity to be able to break unjust laws for society to progress´and question its own values,in order to learn from mistakes and move on as a society.
Four
Privacy is a basic human need: Implying that only the dishonest people have need of any privacy ignores the basic property of human psyche, and sends a creepy message of strong discomfort.
We have fundamental need for privacy . I lock the door when I go to my bedroom, despite the fact that nothing secret happens in there : I just want to keep that activity for myself , I have the fundemental need to do so, and any society must respect that fundamental need for privacy. In every society that doesn't, citizens have responded with subterfuge and created their own private areas out of reach of gov surveillance,not because they are criminals,but because it is their right for privacy.