• Daft_ish@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    In a very confusing way you are saying surveillance is justified because in other parts of the world people are not protected by their country’s justice system. So it’s better to be overly surveiled than nothing at all.

    Which I fundamentally disagree with and am equally upset about either circumstance.

    Especially when the people doing the surveillance operate outside the confinement of the justice system. See BLM.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Ah. No, I’m against any surveillance. At the same time I’m for all the transparency of government one can have.

      It’s basically about how hierarchical the society is.

      A lot of clueless people want power structures to have their secrets, while citizens can be surveilled, cause it’s to some good end (/s).

      The more hierarchical it is, the more corruption and abuse of power there are, and make no mistake - people making it more hierarchical aim for that only and not for some noble goal.

      I’m just saying that this same tendency which inconveniences people in the West with surveillance and legally dubious harassment, simply kills people elsewhere in droves.

      • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Again, the people who are doing the surveillance have the means to kill people extrajudiciously. This just allows them to bring the surveillance they are already doing into the court room.