privacy

If surveillance does not seem to affect their daily lives then they are not bound by the law. They’re simply protected. They have nothing to fear because the government’s terror regime is not directed against them, they simply benefit from the security it provides them. You can not argue against them, they are simply conscious of their own material interests.

Privacy is only valuable if the government is a hostile force, but they have never experienced government hostility. They’re protected. They’re not the ones being dragged out of their houses by screaming masked men or put to work in prisons. They’re fine.

@queermunist@lemmy.ml

as I can't reply under the original post I will reply here

Does it mean if Surveillance are acceptable in countries that is not America and Zionist related countries?

There is no evidence of terror regimes in the governments of Russia, China, India, Japan, and South Korea. and people can always argue Surveillance are acceptable when leadership have changed in a country. Does it mean if Surveillance are acceptable in countries like Russia, China, India, Japan, and South Korea... ?