Mass surveillance doesn't make us safer. We need to deconstruct this false notion.
Mass surveillance is only a tool for control and oppression, it is not for protection.
Mass surveillance doesn't make us safer. We need to deconstruct this false notion.
Mass surveillance is only a tool for control and oppression, it is not for protection.
Not really, it can be used for both and is neither 100% evil nor 100% good.
Just like practically anything, it depends on how you use it.
The problem arises that even if we had a really well meaning government in place that only uses surveillance for good, we don’t know what the next one will do with the power. Even if the data is well protected from third parties (which it never is).
But that doesn’t make surveillance inherently good or bad. There always is nuance.
I do agree that I don’t want it implemented in my country or the EU, because it indeed doesn’t make any of us safer.
Attached: 1 image Forget surveillance capitalism - let's talk about *surveillance infantilism*: the drive by the wealthy to spy on you in order to pursue the toddler's goals of getting everything they want from the people around them, without any reciprocal obligations. -- If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog: https://pluralistic.net/2025/08/20/billionaireism/#surveillance-infantalism 1/
You are not paranoid if they are really out to get you.
mass surveillance makes a society about as safe as issuing everybody guns
Mass surveillance universalizes and debases reasonable suspicion. One may or may not laud economic order that features creative destruction, but such a thing is inhibited, for organizations and institutions mass surveillance favors incumbency.
Mass surveillance makes us less safe.