undefined | Better HN

0 pointsJensson4y ago0 comments

In smaller democracies the government tend to serve the people. In that case the purpose of the spying is to serve the people and not a government power grab, that is how democracies are intended to work.

Also large enough corporations tend to do things for power reasons rather than money, as once you are a billionaire your money is mostly just a means to exert power so trading money for power is what you do. And at that size they start to intermingle with governments, making the acts of the company hard to separate from acts of the government.

0 comments

3 comments · 3 top-level

causality04y ago

"The people" don't have any more right to my data than anyone else.

SllX4y ago

For the people is excellent propaganda, but it’s not rooted in a kind history, nor justification to spy on your own citizens without probable cause nor warrant to do so.

A small democracy can still be an illiberal democracy, and a large democracy can still be a liberal democracy. However the size of the democracy nor the probable liberalness of a democracy should serve as a grant for arbitrary power wielded on behalf of anyone, even “the people”.

jdavis7034y ago

Maybe top-100 population US cities don’t count as “small democracies” in your definition. But if they do, I’d argue that small democracies do plenty to protect owners of capital at the expense of people in the lower half of wealth owners.

For example, take the surveillance and excess force against protestors during the summer of 2020 in the US (various judges and courts have agreed that some of the most high-profile police actions were illegal.)

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse