> does democracy require privacy? Yes, it absolutely does. The most effective way to fight a political ideology is not meeting it fairly on the marketplace of

> does democracy require privacy? Yes, it absolutely does. The most effective way to fight a political ideology is not meeting it fairly on the marketplace of ideas to fight it directly. If the opponent is allowed to an opportunity to fight, you might lose. To guarantee a win, you have to stop the opposing political ideas before the organize into an ideology that people can support and fight for. Political movements need time to mature. It's easy to disrupt proto-ideologies if you can identify the people that might bring together separate parts of the social graph before they knit together into a self-sustaining political movement. This is what the FBI did to disrupt civil rights groups under COINTELPRO[1]. This is what GCHQ's JTRIG[2] group is probably doing today. While the Freedom of Assembly doesn't get as much discussion compared to speech/religion/etc, it's one of the most important rights. Assembling with people in public is how an idea moves into public view. Ideas you only discussed cautiously in private ("in the closet"?) are a lot easier to discuss openly in public when you realize other people have the same beliefs. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO [2] https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/ https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/