5 ms·

The false equivalency also begs a deeper moral analysis. Let's assume the US government has as complete access to iMessage and WhatsApp as the CCP does to WeCha

The false equivalency also begs a deeper moral analysis. Let's assume the US government has as complete access to iMessage and WhatsApp as the CCP does to WeChat. The story doesn't end there, since you have to examine the nature of the entities that have access to your information. Would I prefer that access be held by the US Government, which for all its faults is extremely engaged with and integrated into the global system, beholden to Law and a robust court system which enforces a strict set of checks and balances on its behavior, and is philosophically rooted in individual liberty? Or would I prefer the CCP, which does not even recognize the concept of individual liberty, is beholden to no one but itself and its own desires, and ruthlessly upholds its iron and unquestioned (unquestionable, at least in China) will upon the entire nation with absolutely 0 oversight? Yeah, gonna go with the US here.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
turnipla 6y ago
> extremely engaged with and integrated into the global system, beholden to Law and a robust court system Uhm yeah but countries do nothing when Russia annexes Crimea, what do you think they’d do if the US simply spies on them? Absolutely nothing. It’s literally happening right now and it’s public knowledge and “it’s just a matter of national security.” Case closed.
Silhouette 6y ago
This depends on your point of view, of course. If you're a US citizen with US legal protections and representatives in US government and access to US lawyers, you might find that reassuring. From the outside, the picture of the modern US is not nearly as pretty.
cyphar 6y ago
I disagree with several aspects of your depiction of the US's "robust court system" (especially in the case of mass surveillance). There have been several attempts by citizens to sue the US Government for their illegal and indiscriminate surveillance programs, but have been stonewalled for years by government lawyers arguing that such cases should not happen in public courts (where they could be held accountable) due to "national security risks". Not to mention that the NSA has their own interpretation of the US Constitution which completely twists the meaning of "collection" to allow indiscriminate mass surveillance to not be seen as "unreasonable search and seizure". Then there's the whole FISA court system, which rejects so few requests that it is in every sense of the word a rubber stamp court. And even if the court system is "robust" -- let's not forget that the PATRIOT Act exists (though it turns out that the NSA actually violated even the minimal restrictions present in the PATRIOT Act). Now, is China any better? Of course not, and the CCP has countless policies which are far worse to their own people than the US. But the key question is -- do you live in or have any connection to China? If not, then I would go with the CCP surveillance because there is no obvious mechanism for such surveillance to harm you directly. On the other hand, if you live in a 5-EYES country (as I do), any data obtained from US surveillance can be used in parallel construction (or other not-entirely-legal methods). Hell, here in Australia our mass surveillance systems have been used to punish minor infringements such as littering. Obviously I'd prefer not to be surveilled at all, but between the two I'd choose the one that has the smallest threat of direct impact on my life.
- nyolfen 6y ago
  > But the key question is -- do you live in or have any connection to China? If not, then I would go with the CCP surveillance because there is no obvious mechanism for such surveillance to harm you directly. they can spy on your business dealings and potentially find material to blackmail you
- elefanten 6y ago
  In aggregate, the systems of governance and human rights that we endorse for the world will have a direct impact on our lives in the long run. If you think you're marginally more likely to be arrested and prosecuted for littering because of super secret iMessage collection... why not consider the marginal effects of turning a blind eye to (and contributing to the economic expansion of) an illiberal, anti-democratic power that, in your words, does "far worse to their own people than the US"? They seem to already be comfortable collecting your data as they please and influencing various levels of your government. What harm could it do to enthusiastically profile yourself for them?
throw37543 6y ago
I would prefer the country that I don’t live in and doesn’t have authority over me to have this data.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

turnipla 6y ago

> extremely engaged with and integrated into the global system, beholden to Law and a robust court system Uhm yeah but countries do nothing when Russia annexes Crimea, what do you think they’d do if the US simply spies on them? Absolutely nothing. It’s literally happening right now and it’s public knowledge and “it’s just a matter of national security.” Case closed.

Silhouette 6y ago

This depends on your point of view, of course. If you're a US citizen with US legal protections and representatives in US government and access to US lawyers, you might find that reassuring. From the outside, the picture of the modern US is not nearly as pretty.

cyphar 6y ago

I disagree with several aspects of your depiction of the US's "robust court system" (especially in the case of mass surveillance). There have been several attempts by citizens to sue the US Government for their illegal and indiscriminate surveillance programs, but have been stonewalled for years by government lawyers arguing that such cases should not happen in public courts (where they could be held accountable) due to "national security risks". Not to mention that the NSA has their own interpretation of the US Constitution which completely twists the meaning of "collection" to allow indiscriminate mass surveillance to not be seen as "unreasonable search and seizure". Then there's the whole FISA court system, which rejects so few requests that it is in every sense of the word a rubber stamp court. And even if the court system is "robust" -- let's not forget that the PATRIOT Act exists (though it turns out that the NSA actually violated even the minimal restrictions present in the PATRIOT Act). Now, is China any better? Of course not, and the CCP has countless policies which are far worse to their own people than the US. But the key question is -- do you live in or have any connection to China? If not, then I would go with the CCP surveillance because there is no obvious mechanism for such surveillance to harm you directly. On the other hand, if you live in a 5-EYES country (as I do), any data obtained from US surveillance can be used in parallel construction (or other not-entirely-legal methods). Hell, here in Australia our mass surveillance systems have been used to punish minor infringements such as littering. Obviously I'd prefer not to be surveilled at all, but between the two I'd choose the one that has the smallest threat of direct impact on my life.

nyolfen 6y ago
> But the key question is -- do you live in or have any connection to China? If not, then I would go with the CCP surveillance because there is no obvious mechanism for such surveillance to harm you directly. they can spy on your business dealings and potentially find material to blackmail you
elefanten 6y ago
In aggregate, the systems of governance and human rights that we endorse for the world will have a direct impact on our lives in the long run. If you think you're marginally more likely to be arrested and prosecuted for littering because of super secret iMessage collection... why not consider the marginal effects of turning a blind eye to (and contributing to the economic expansion of) an illiberal, anti-democratic power that, in your words, does "far worse to their own people than the US"? They seem to already be comfortable collecting your data as they please and influencing various levels of your government. What harm could it do to enthusiastically profile yourself for them?

throw37543 6y ago

I would prefer the country that I don’t live in and doesn’t have authority over me to have this data.