3 ms·

I don't disagree that privacy abuse for various goals, or some governmental policies (like the treatment of Snowden) are not beholden to public opinion. Althoug

I don't disagree that privacy abuse for various goals, or some governmental policies (like the treatment of Snowden) are not beholden to public opinion. Although the counterargument might be the intensity of public opinion on the topic. My main argument is specifically around whether the US is veering towards the implementation of a social credit score (which I think would look like having ones credit score be impacted by social reasons, and having the credit score be more pivotal to various civil liberties like travel). That's the kind of thing I think intense public outrage would shift government behaviors, especially since it's the kind of policy that would impact every single American

gmadsen 5y ago
fair point. I guess my counter argument to that is that it is very surprising how much public outrage can be controlled through lengthening time duration, media propaganda to fuel fear and anxiety. the world is much different than it was 30 years ago. I'm sure many would be appalled by the lack of privacy and governmental overreach. Also, in the current era, the division of the populace, to the point where many actively hate the other side and think they are evil, is the exact conditions where a social credit score could become palatable if you believed the other side would be affected more. Just look at the current trend of cancel culture. Its not that far of a leap to make that government policy