7 ms·

You were called a nutjob for trying to bring it up. Once it became public, a lot of the narrative that you see now was developed behind the scenes by the peopl

You were called a nutjob for trying to bring it up. Once it became public, a lot of the narrative that you see now was developed behind the scenes by the people responsible for these systems. The (yawn, apologist, anger) was created as a playbook, and most people don't think for themselves, so they parrot this narrative. It is 100% clear that domestic spying in the US is unconstitutional and unethical. There is no debate, and those that present it as a debate, or even that you are naive for not wanting it, are in service of the narrative.

WarOnPrivacy 3y ago
> The (yawn, apologist, anger) was created as a playbook, To be pedantic on this one point, I don't think that's the case. Warrantless surveillance of citizens not suspected of a crime is a divisive activity. People will reasonably stake out a position. I certainly did and do.
- colordrops 3y ago
  It wasn't "divisive" until it was revealed to exist, and the narrative was pushed. The division was sowed. Before people knew of the extensive surveillance, there was no division - you were nuts for thinking that our government was capable of trampling on the law to do something like this in secret. It's only after the revelations that the waffling around whether it was legal and whether it was ethical started to arise.