3 ms·

Tech might change scale, but we still had surveilence, secret police, masacares, etc in olden times. If anything, in olden times many of these types of things

Tech might change scale, but we still had surveilence, secret police, masacares, etc in olden times. If anything, in olden times many of these types of things were considered normal. As hard as it might feel like it is to see it, we have come a very long way when it comes to morals of wars & state violence. If nothing else at least we mostly feel like its "wrong" now.

mmooss 2y ago
I didn't claim otherwise and it's irrelevant to my point, regardless. The point is that you can't exclude technology from the issue - surveillance with modern tech and with pre-industrial tech are very different things. Now you can do almost complete surveillance of the population (just track phones and you know everywhere everyone goes). (Also, where and when specifically are you talking about? The 1950s US? State intelligence agencies didn't really exist, afaik, before maybe the (20th century?).)
- bawolff 2y ago
  I'm just saying these issues aren't new. One of the reasons the us had limited domestic intel services back in the day is that they were scared of this sort of thing. As an example the surveilence practised by soviets or east germany was much more invasive despite not having phones.
  - mmooss 2y ago
    > I'm just saying these issues aren't new. I'm saying they are new, because the technology is different - like saying 'transportation isn't new' when comparing horses and airplanes. The technology is inseparable from the issue. > One of the reasons the us had limited domestic intel services back in the day is that they were scared of this sort of thing. Do you have evidence of that? Many people are scared of it now, and that does limit it to some degree, but not a lot. > As an example the surveilence practised by soviets or east germany was much more invasive despite not having phones. They were enabled by technology far more advanced than the colonial era. They did have phones and they tapped them, tapped rooms, etc., and used communication tech to centralize and disseminate the information, as well as using mass communication to implement propaganda.

mmooss 2y ago

I didn't claim otherwise and it's irrelevant to my point, regardless. The point is that you can't exclude technology from the issue - surveillance with modern tech and with pre-industrial tech are very different things. Now you can do almost complete surveillance of the population (just track phones and you know everywhere everyone goes). (Also, where and when specifically are you talking about? The 1950s US? State intelligence agencies didn't really exist, afaik, before maybe the (20th century?).)

bawolff 2y ago
I'm just saying these issues aren't new. One of the reasons the us had limited domestic intel services back in the day is that they were scared of this sort of thing. As an example the surveilence practised by soviets or east germany was much more invasive despite not having phones.
- mmooss 2y ago
  > I'm just saying these issues aren't new. I'm saying they are new, because the technology is different - like saying 'transportation isn't new' when comparing horses and airplanes. The technology is inseparable from the issue. > One of the reasons the us had limited domestic intel services back in the day is that they were scared of this sort of thing. Do you have evidence of that? Many people are scared of it now, and that does limit it to some degree, but not a lot. > As an example the surveilence practised by soviets or east germany was much more invasive despite not having phones. They were enabled by technology far more advanced than the colonial era. They did have phones and they tapped them, tapped rooms, etc., and used communication tech to centralize and disseminate the information, as well as using mass communication to implement propaganda.