3 ms·
It seems to me that security and surveillance conscious folks tend to sit on either extreme of the spectrum
by bobxmax 1y ago
It seems to me that security and surveillance conscious folks tend to sit on either extreme of the spectrum
- logicchains 1y agoBecause governments aren't persecuting people in the middle of the spectrum.
- ttoinou 1y agoBeing docile could be the definition of being in the middle of the spectrum
- nozzlegear 1y agoBeing in the center of the political spectrum doesn't make you "docile." What a ridiculous notion.
- surgical_fire 1y agoExtremists love to make themselves as victims, and those on both sides hate moderates. It's all bullshit of course.
- ttoinou 1y agoI agree with you in that what I said might not be true for US politics
- mrweasel 1y agoThen why do they need to spy on people? I mean, I agree with you. The center parties typically aren't persecuting massive amounts of people for their beliefs and "thought crimes", but they do still seem a little to happy to spy on people. Probably more relevant in multi-party parliamentary systems, but someone pointed out that: if the left wing parties and the liberales agree on a policy, you should probably just implement it immediately. (Said about the Danish Red–Green Alliance and the Liberal Alliance, an eco-socialist party and a right-wing liberal party respectably).
- whatwhaaaaat 1y agoPolitics isn’t a line. Center in most countries is “fine with whatever the government tells me” from forced medical experimentation to genocide. You’re right tho in that it does seem like people who reject the lies their government tells them may be slightly more likely to say things that upset you on the internet (since I’m guessing that’s what you mean by persicution)
- mrweasel 1y agoI was using persecution as a response to the parent post, which I took to mean that the far left and right are more likely to persecute political opponents and expect persecution themselves, so they are reluctant to approve of government surveillance out of fear that they are on the receiving.
- nozzlegear 1y ago> Center in most countries is “fine with whatever the government tells me” from forced medical experimentation to genocide. This is a strawman, plain and simple. Calling the political center of any country "fine with genocide" isn't an argument, it's a smear. I'm a centrist democrat, I'm not fine with either of those things and you'd be hard pressed to find someone who is. You can disagree with moderates like me, but painting them as compliant with atrocities is dishonest and lazy. > Politics isn’t a line No disagreement here, sometimes it's a horseshoe and you're proving the theory true.
- const_cast 1y ago> Calling the political center of any country "fine with genocide" isn't an argument, it's a smear. Well the US isn't doing genocide really so yeah it's a smear. But moderates run the status-quo. MLK talked about how the biggest hurdle to integration and civil rights wasn't racists - it was the moderate white man. Ultimately things are the way they are because there are so many moderates who propose no solutions to anything and are terrified of anything that could be misconstrued as a change. Moderates are, by in large, complacent with atrocities currently going on in the government they belong to. Moderates in Israel certainly seem fine with genocide. Moderates in the US are fine with the US' war-mongering. They're fine with the pseudo-slavery system that exists in some US states like Georgia.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]