5 ms·

You and I are just afraid to face obvious and true answer, which is "no".

• mc32 13y ago
  There are places which might not respect civil liberties but which do not surveil (by the state) the population: third world. Is there a place where both are true? I don't think there is a place where there is 100% of both (respect for civil liberties and do not do any surveillance) and also not sure a place free of surveillance would by any better in practice, except in theory (to confuse a Yogiism). As many things, it's a balance which needs to be struck and it remains to be seen where that will be or if it's pendulum-like.
• vinceguidry 13y ago
  The problem here is that we inevitably start moving the goal-posts every time we try to nail down the scope of what constitutes a basic human right. Do you want freedom of speech and the press? Many nations can offer that. Do you want the power to piss off prominent and powerful government agencies without serious repercussions? You'd have to move somewhere without prominent and powerful government agencies, because we've yet to figure out a way to effectively limit their power.
  • rayiner 13y ago
    And let's face it, you have more power to do that in the U.S. today than pretty much anywhere in the world. Listen to the kinds of things people say about Obama, his mother, etc. How many places could you get away with that?