[matz1]

The difference with hong kong is the surveillance is one sided, goverment can surveil their citizen but the citizen can't surveil the goverment.

The surveillance/transparency has to be on both side.

Government can't just do whatever they want if they also being surveilled.

[MikeUt]

> Government can't just do whatever they want if they also being surveilled.

No? Because it seems to me if you're the one with power, you have a lot less to fear from surveillance, than if you're without. Say there's only one political party allowed (officially or unofficially) - that means it is free to organize and act as a political party, while if you were to try and start your own, you'd be jailed.

[matz1]

>Because it seems to me if you're the one with power,

So where does their power come from ?

Information advantage ? No, if both side has the same information

Strength in number? there are more citizen then the government people.

[MikeUt]

From organization. They can rely on the police to arrest you, you cannot rely that your arrest will be what sparks the revolution that overthrows them. Assuming many people even learn about your arrest - they might be able to find out in theory, but it's probably not going to be on the front page of major newspapers.

[matz1]

Citizen can organize too. Government can try to prevent that but there are much more citizen then government people. Citizens has strength in number.

>Assuming many people even learn about your arrest -

Thats why I argue for citizen to surveil the government too to level the playing field.