[aerojoe23]

I think the link is much more general. Take any act that today isn't a crime, for instance drinking alcohol, and at some point the government could decide it is against the law.

When thinking about this, try to pick an act you enjoy. For instance, practicing as a software engineer with out a license? I know it isn't a thing today, but as more software mistakes are blamed for more deaths it could happen.

Her argument is that having strong rights to encryption will enable us to continue to do these acts, write software w/o license, drink alcohol, have abortions, and be Jewish (see WWII), once they're no longer allowed.

She then argued that we should stop treating the US government as the good guys (by default) in conversations about encryption.

Encryption rights becomes another front in the war over any of these other rights.