[lolinder]

> Those laws would be imperialistic if a majority of citizens around the world, including a vast majority of American citizens, would not gladly demand the same protection when shown what websites do with their information.

Imperialism for the good of the imperial subjects is as old as time. The barbarian nations need civilizing, and if they only knew what was good for them they'd gladly embrace our regime!

Or, as CS Lewis put it:

> Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their conscience.

[bertil]

You are confusing paternalism (deciding what others want without asking them) with informed democracy. I’m not saying to decide for American voters. I’m saying that, if you explain GDPR to American citizens, they overwhelmingly think it’s a good idea. I’m not saying they should think so because I know better: I’m saying that they do.

The US is welcome to use any political system they want. The current system is a government of the people, by the corporations, for the executives.

[lolinder]

No, I'm not, I think you missed the context. OP responded to this statement:

> You just can’t have them and also simultaneously expect everyone is going to find it worthwhile to deal with you under such laws, such that you’re outraged when they don’t. Or, well, you can, but it’s either quite foolish of you, or it’s imperialistic.

By saying:

> Those laws would be imperialistic if a majority of citizens around the world, including a vast majority of American citizens, would not gladly demand the same protection when shown what websites do with their information.

This is false. Whether the other nations being imposed upon would embrace the laws if they simply knew what was good for them is irrelevant to whether a state action is imperialistic. What matters is the degree of consent.

There's been a strong theme in this thread of people arguing that Google should be required to do business in the EU and obey their privacy laws, and that would be imperialistic.