|
|
|
|
|
by slopinthebag
105 days ago
|
|
Maybe, but I still think it's an odd moral boundary to cross. You might feel as though it's fine to spy on Chinese citizens because of the relationship the US and China have, but what about Canadians or Australians or the Brits or any other NATO country? I get it might feel different, but is that really a hard moral line in the sand you refuse to crosss? Idk. |
|
The harms that come from this are against us national security as a whole, the harms are not to individuals and civil liberties. Even if both China and US governments are bad actors, then the fact that China is spying on Americans will not affect Americans civil liberties.
On the other hand if the United States does mass surveillance on Americans, then that can be used by bad actor administrations to suppress dissent, throw people who disagree in prison, suppress speech. Essentially the government has the targeted ability to suppress civil liberties.
So it is very different, because the incentives and potential downsides are different. Similar with companies. Google does not have the ability to lock you up for your Google search, the federal government does (if you are American).
It's the same with Nato/allies, it's not about the country, it's about the spying governments ability and incentives to act on the information.
We don't want the stasi, but imagine a world where the stasi instead had millions of files on Scottish people. What is the worst the stasi could do? What is the worst they would be realistically incentivised to do?