It's not that hard. The problem is - people swallow the concept of "public security" almost like holy water. Mrk
Of course it is, they say it often enough in enough articles the masses will subliminally accept that they need to sacrifice their privacy for public security without questioning if that is actually necessary or even accurate.
Yeah, "public security" is virtually undefinable, at least in the abstract. As others say, it's primarily used to frighten people into giving up privacy. Sorry to flog this, but I highly recommend this 2016 paper by Stephanie K. Pell: “You Can’t Always Get What You Want: How Will Law Enforcement Get What it Needs in a Post-CALEA, Cybersecurity-Centric Encryption Era?”. She's a former prosecutor, and an Assistant Professor at West Point Code: https://scholarship.law.unc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1306&context=ncjolt
How long before journalists and activists who try to expose wrongdoings and human rights abuses get targeted and killed because their phone gave up everything about their activities including location. Assuming, that hasn't happened already.
The most important questions are usually not asked: What exactly is the threat? Who is threatening us? Why? If someone is to be a threat to me he has to, eventually, get close physically; and that brings to the question: Why are so many that hold a grudge against us amongst us?
They are good questions. I'll give you my 5c worth. The real threat is that an agent provocateur would attempt to leverage a response by the US military against THEIR enemy, by attacking the American people in the name of their enemy. AKA false flag. Who that is? 5th column traitors. They are among us because, they are so wealthy and powerful very few in public positions dares to do or say anything about it and most of the ordinary American people, are not aware of it.
I get that. But sometimes it's hard to know. I've used various nominally illegal drugs at times, over the years. So there, the primary threats were arrest and incarceration. Also robbery. The primary adversary was obviously the police. Also of concern were associates who'd been busted, and friends who talk too freely. I've generally been an activist. Now it's about privacy and OPSEC. Back in the day, I was a хулиган. The English word is hooligan, and now most хулигани are soccer fans But there's also Пизда Бунт And for me, it was about doing samizdat, and being an anarchist, refusenik, punk, hippie, etc. And yes, LSD and psychedelic rock were part of that. But I was also into dissemination of subversive documents. From mass media to hippie tracts. And "expos[ing] wrongdoings and human rights abuses", as @RockLobster said. Again, the primary threats were arrest and incarceration. The primary adversaries were police and security services. However, being a diplomat's child, I had fewer constraints than most. And a great rep from the пионеры (like a mix of Boy Scouts and Young Republicans). So whenever you're interesting to police and security services, there are ultimate threats of arrest and incarceration. There are also threats of false arrest, planted evidence, and entrapment. Fundamentally, it doesn't matter whether or not you're knowingly breaking laws. Because we're all breaking laws, or can be framed as doing so. Right. And so a crucial aspect of OPSEC is subterfuge. To avoid attention and observation in meatspace. It's always safest to look "respectable". To "act normal" as much as possible. With care, you can be effectively invisible. Big question But really, does "why" matter? Arguably, none of us know why we do stuff.
Mirimir: The why is simply we do stuff to better our own small universe be it financial or otherwise. As for the police it comes down to one thing: only a fool talks to them without a mouthpiece. First words out of my mouth as politely as I can is "sir/mam, am I being detained for any reason"? "No? Well I will be on my way then have a terrific day officer". I had to digress because I dislike cops and nothing productive will ever come from talking to them.
I think it matters a lot and the reason, because asking why is the first step towards learning the truth.
Yes, I am always polite to police. But I've never been detained. At least, in a serious way. Lots of traffic stops. I got pulled over once by an off-duty cop in his personal muscle car He was impressed that a Civic could be so fast. And he let me go with a warning to be more careful about who I played with I did get stopped once, holding serious acid. For a dead brake light. And K9 searched. But part of my OPSEC was never smoking weed in the car. But I was cool, and the acid was hidden well, so they found nothing. After that, I was more careful about checking lights and stuff Edit: There are obvious analogies in other contexts.
It's like a mass psychosis. The masses have lost touch with reality and are willing to be spoon fed by the MSM and regardless of how much evidence there is to the contrary, and who tries to warn them they are being lied to and manipulated they choose to accept the easy pill. Can you even remember the last time anyone said, so what actually did happen to that 2.3 TRILLION dollars? I mean it beggars belief. I'm sure even THEY never realised the people were this much of pushover. If they can get away with that so easily then there is almost no limit. You could say that to almost anyone and you know what they would do? Go back to checking their text messages.
@ RL As I see it it's like this: 50's) Get them hooked on TV. Great for consumerism. 60's - Present) Get them hooked on drugs. Great for destroying ambition, resistance, thought & action. 00's - Present) Get them hooked on smartphones. The best destroyer yet. Combines all the above plus alienation of care & empathy towards each other in real life. Plus the penetration rate & social acceptance of the smartphone is unparalleled. Racks havoc on people's self-esteem & serenity.
Add to that the 1996 telecommunications act that allowed the monopolization of the MSM by the 1% which effectively and quietly put an end to the free and independent investigative journalism which the masses expect would expose and stand in opposition to lies and corruption by that 1%.
When I say detained I do not mean arrested. There are various levels of detention by police. The level most are familiar with is the arrest. Another level is the Terry stop. Most won't realize this but when you are stopped due to a traffic infraction you are being detained via the Terry statutes. Terry is why it becomes critical to ask directly "Officer, am I being detained for any reason"? It covers both angles.
Thanks. But I've never been detained so long that I felt the need to ask. In most cases, it was quite obvious. I'd been speeding, driving like a maniac, or whatever. Once or twice, maybe subtle evading, but that just got me some good-natured irony. It always seemed the best course to chill, and act naive. And now that I'm seriously old, I can play dumb very well.
Yeah, I know that one. My teenagers are now butting into my conversations in public as people struggle to hear their curmudgeonly old and hard of hearing father.
I'd like to get a hearing aid. But at best they don't work or at worst they further degrade hearing. It **** me off that even 20 year flip phones have better technology.
