this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2023
70 points (100.0% liked)
Socialism
2849 readers
64 users here now
Beehaw's community for socialists, communists, anarchists, and non-authoritarian leftists (this means anti-capitalists) of all stripes. A place for all leftist and labor news and discussion, as long as you're nice about it.
Non-socialists are welcome to come to learn, though it's hard to get to in-depth discussions if the community is constantly fighting over the basics. We ask that non-socialists please be respectful and try not to turn this into a "left vs right" debate forum by asking leading questions or by trying to draw others into a fight.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The Patriot Act and other laws with provision for invasive surveillance didn't come out of nowhere. There are officials and/or lobbies who have always argued for more surveillance in the name of security. They have proposals on standby, and are waiting for opportunities to turn these into laws.
When an attack do happen, these people are going to push their proposal, present them as the solution. It doesn't mean they had anything to do with the attack. I assume people who wrote the Patrick Act are genuinely looking to avoid terrorist attacks, but their solution isn't effective nor right.