> It's simply people versus their various over-reaching governments.
If pretty much every liberal democracy of any significant size is doing it, maybe we should stop and think about why. Blaming "over-reaching governments" is too simplistic in my opinion. I have a hard time believing that the legislative process is so broken in every liberal democracy that such surveillance is happening contrary to the public will.
'if everybody is doing it' wasn't a very good reason to jump on the bandwagon in high-school, I see absolutely no reason to come to the conclusion that 'if every liberal democracy of any significant size is doing it' is any stronger as a reason to give out free passes.
This is all about fear and using that fear to push through legislation that appears to benefit nobody (except maybe some technology vendors) and that has the potential to negatively affect the lives of 100's of millions.
Given the stakes I think it is the other side that should do the explaining without us having to 'think about why' because if we're just going to sit and make stuff up there is no end to this, ever.
Giving up all these privileges should come with a substantial change in quality of life or some other tangible benefit and from where I'm sitting I have not seen anything at all that was not better on those fronts when I was a kid.
Instead of some strawmen, you could pull real reasons:
- industrial espionage
- government espionage
- wiretaps and other active investigations
- supporting military ops (like "counter-terrorism" stuff)
Throwing out those strawmen won't convince anyone of anything. The discussion of whether it's worth it is important enough to introduce nuance to what you're saying (are you against the NSA tapping, say, Kim Jong-Un's phone?)
A statement that "public will" had anything to do with any of this would be an extraordinary claim. The public can't decide not to have traffic jams. How would they decide what information gets collected by whom? I doubt they could decide what information gets collected by devices they own.
If pretty much every liberal democracy of any significant size is doing it, maybe we should stop and think about why. Blaming "over-reaching governments" is too simplistic in my opinion. I have a hard time believing that the legislative process is so broken in every liberal democracy that such surveillance is happening contrary to the public will.