Mass Surveillance

[Anonymous No.15891821]

I’m tired of hearing the same “mass surveillance bad!” NPC lines over and over again, are there any books which argue in favor of mass surveillance, social credit and similar measures?

Pic related

[Anonymous No.15891827]

>>15891821
that's literally what the Bible is, the consequences just have a lag

[Anonymous No.15891835]

>>15891827
This. This has been the goal of the last few hundred years too, and only now is it becoming actualized. “If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him ”

[Anonymous No.15891838]

I think having more cameras on the streets is a good thing, but I'm not exactly too keen on social credit, that's probably where I would draw the line. The only people who are disadvantaged in a surveillance state are people who want to hurt others

[SAGE No.15891851]

>>15891821
>ignore all reasoning and history
>just give all authority and power to a hypercentralized government and hope everything turns out great
>calling others NPCs

reddit invaders are off the chain!

[Anonymous No.15891862]

What in the actual fuck

[Anonymous No.15891863]

>>15891838
Social credit would be beneficial because it would actively punish people for not conforming to norms intended to be beneficial for the entire society (i.e. anti-social behavior and petty crimes), quickly making their life difficult until they feel compelled to climb out of the hole that they themselves dug. I assume most peoples behavior would change rapidly if they were prevented from using public transportation, access to services and various forms of public shaming. Confucian technocracy is the future

[Anonymous No.15891867]

>>15891851
>just give all authority and power to a hypercentralized government and hope everything turns out great
Why assume the worst? I think it will end up being more like a network of human interests. Everyone wants to feel safe, unless they're sociopaths who like to hurt people.

[Anonymous No.15891868]

>>15891851
>government bad!

[Anonymous No.15891874]

>>15891821
look up the word 'contrarian' in the dictionary

[Anonymous No.15891881]

>>15891867
A lot of people don't care that much about 'feeling safe' as you're likely imagining it, and prefer feeling 'free'. I realize these are vague concepts but it's a real thing I have noticed time and again and I think it must be some innate personality difference.

[Anonymous No.15891889]

>>15891868
>government good!

[Anonymous No.15891893]

>>15891874
Not even the most contrarian board on the Internet supports mass surveillance (/pol/). There must be something to it if lemmings are so opposed

[Anonymous No.15891903]

>>15891889
Yes

[Anonymous No.15891906]

>>15891881
Safety means more freedom in general, just less freedom to hurt other people. I don't think it's merely a personality difference, but something that people haven't exactly thought through thoroughly

[Anonymous No.15891921]

>>15891906
It depends on your threshold for 'harm', which is a notoriously contentious concept. And it also includes the freedom to do stuff that will harm yourself and the negative liberty issue, ie. your duty to help others.

[Anonymous No.15891922]

>>15891893
You may be on to something. I hear retards are afraid of suicide

[Anonymous No.15891926]

>>15891863
China's system isn't good, it creates cultural stagnation and weird dilemmas like where people refuse to help others because they're afraid it will affect them legally. You need a middle ground, enough freedom for people to not feel suffocated, but enough pressure to prevent and punish violent crime and terrorism.

[Anonymous No.15891932]

>>15891906
also people might be willing to accept a higher risk of harm to themselves from others in exchange for more privacy/freedom, while having no intentions of harming people themselves. Or they might prefer to eg. have guns than rely on cops. There is a lot of stuff at play here.

[Anonymous No.15891947]

>>15891922
Suicide is the best way to leave life. You can choose to end it at the moment of your choice and when you are in peak health still rather than enduring a slow decline into weakness and ugliness. So yes, only retards are afraid of suicide and I will one day die when I choose so.
>>15891926
>it creates cultural stagnation
This is a meaningless term. Stability is good.
>and weird dilemmas like where people refuse to help others because they're afraid it will affect them legally.
Helping criminals and other low-lifes should be discouraged. This is the point of the system. To isolate those who engage in such behaviors.

[Anonymous No.15891953]

>>15891947
Oversocialized, opinion discarded

[Anonymous No.15891954]

>>15891953
t. Ted incel

[Anonymous No.15891959]

>>15891921
The threshold is when they're explicitly hurting or harassing other people. These issues are often made more complicated than they need to be.
>>15891932
These people like the feeling of freedom, but in actuality they don't really gain that much.

[Anonymous No.15891971]

>>15891959
>The threshold is when they're explicitly hurting or harassing other people.
I challenge you to unambiguously define this, it is much harder than you think. Is calling someone an asshole harm? What if they were being kind of an asshole, is that harm? And who are you to say that their wellbeing isn't genuinely raised by their feelings of freedom?

[Anonymous No.15891972]

>>15891947
>Stability is good.
Too much stability is just stagnation and eventually rot, for example Taiwan, Japan, and Korea are much better places to live than mainland China

[Anonymous No.15891982]

>>15891972
>he thinks China is a “stable society”
China one hundred years ago was a bigger shithole than India

[Anonymous No.15891989]

>>15891982
China went through a lot of changes in the past hundred years, but historically it's been fairly stable which has led to problems. The whole point of the great leap forward was to rejuvenate old China

[Anonymous No.15892003]

>>15891989
China horrifically massacres its own people by the millions at fairly regular intervals. What's unique about it is the length of a civilization you can more or less always term Chinese despite these periods of chaos.

[Anonymous No.15892012]

>>15891971
>Is calling someone an asshole harm?
No
>What if they were being kind of an asshole, is that harm?
This is a non issue
>And who are you to say that their wellbeing isn't genuinely raised by their feelings of freedom?
The difference is that those feelings are irrational because feeling free isn't the same as actually being safer when you walk down to the market

[Anonymous No.15892018]

>>15892003
I'm not defending communism or China, I'm a neoliberal

[Anonymous No.15892020]

>>15892012
I'm assuming there is a level of freedom you care about, you wouldn't tolerate being a slave if it meant you were safer?

And can you tell me what you mean by harassment, in the case in which it does equal harm?

[Anonymous No.15892025]

>>15892018
I didn't say you were I just think stable is not exactly the right word for that country. It's almost like a phoenix

[Anonymous No.15892033]

>>15892020
There's a state of balance that makes life more enjoyable, existence itself is a play between chaos and order too much of either is a drag.
>And can you tell me what you mean by harassment, in the case in which it does equal harm?
When someone won't leave another person alone, I mean most people intuitively can decipher harassment from someone being a jerk

[Anonymous No.15892040]

>>15892033
>, existence itself is a play between chaos and order too much of either is a drag
That was my point with the freedom/safety thing, and how people have what I believe are inborn differences in where they draw the line. I mean there are undoubtedly people who don't mind being slaves, there were happy slaves in history.

And about harassment, that seems reasonable to me, though that is not the only way people use that term.

[Anonymous No.15892091]

>>15892040
People who are happy with being a slave most likely came out of far worse conditions. I don't think anyone would enjoy being castrated and forced to guard some mans concubines, but there's always a giving up of freedom in order to gain other freedoms such as safety and warm food.

[Anonymous No.15892099]

>>15891947
seek help

[Anonymous No.15892100]

>>15892091
I am quite sure that many people would actually prefer a slave-like existence. It's a sort of continuation of the lack of responsibility of childhood, if the slavemaster is relatively benevolent, which in your ideal situation could easily be arranged, and which obviously did happen at times in history. Many slavery arrangements were hard to distinguish from just a live in servant who was part of the family, if of a lower rank.

[Anonymous No.15892116]

>>15892091
also, the fact that the majority of slavemasters were not very benevolent is a problem for the very totalitarian control of the population you want to implement. Similar abuses will undoubtedly occur.

[Anonymous No.15892155]

>>15891821
man desire for free will wont make this possible

[Anonymous No.15892162]

>>15892100
People really just want to feel safe and be fed, I don't think people actually want to be whipped like a monkey.
>>15892116
>Similar abuses will undoubtedly occur.
Why would they? It's not necessary to rule people with violence and severity, people just need to be given a positive role in society.

[Anonymous No.15892176]

>>15892162
>People really just want to feel safe and be fed, I don't think people actually want to be whipped like a monkey.
I didn't say they did, I was referring to the benevolent slavery, which while taboo obviously did occur at times, if rarely.

And abuses would occur because humans on average abuse their lessers, nobody can study history and not see this.

[Anonymous No.15892186]

>>15891821
Cancel culture's existence alone and the leftist "if you stay silent, you're racist" rhetoric alone proves you wrong.

[Anonymous No.15892279]

>>15892176
>benevolent slavery
Yeah I know, not all slavery at all times has been equal. My point is that there isn't a reason that slave whipping tier totalitarianism will be a thing, it's known that it's an inefficient method of keeping things under control. When people love their servitude, have comfortable and fun lives, people won't mind giving up some hypothetical freedoms. It also turns out that the quality of life improves with a certain level of cooperation, as opposed to being cold, fearful, and hungry all the time.

[Anonymous No.15892503]

>>15891821
kike

[Anonymous No.15892522]

>>15892279
>. My point is that there isn't a reason that slave whipping tier totalitarianism will be a thing
Of course it will happen, it happened in the past, it happens right now, and it will happen in the future. Humanity has cruelty in its blood. It has other better stuff too.

[Anonymous No.15892541]

>>15891821
Depends entirely on what it's for.

[Anonymous No.15892691]

The main problem is the current over polarization in politics, which will tend to put Chinese mass surveillance model of society as a "reasonable" option for one side, with the help of propaganda. This discussion is a symptom of it, and also with the whole pandemic thing I'm seeing more and more pressumably "reasonable" people invoking measures in line with that model of society.

Just remember you don't value what you have until you lost it, even if it's very far from being ideal.

[Anonymous No.15892738]

>>15891821
But the surveillance and conditioning are all aimed at making you a dopamine starved, media and drug addicted illiterate person with 80 iq who would never dream of using the state as anything other than a mercenary arm of captial.

If the elites were moral you would have a point but you seem to just be coping.

[Anonymous No.15892797]

nigga nae nigga nigga nae nae