I came across a few comments and topics here telling people who strongly advocate for privacy to be more “moderate”, and to “sound less crazy”. People who say that should be ignored and even banned if they persist. Time and time again privacy advocates and skeptics of the “if you don’t have anything to hide you shouldn’t worry” have been proven right, while the other side has been proven wrong. Remember when James Clapper lied in front of congress? I do. Remember when Snowden used to be glorified as long as it served the purpose of the media and some politicians? I do. How do people think of Snowden now? As a traitor, a rat, someone who should be executed.

Privacy is a universal human right, we all deserve to have some. Yet, being welcoming and open to people who are here to set obstacles for us at every step is not only counterproductive but foolish. They clearly don’t care about privacy, and they certainly don’t care if others lose it, so why should we welcome them here and embrace their drivel and gibberish with open arms? They are a detriment to our cause.

My two cents.

  • poVoq
    182·
    2 years ago

    deleted by creator

    • kitsunekunOP
      27·
      4 years ago

      I was expecting a response such as yours.

      Good meaning movements tend to be very open to outside influences and that’s how they lose everything in the process.

      You invite the fox to the hen-house, you get devoured. The rest is childish idealism.

      • poVoq
        81·
        2 years ago

        deleted by creator

        • Whom
          102·
          4 years ago

          Absolutism like this is also a little silly. We need a range of strategies, from the most radical to the most reserved.

          • lorabe
            6·
            4 years ago

            IMO there’s nothing wrong with being radical, analyzing a problem from the roots often means your conclusions are going to be very extreme, but that’s part of change.

            However, being bigoted is a problem, it means you’re being hateful, hate cannot change the world, it only worsens it. I don’t disagree with the opinions of OP, but at the same time i encourage the community not to polarize.

    • kitsunekunOP
      24·
      4 years ago

      lmao so the “wall of text” is your best critique?

      The naïveté of people here is astonishing

      Privacy is under fire 24/7, it has been like that for decades, if not centuries. And it has never been more intense than in recent times.

      I am just letting people know that small communities such as these, as well-intentioned and oriented as they may be, eventually become a target to subvert by those seeking to prevent them from achieving their goals.

      Don’t ban people if you don’t want to, that’s fine, but at least be aware of what’s happening and what people really mean when they say that we should be more “moderate” or “sound less crazy”.

      The rest, as I said, is childish idealism or having dinner with the fox while you’re the hen.

        • kitsunekunOP
          11·
          4 years ago

          thanks, man. you know, when I typed that I did use “enter”, but it dawned on me that I have to do it twice for the paragraphs to be displayed correctly. Cheers

    • kitsunekunOP
      43·
      4 years ago

      It’s not a bad mindset. Look up what regulatory capture is and look up the history of social movements and how they become subverted over time. It starts with seemingly innocent comments and claims, and it ends with the movement being destroyed from within. You are all entitled to think whatever you want of me, I am just letting you know that it’s happening right now, and you all are soundly asleep as it unfolds.

        • kitsunekunOP
          11·
          4 years ago

          Man you are so off the mark. No one is advocating for utopias. Quite the opposite: guard communities like this one from subversion and people whose only interest is to call you crazy and to tell you to shut up, because, you know, “iF yOu DoN’T hAvE aNyThiNg To HiDe…” etc etc…

          Don’t be naive, please.

            • kitsunekunOP
              11·
              4 years ago

              The idea of banning people, to be honest, was a bit of hyperbole.

              I clarified that a bit with this comment:

              Don’t ban people if you don’t want to, that’s fine, but at least be aware of what’s happening and what people really mean when they say that we should be more “moderate” or “sound less crazy”.

              To be fair I agree with you. All I want people to take from this thread is that we need to tread carefully when dealing with the “be more moderate” crowd. I don’t believe, at all, that they have good intentions until demonstrated otherwise.

              If people can leave this thread with that takeaway alone, I will be more than satisfied. The banning and extracurricular activities are more hyperbole than anything else to be honest.

              And yes! Kudos to you for allowing dissenting opinions. Remember when I posted to your Subreddit about why we should be distrustful of Signal? You were the only one who allowed me to say that out loud and look, today, I was validated; but back in the day all I got was a kick in the proverbial mouth and lots of censorship from the mainstream “privacy” subs.

              Cheers my friend.