Who you think the "next Nazis" are is debatable. I think it's easier to just prevent the situation happening altogether. We don't need arbitrarily powerful surveillance to function as a society
It really don't think there is when it gets to "Nazi" level bad. But that isn't really a debate worth having.
>I think it's easier to just prevent the situation happening altogether.
Why is surveillance the line you are drawing? We are all fucked if the US government goes the route of the Nazis. Having the ability to tap into some extra municipal surveillance cameras isn't going to make or brake their control.
>We don't need arbitrarily powerful surveillance to function as a society
Sure, but no one is yet proposing arbitrarily powerful surveillance. You are going slippery slope here. Low level surveillance has value just like the Polish government having an accurate picture of their citizenry has value. The question is whether the present value of the information is outweighed by the remote possibility that the information can be abused by a corrupt power. That remote possibility alone shouldn't be the deciding factor or else we should be against any form of governmental power including having a military any more powerful than a local militia.
Yea, lets just figure out what sort of ideology leads to that.
Then lets make a list somehow of people who are of that ideology or likely to fall to it.
Then we just ought to round em all up, maybe put them in camps where they can be reeducated on why they're wrong...and ones who are uncooperative could be put to work, and...oh shit we're the next nazis, woops!
Are you really going with the "the anti-Nazis are the real Nazis" trope? There are a few steps along the way between "let's try to stop Nazis" and "let's throw them in concentration camps".
