On 2013-07-03, at 10:13 PM, JOANNA A. wrote:
> Can people who are not politically sophisticated understand that this spying is NOT about their safety.
I think it's safe to say most people would counter that pervasive state surveillance IS about their safety, about reducing the possibility of a terrorist attack by "any means necessary". They're far more frightened of being caught in a terrorist attack than about their personal records ending up in a government data bank. Many are resigned to this being the case already.
Fear is a far more powerful urge than the need for privacy, especially in the Facebook era.
The Snowden affair has promoted calls for strengthened oversight, which should be supported in principle, although typically the agencies set up to administer such safeguards act a rubber stamp for the intelligence services and only promote the illusion of democratic control.
I'll be happily surprised if a mass campaign develops against Big Brother. But, as Occupy showed, unemployment, debt, stagnant incomes, widening inequality, the threat to social programs, control of congress by the monied interests, etc. have a greater potential to rouse the public.