“Once in awhile I get annoyed about the fact that I have no real privacy. No where I can go and not be registered. I know that, somewhere, everything I do, think and dream of is recorded. I just hope that nobody will use it against me.”
The consensus seems to be that this is a propaganda piece (or at least heavily opinionated by the writer) but I just don’t understand how they could write this with a positive frame of mind. The article is a strange mixture of perspectives that don’t seem consistent. Bizarre.
In modern context, with Musk censoring and banning everyone and everything he doesn’t like, having a backdoor into a country’s financial system and probably also deportation, that statement is ominous as hell.
Seriously. It seems like the subconscious anxieties and fears of the writer’s mind come through in statements like this and a few others. Whatever positives (real and imagined) there are about the situation, there is an underlying loss of personal autonomy that causes a sense of unease. The thing that’s continuing to intrigue me now is: did the writer intend for that to come through, showing the losses a society of that nature would sustain as a commentary on those that promote it, or are they unaware that their words reveal that distress and anxiety? Idk, weird article.
The consensus seems to be that this is a propaganda piece (or at least heavily opinionated by the writer) but I just don’t understand how they could write this with a positive frame of mind. The article is a strange mixture of perspectives that don’t seem consistent. Bizarre.
In modern context, with Musk censoring and banning everyone and everything he doesn’t like, having a backdoor into a country’s financial system and probably also deportation, that statement is ominous as hell.
Seriously. It seems like the subconscious anxieties and fears of the writer’s mind come through in statements like this and a few others. Whatever positives (real and imagined) there are about the situation, there is an underlying loss of personal autonomy that causes a sense of unease. The thing that’s continuing to intrigue me now is: did the writer intend for that to come through, showing the losses a society of that nature would sustain as a commentary on those that promote it, or are they unaware that their words reveal that distress and anxiety? Idk, weird article.