There are many corrupt people in the government, both elected politicians and unelected officials. Many are p#do***les, other launder money, some rig elections, while others surveil and harass innocent people.

To protect our Parliament, and Constitution, all these politicians and their families should come under public scrutiny. All their financial records, their communications, their online search histories, should be in the public domain.

In other words, we need parity of privacy between the State and its People.

This sounds hair-brained and extreme, but the public is already under intensive surveillance. I think experience needs to be felt by the officials as well so they finally begin to value the fundamental right to privacy.

    • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.worldEnglish
      251·
      1 year ago

      I consider this post as more of a thought experiment. If this sounds extreme to you, then the mass surveillance of society is even more extreme.

      The fact governments almost always exempt themselves should be all that’s needed to prove the measures violate a democratic societies rule of law and civil liberties, and that their promotion should be considered treason — an attack on the civil liberties of the entire population is an attack on democracy itself.

    • SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      8·
      1 year ago

      I forget what privacy podcast I was listening to but they said that privacy is important because you might not be under scrutiny now but could be.

      After the Boston marathon bombing reddit was scouring footage and believed a particular person was responsible (“we did it reddit!”). They were wrong. People found his address, work etc and he was stalked and harrassed for days though he did nothing wrong.

      You can bet he would have liked to disappear for a while, and a little extra everyday privacy in advance would have made that a lot easier.

  • PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de
    111·
    1 year ago

    The more power a person has, the less privacy we cann afford to give them.

    I heard once that in Norway, all members of parliament have to basically make most of their finances public. I think anybody who is tasked with ruling a country should be required to show all their wealth assets and income sources for a few years even after they leave office.

    • youmaynotknow@lemmy.ml
      7·
      1 year ago

      Most democratic countries have what’s known as a “Sworn Declaration”. This is supposed to be a financial audit for anyone aspiring to a public office position.

      In my country these are doctored and then some. Our next to last president used to work as a packer at a “bodega” in New York, but his sworn declaration put him at a net worth of over 100 million dollars.

      The whole system, in every country, is corrupt.

  • foremanguy@lemmy.ml
    2·
    1 year ago

    That’s a good response to their act but it’s not the way to go, instead of controlling everyone included the politicals just stop to control the world

        • themurphy@lemmy.ml
          4·
          1 year ago

          I didn’t say other forms don’t work.

          I’m just saying a government works very well other places and in smaller countries. Especially in the nordic Europe, where ironically has a bigger government than most countries, and are better off.

            • sunzu@kbin.run
              3·
              1 year ago

              At our current development, the solution is better government, NOT no government.

              Government can the done decent. It ain’t got to be a clone degenaracy

                • sunzu@kbin.run
                  2·
                  1 year ago

                  Bro i am with you on that lesser of evil aint gonna do shit.

                  I am voting third party as protest vote until i die or enough of us do it.

                  coupled with direct action. that’s really all a peasant can do, it aint worth dying over it or suffering anymore then it is imposed up on you. like you said, boycott!

                  hence why, voting with your money is more powerful then even voting third party. this one hurts owner class.

                  we don’t hate choice on necessities but other thinks our opinion can be felt with a financial quarter and they have to listen :)