And no need for authoritarianism. 
- which is why they gave us feminism
- and racism
- and partisanship
- and age gap issues
- and criminality
- inability to defend ourselves
- and oppressive laws
- and so on.
…and many fell for it all and embraced it. I never believed all the hype, of all those things. I used to think that it was the relocated Brits that made those changes, to far distance themselves from Britain to be different from it and the British, in both vocabulary and style.
The last decade was the most prolifically rigged, for America and most of Europe. What next?
Total AI surveillance.
I’m afraid that this will perhaps even go so far that no one will have an self-consciousness anymore.
We have still not worked out the purpose of our own existence. All we really do is live, reproduce and die.
Is living, experiencing, not miraculous or purposeful enough?
Living and experiencing is great for the most part. We choose our own purpose if we want to.
I’m not bothered by that happening… why do so many find it so ominous?
There are obviously/should be limits to any such installations, in keeping with human rights and ethics etc… so balancing citizens’ safety with human freedoms.
You are “not bothered by” AI surveillance “happening”, but you also demand “limits to any such installations” that have to do with total AI surveillance (?!?). 
I see your point, but I wouldn’t want AI surveillance surveilling me in the privacy of my own home, but outside of my four walls I’d feel safe, with prying AI eyes watching over the activities of the external.
Is it not the responsibility of the State to ensure the safety of its citizens and the detaining of suspected criminals, captured, on their way to do criminal activities?
This opinion is probably shared by most people. This is no wonder, because most people are concerned with their freedom on the one hand and their safety on the other. But unfortunately, this is often exploited, so that on the one hand the impression is created that it is about safety, while in reality it is about surveillance, on the other hand the impression is created that it is about freedom, while in reality it is about surveillance.
Yes, but I have a counter question: Are the states of the individual nations really still sovereign? My answer is straightforward: No.
No I don’t think so.
In a democracy the purpose of the State is to do the bidding of the people. In a socialist State the purpose of the government is to control the people into doing the bidding of the rulers.
People in democracies are generally willing and expecting to take a degree of risk so as to maintain a higher degree of freedom while also keeping themselves alert. When the government takes on the task of protecting the people - despite the will of the people - or to control the will of the people - the people lose the ability to care for themselves and there is no longer freedom or democracy - there is only socialism - authoritarianism.
The only purpose of surveillance is intervention - control over the future - but to who’s advantage? - Whoever has the power - and that isn’t you.
Obsrvr,
You’re using words like democracy, socialist and communist incorrectly. You have the whole time on these boards to understand.
Ok.
There are monarchies. One person decides everything; also know as totalitarian.
There are republics. That’s when the ruler hires people to vote.
There are democratic republics. That’s when the population hires a representative to vote for them
There is direct democracy. Everything is decided by the general public.
There is socialist. This is an economic system; generally understood to be what helps the most people most the time… such as free education, infrastructure, medicine etc… (publicly owned)
Then there is communist. Everyone is free because everyone intuitively does what is best for themselves and the whole without a system; also known as anarchy, but slightly different.
Then there is anarchy. No central source for anything.
Basically, what I’m saying is: use your words correctly and you’ll gain more respect here from people than just UR…
Then there is capitalist. Everything is privately owned.
There’s more than that, but it’s a start.
I don’t believe so.
It is good to see that you have finally got that much right. Did you ever get around to reading your Constitution?
But then you display mindless propaganda naivety.
Continue to learn the words, especially relating to real world socialism and communism, and eventually you might catch up to the rest of the non-propagandized world.
Dude Obsrvr,
Read a fucking book someday. You don’t get to define communism and socialism as totalitarianism.
I know what I’m talking about; you’re just being a jerk.
Communism is defined a a self governed system for each individual.
Socialism is defined as public interests from and for the collective.
Get your shit together man and stop being a smug idiot.
Off Topic response:
To your point, Ecmandu, anyone who wants to claim to be #1 at something - shows signs of narcissism and arrogance. Furthermore, someone who claims to be the embodiment of another, is delusional.
From my brief exposure to obsrvr [claiming to be the incarnate of someone else + reading their signature], this is what I have observed in them.
Perhaps they have a degree of wisdom, yet still undoubtedly smug. Even some of the best of us can falter, have vices, or trip into pitfalls - arrogance being just one.
This post is in no way critique of the contents of their beliefs, rather, a critical assessment of particular aspects projected by their personality.
Resist arrogance - it’ll cloud your mind. Or in the words of a wise chap, it will ‘create noise’.
Consider yourself observed. 
“#1 of something”?
If that is about my signature - it denotes the first member.
No such claim was made.
Proper observing requires avoidance of assumptions.
What say you on arrogance, friend?
What say you on smugness, friend?
Please, tell us how special you are.
I invite you to do so.
Denial may sometimes be a refuge.
Only that you appear to be - full of it, mate.
I’m the perpetual idiot, as clearly demonstrated by my contribution.
The vastness of my ignorance is quite awe-inspiring,
and if we stood side by side, and peered into the chasm of the unknown,
our islands of understanding are both equally very much contrasted by that abyss.
There was a time before language as we know it.
If born into such a time,
Would either of us have recognised and reflected…
on the true machinations of existence?
Or are we not on the shoulders of giants?
Is not the privilege of homo sapiens,
born in our current era,
the product of our species…
working tirelessly for generations?
i.e. a group effort?
To what end is arrogance? A fool’s trap.
Forgive my stupid self, friend. I am mistaken.
Be well to yourself and others,
and keep fighting the good fight.
Thank you for indicating my stumble.