The govermnent is not some sort of abstract infallible entity. It consists of regular people. And giving those people deep access to your private and personal life is going to be abused more than it will help.
Have we already forgotten what disastrous consequences moving toward such a totalitarian government has? Have we already forgotten about the horrors of the second world war and its aftermath?
That is not a persuasive argument to anyone who understands that people working for governments/justice systems are much more keen to be bound by... laws... than randos on the Internet.
> Giving those people deep access to your private and personal life is going to be abused more than it will help.
Yeah, I'll need a pretty convincing citation about that because it sounds like a load of misinformed nonsense to me. At the very least, you ought to segment your argument based on regional zones. As an example, in the EU governments do collect quite a lot of deep information on their citizens (their finance, their health, their skillsets, etc). They can then use that information to give out unemployment insurance, support education, tackle the best part of healthcare costs and so many other things that have a truly positive effect on people.
> Have we already forgotten what disastrous consequences moving toward such a totalitarian government has? Have we already forgotten about the horrors of the second world war and its aftermath?
Wait, is your argument that citizens in the US, EU, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, etc. will experience a shift of their government to totalitarian states in their lifetime? If so what are you basing this belief on?
> The govermnent is not some sort of abstract infallible entity.
Most people agree it's not infallible, but a lot of people view it as an abstract entity and not just a group of different people.