The US has this capability too. It's an expansive power and largely unchecked.
https://techcrunch.com/2020/10/22/representatives-propose-bi... (" Representatives propose bill limiting presidential internet ‘kill switch’")
https://techcrunch.com/2020/10/22/representatives-propose-bi... (" Representatives propose bill limiting presidential internet ‘kill switch’")
If it gets misused then we'll protest, etc.
Edit: You can downvote if you like, but this comment of mine isn't made in bad faith. It's fair to worry about a global cyberwar and fair to point out that in-person protests are still a viable response to abuse.
Adversaries have access to this technology too, and it's a power multiplier. If they can shut down access to those they are oppressing, then they become far too powerful.
Yes, protesters can still protest, but without access to the same tech that those they are protesting can use, they can be out-organized, their voice muted, and their effectiveness minimized.
That would not be the case in this instance. You (the protestors) would be back to runners, unencrypted radio/code. They'd still have the modern comm suite.
It doesn't make things impossible for protestors, but it greatly shifts things in the government's favor for containment and ability to sustain itself against a now unconsenting populace. Always remember asymmetry will be employed as early and often as possible.
US Population, 1870: 38,558,371
US Population, 2020: 331,449,281
People survived hundreds of years ago without electricity or running water, so it should be perfectly fine if the government shuts off utilities for protestors, right?
Honest question - how would you know?
- The problems will not be on the radio / tv.
- Services that try to talk about it can be silenced.
- Users who talk about things the government finds inconvenient will be silenced - its already happening.
- Groups trying to organize to protest things are already banned in some cases on facebook (see Australian response to covid vaccine mandate groups).
Governments can plan for and have shut off valves to silence you.
Do not be so quick to trust a government who obviously does not want to trust you.
In practice what happens is that some boondoggle results in a catastrophic too big to brush aside and the part of the executive branch in question decides that just not doing that thing going forward is better than the scrutiny from the legislative branch and change their policy. Nobody is ever meaningfully held accountable. Sometimes there's a token scapegoat. The above pattern holds both at the federal and state level.
That wasn't the people. That was the oligarchs disagreeing as to who got to own the slaves and reap the spoils of genocide.
Oh come on, quit with the BS talking points. War on your territory is NEVER good for business and overall wealth and they knew that back in the 18th century too. They would have been far, far, far, richer throwing their lot in with the status quo. Many of the prominent individuals who played key roles the revolution lost their wealth and in many cases their lives.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United...
So they fought and expended resources because they disagreed on which land stealing genocidal slavers got to be on top of the pile...
If it was for the good of the people, 'the people' would have included people and not just the elite men.