Hacker News Reader

One of the governments primary jobs is protecting you from aggressors. You may not agree with the method a government uses but that doesn't change it's job description. So when they come for the terrorist they are pursuing a legitimate governmental role.

When they come for the whistleblower and illegal alien it becomes debatable whether they are pursuing a legitimate governmental role. It's very definitely an apples to oranges comparison there.

View on HN

If the government gets to deny human rights to anyone it with a specific label - what does it matter what the label is?

The government should not be allowed to deny human rights to anyone.

I think you may have missed the part where I said you might disagree with the methods. But my point wasn't regarding methods it was regarding purpose.

The problem, and what bandushrew is saying, is that purposes can be flexible. Once a system or method is legitimised, legalised or even routinely used it can be repurposed for other means. That's the true message of the OP's post - the "coming for" is the method in this case, while the people listed are the individual purposes.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com