> The difference now is how it no longer requires a large government to do it.
That may be, but the US government certainly is large.
That may be, but the US government certainly is large.
I believe you have equated size with capability/control, which is a fallacy. Size allows for capability, but neither, of the two, can be causally linked. The US government can do with 10 people, what previously required 100 or 1,000 people in the recent past. Total control of the population is no longer required to obtain total surveillance. So, the difference now is how it no longer requires a "large" government to do it.
Something like 1 in 10 people is employed by the government (state, federal, or local) directly, countless more indirectly.
The .gov actually is large, in the strictest sense of the word.
At least there's a correlation between a government being large and a government being oppressive, right? A small government simply has less influence in the general populace's everyday lives.