"enemy of the state" depends a lot on the current state of the state.
Eg in England you're already an enemy of the state when you protest against Israel's actions in Gaza. In America if you don't like civilians being executed by ICE.
This is really a bad time to throw "enemy of the state" around as if this only applies to the worst people.
Current developments are the ideal time to show that these powers can be abused.
Very much hyperbolic about the UK. You’re fine protesting against Israel, but Palestine Action is a proscribed group (not that I agree with that!) and that will land you in trouble.
No you aren't,why are you lying. You can protest all you want,the only time people got in trouble was because of the Nazi flags the protestors were using and extreme Islamists trying to recruit terrorists.
> Are we calling everyone who wants some control over their computers enemies of the state?
As of today at 00:00 UTC, no.
But there's an increasingly possible future
where authoritarian governments will brand users
who practice 'non-prescribed use' as enemies of the state.
And when we have a government who's leader
openly gifts deep, direct access to federal power
to unethical tech leaders who've funded elections (ex:Thiel),
that branding would be a powerful perk to have access to
(even if indirectly).
You're not going to avoid any state surveillance if the state is really interested in you specifically.
But you can still help prevent abuses of mass surveillance without probable cause by making such surveillance as expensive and difficult as possible for the state
