There’s definitely no assured promise of correlation between transmission of content, possession of content, and true criminal act resulting in harm.
What’s actually transpiring is opportunistic enforcement, whenever there’s a broader perception of necessity to act against an apparently dispicable entity.
This motive alone guides organizations to hunt down and punish anything that would seem obvious to a lowest common denominator beureaucrat, when printed on paper.
The reason these sorts of policies are upheld is to provide the umbrage of an imprecise broadsword, when conducting more surgical operations relating to espionage and counter operations. That’s it.
Someone needs to quietly erase something, and they need to sweep it up with a broad mop, so that no one notices the little smear that needed to go away.
It’s not about morality. Only convenient morality. Deviants are pretty rare, and the population of apparent deviants needs to be magnified, so that certain criminals may be framed to keep their real crimes (betrayal, subterfuge) quiet.
What’s actually transpiring is opportunistic enforcement, whenever there’s a broader perception of necessity to act against an apparently dispicable entity.
This motive alone guides organizations to hunt down and punish anything that would seem obvious to a lowest common denominator beureaucrat, when printed on paper.
The reason these sorts of policies are upheld is to provide the umbrage of an imprecise broadsword, when conducting more surgical operations relating to espionage and counter operations. That’s it.
Someone needs to quietly erase something, and they need to sweep it up with a broad mop, so that no one notices the little smear that needed to go away.
It’s not about morality. Only convenient morality. Deviants are pretty rare, and the population of apparent deviants needs to be magnified, so that certain criminals may be framed to keep their real crimes (betrayal, subterfuge) quiet.