Re: Governments Covertly Fund Internet Freedom Activists

perhaps the institutionalization of 'royal perks' explains in part the necessity of a one-party governing system, where any actual opposition (politics) are then managed and absorbed into this model, to protect/secure/maintain aristocratic lifestyles otherwise threatened by actual change, where the focus of issues of subsidy then becomes the poor: "hark! peasants are drinking wine, wine!! with Our Money!" (in a top-down surveillance context, who benefits/profits most?) jya@pipeline.com wrote:

This is what governments and NGOs were invented for and remain the premier source of livelihood one way or the other, especially for those who pretend opposition while royally partying with opponents. Royally, not peasantly.