From a conversation with a journalist asking what I think about some proposed government spyware regulation: (me) I saw, I don't really care so much about that kind of stuff though. Intel agencies and police do what they want regardless of regulations, and criminals like me do what we want regardless of regulations. I guess it just provides a way for professional activists to feel like they're accomplishing something. (journalist) Perhaps. So you take an absolutist view that laws can't stop, nor slow down, abuse in this case? (me) That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is reformists like them that petition those in power for change can never accomplish anything more than cosmetic reforms. Meaningful reforms, that resulted in real improvements in peoples' lives, like the 8 hour workday or the end of legalized segregation, were all the result of revolutionary movements aiming to completely transform society, that represented an existential threat to the system, to the point that those in power had to concede something in order to maintain control. States have realized that trying to completely suppress dissent, trying to stamp out social movements as soon as they appear, doesn't work. It's far more effective to manage dissent, to create acceptable and ineffective channels for it, and through a variety of carrots and sticks, co-opt and push social movements into those channels. That's the role that most professional activists and the institutional left, albeit unconsciously, play. Their professional success, access to the media, and access to those in power to "win" cosmetic reforms are all contingent on them helping to condemn and isolate those engaging in "inappropriate" (read: effective) action, and praise those doing "good" (read: ineffective) work. A rare counterexample in the world of professional "internet rights" activists is Gisela Pérez de Acha, who wrote a well researched report on how the purchase and use of Hacking Team's software violated laws across Latin America [1], but also writes editorials defending anarchists [2], and is currently tweeting in support of the resistance in Oaxaca. And no, "expressing solidarity" with the teachers in Oaxaca doesn't count for activists in the US. It's easy to "support" movements far removed in place or time, when there's no cost in doing so. Plenty of people that today "support" road blockades and plaza occupations in Oaxaca were quick to regurgitate the media's slander of BLM and OWS. Plenty of people that today "support" the civil rights movement would be the target of King's Letter from Birmingham Jail if they were alive in the 60s. And I'm sure plenty of people who condemned the rioters in Ferguson support the Boston Tea Party. [1] https://www.derechosdigitales.org/wp-content/uploads/malware-para-la-vigilancia.pdf [2] http://www.sinembargo.mx/opinion/16-11-2014/29153 Unfortunately, especially among "privacy", "anti-surveillance", and "internet rights" activists, that level of awareness is very rare. Most lack any broader critique of the system outside of their very narrow focus on surveillance (or even just specific kinds of surveillance), lack any understanding of history and social movements, and lack any chance of actually changing anything. But I'm not saying activism is useless. Is writing a report on the legality of Hacking Team's software going to change much? No, but I think it's still valuable work to be doing. Showing the system won't even follow the rules it writes for itself helps to delegitimize it, and is important work that, as part of a larger movement, can result in change. What I'm saying is that successful social movements have always had a wide variety of people participating with a diversity of tactics. Activists need to stop promoting their methods as the "correct" way to effect change. They need to encourage and support those acting outside the confines of professional activism, not condemn and illegitimize them. At least, if they actually care about changing the world, and not just about do-goodism, promoting themselves, and advancing their careers.