I think the error in your comparison is that "the democratic consensus" is certainly not what produced PRISM and the rest.
What I suggest in the article is little more than civil disobedience, in a way. It's refusing to supply an apparatus we never approved with information we never released. Since they can and will take it from us without our knowledge or consent, we have to make it impossible for that to happen before we can have a reasonable parley, you know?
Obviously we're not quite at the Gandhi or King level of disobedience (it would be rather hubristic to suggest it), but it's a similar principle in action, perhaps a bit more preemptively.
What I suggest in the article is little more than civil disobedience, in a way. It's refusing to supply an apparatus we never approved with information we never released. Since they can and will take it from us without our knowledge or consent, we have to make it impossible for that to happen before we can have a reasonable parley, you know?
Obviously we're not quite at the Gandhi or King level of disobedience (it would be rather hubristic to suggest it), but it's a similar principle in action, perhaps a bit more preemptively.