;-) and when I think of George Bernard Shaw musing on "freedom" I automatically recall that he was an actual Marxist:
Shaw's enthusiasm for the Soviet Union dated to the early 1920s when he had hailed Lenin as "the one really interesting statesman in Europe".[170] Having turned down several chances to visit, in 1931 he joined a party led by Nancy Astor.[171] The carefully managed trip culminated in a lengthy meeting with Stalin, whom Shaw later described as "a Georgian gentleman" with no malice in him.[172] At a dinner given in his honour, Shaw told the gathering: "I have seen all the 'terrors' and I was terribly pleased by them".[173] In March 1933 Shaw was a co-signatory to a letter in The Manchester Guardian protesting at the continuing misrepresentation of Soviet achievements: "No lie is too fantastic, no slander is too stale ... for employment by the more reckless elements of the British press."[169]
Shaw's admiration for Mussolini and Stalin demonstrated his growing belief that dictatorship was the only viable political arrangement. When the Nazi Party came to power in Germany in January 1933, Shaw described Hitler as "a very remarkable man, a very able man",[174] and professed himself proud to be the only writer in England who was "scrupulously polite and just to Hitler".[175][n 22] His principal admiration was for Stalin, whose regime he championed uncritically throughout the decade.[173] Shaw saw the 1939 Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact as a triumph for Stalin who, he said, now had Hitler under his thumb.[178] source wiki
He was also the master of unintentional irony :-)
:-)
Anyway he couldn't know anything about the NSA, Edward Snowden's disclosures and the efforts of the USA to monitor everything and everyone nowadays - but in my eyes his citation describes the current situation in a very applicable way.
Admittedly the Deep State is alive and well in America, but the intrusive surveillance state isn't limited to any one country. No doubt Shaw would be supporting China ;-)
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-surveillance-big-data-score-censorship-a7375221.html
The way how Obama called the European countries "friends" and at the same time spied them out ruthlessly (politicians, companies, universities as well as 'normal' inhabitants), makes the story unique.
Of course secret services everywhere in the world are exerting their dirty businesses (if I had the power I would restrict their actions in and outside of my country), however, concerning its technological abilities and the huge amount of money spent for secret services and military infrastructure, the "land of the free" (irony again!) is unique. To make it clear I don't think that for example German secret services act in a more 'moral' way anyhow, but they simply lack technology, know-how, financial resources which makes them less dangerous.
I know about these worrying developments in China and I wonder where it leads (to nothing good I fear ... even if in some other fields I see some amazing progresses). However, isn't it amazing that nowadays we need to name China if we are seeking for something less free than the "land of the free"? :-)
That all said I have nothing against the US-American people in general (my text could lead to this wrong impression) - what I criticize is especially the external policy of the country. And (do I repeat myself?) in my eyes Snowden is a 'hero'.
Furthermore, I think the fear of terrorism has triggered the wish to be invulnerable and caused the recent development of the USA towards a surveillance state. In an ironic way the terrorists finally won, because they were able to change the country, even if the risk to become a victim of a terrorist attack is lower than having a car accident or being shot by ones neighbor ...
You expressed that very well. As for Snowden, I'm with you on that. If find it strange that Germany offers asylum to virtually anyone, but not to Snowden and Julian Assange. As for Obama listening to "friends" I too thought that was outrageous, as well as the many other abuses we've learned about since he left office.
Strangely, even now, after all we have learned about him and his administration, I bet Germans would vote for him as president of the EU if they could. (Full disclosure, I voted for him twice.) I think where we differ somewhat is that I see globalist interests behind the surveillance state, corporate media, high tech, etc. I don't know who these power brokers behind the scene are, and I don't imagine I will find out.
Let's keep in mind, even a billionaire, both as a candidate and as a president, was a victim of the deep state ohne Borders surveillance :-) It seems to me our world and freedom in general are in a very precarious state.