They're both currently anti-privacy. It was Clinton Administration that originally compromised with escrow and then allowing crypto. Also expanded FOIA use. The conservatives in the military, esp running NSA, wanted it banned. Then conservatives passed Patriot Act and issued State of Emergency creating a lightweight, selective form oc martial law with bulk surveillance and indefinite detention without trial. Also reduced public access to government info. Obama reversed Democrat accomplishments in privacy by expanding on those conservative policies and laws. New Republican President is trying to crank them up to the next level on top of showing himself to be a threat to individuals or companies for arbitrary, unpredictable reasons motivated by ego.
So, both parties suck at privacy but one did something for it once under pressure. Republicans are consistently in favor of trading liberty for temporary, limited security if it's not their firearms, speech, or press.
> Republicans are consistently in favor of trading liberty for temporary, limited security if it's not their firearms, speech, or press
That's a pretty big "if". Trading guns, speech, and press in exchange for security seems like a much bigger deal than trading internet privacy for security.
It's the digital versions of 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendments. They want the physical but not digital versions despite the ideology behind one justifying the other.
Might even be able to add the 2nd Amendment here on the self-defense angle. It takes crypto, privacy, and endpoint protection technologies to stop hackers and online criminals effectively. The conservatives, esp military, classified high-assurance security as "munitions" since they disrupt their spy operations. They remained classified as "munitions" after the crypto wars. And, yet, we really need information security to stop all kinds of daily threats instead of them trying to ban it to hope they spot rare threats [they often fail to spot].
So, both parties suck at privacy but one did something for it once under pressure. Republicans are consistently in favor of trading liberty for temporary, limited security if it's not their firearms, speech, or press.