He's a politician that I suspect most of us here largely agree with, but he's still a politician. This is best looked at as campaign literature. The pirate party are sensationalising dangers that don't (yet) exist, in large part imo because it boosts their profile.
It's difficult, because I too would be very concerned about this issue, once there's actually a proposal to object to! I'm entirely on their side on this issue, if reality were as presented here, but campaigning against a strawman that might never be proposed whilst disingenuously implying that it's imminent feels a lot like fearmongering to me.
Frustratingly, it would be quite possible & useful to campaign against this with nuance instead: "the commission is considering proposals to better fight CSAM - have your say, make suggestions & help define tech solutions to do this while preserving privacy", rather than "the EU is going to destroy all privacy ASAP". And it's not like we're short on other genuine issues to campaign on either.
Any idea why the Breyer makes it sound like this is something which is coming though? Or why he's even talking about it?