I don't condone surveillance. It is a reality of life. However, I would expect that it is done responsibly and securely. I don't consider surveillance a big violation BUT doing a poor job at protecting the collected data is an egregious violation of privacy.
The only reason to collect data is to use it and those collecting and storing the data are fully responsible for how it is used. The reasons for collecting and retaining it should be explicitly stated and it should only be used for those purposes. It doesn't matter who is doing it - Facebook, Google, a random web site or a government.
In the case of the US, the government is bound by due process, at least theoretically, which makes it far less likely to hurt me than private entities.
Granted, that may not be the case when it comes to China.
That's putting the cart before the house. Due process isn't an agent that enforces your rights, due process is a convention of how things are done. Nothing fundamentally prevents anyone from simply not following due process, other than the actual power structure of society, i.e., what people could get away with. That actual power structure depends on stuff like knowing things about people allowing you to control them. To illustrate what I mean: If your opponent can blackmail all judges, there is no due process for you.
Due process can also be used to oppress. Totalitarian systems are about 'process'. Customs officers going through your personal papers in US airports like the stasi is 'due process'. Secret courts and secret orders are also 'due process', not being able to speak out against arbitrary gag orders is also 'due process'.
Whistle blowers and activists being harassed, surveilled or infiltrated by law enforcement or not a single person being held to account after the NSA revelations is 'due process'. Users being spied and stalked on by an assortment of SV companies and state agencies via the internet, phones, facial recognition, licence plates do not seem to have access to the basic right to privacy or any recourse to due process.
These binary statements about 'rule of law', 'due process', dissent, democracy comes across as theoretical and disconnected from the complexity and events in the real world.
You dont even have to worry only about your own/current government. Take the Netherlands, with detailed census data (conveniently as punchcards) about their population before the German invasion. With the threat of an invasion looming some suggested to at least trike out the information about religious believes. Unfortunately this didnt happen. Amsterdam had one of the highest rates of deported Jews for a reason.
I don't condone surveillance. It is a reality of life. However, I would expect that it is done responsibly and securely. I don't consider surveillance a big violation BUT doing a poor job at protecting the collected data is an egregious violation of privacy.