By Admin
As November ended, Americans took pause and celebrated Thanksgiving, a time intended for friends and family, for showing gratitude and coexisting in peace. A time which, as a growing number of dissenting voices have pointed out, provides many of us cover from the well-blurred legacy of genocide that European colonists wrought on indigenous peoples, which would evolve into a centuries-long onslaught of murder and slavery conducted in the name of conquest, God and cost-efficiency.
I’ve always found it perversely fitting that the day after such prescriptive harmony we should pivot into Black Friday, a violent orgy that kicks off the beginning of a month-long celebration of the West’s most prominent modern religion: Commodity. Now more than ever, consumers seemed primed for distraction.
And it’s warranted. For many, 2017 has seemed like an endless series of political shock-and-awe, a rapid deconstruction of the institutions that we depend on, rightfully or not, to be the keepers of the Republic. The EPA, the Department of Education, the FCC, and the Presidency itself have seemingly begun to destabilize into amorphous political bodies, now unrecognizable to many of the “decent” folks in our country. In such times of uncertainty, an impulse within us emerges to seek out answers and (more often) find an escape.
Though I find that many of us, no matter how well-informed we are, at some point bristle with resentment at any truth that challenges our adherence to Commodity. And it’s a shame, because as we tap at our screens, snap selfies, scroll through ads and post articles on the coming Fascist State, we unknowingly embed ourselves into the manipulative infrastructure that readies us for that same level of fascist control.
Simply put: while many rage against the powers that be, it’s disheartening to see such little attention paid to the rapidly-evolving apparatus that helps keeps that power in place. I’m speaking of course about the modern surveillance state.
George Orwell’s 1984 gave us the concept of ‘Big Brother’ over a half century ago. The image of a menacing leader, capable of monitoring and controlling us through a well-equipped police state, provides us with an articulate warning of a possible dystopian future. But while one hears the term used frequently, I wonder if it’s starting to miss the mark. I wonder if we cut an essential conversation short by assuming that this future hasn’t already snuck its way into our lives.
Despite the growing public awareness of the US Intelligence Community’s surveillance capabilities, many people still trust that our government only uses these powers to “fight terrorism.” Others know well that abuse of this power occurs routinely, though they often brush off concerns because they “have nothing to hide.”
I suspect that these reactions are symptomatic of something larger at work. How could surveillance technology dominate our lives if we didn’t still hold on to some unearned privilege or veneer of power? Or, perhaps it’s our faith in Commodity itself which provides cover for these developments to go mostly unchecked.
Government overreach is scary, but at least I have a microphone in my house that lets me order take-out.
I hesitate to use the term “Little Sister” to describe the leviathan tech companies of Silicon Valley (and I’m not the first to do so). But when you consider their efforts to normalize the most invasive technologies, it’s hard not to extend the metaphor.
And yet American culture celebrates men like Jeff Bezos, Tim Cook and Mark Zuckerberg as enlightened titans of new industry. Zuckerberg is even spoken of today as a potential 2020 presidential contender. But while most Americans don’t see the problem in lauding the accomplishments of these wealthy businessmen, each of their massive corporations has worked tirelessly to move us through the pipeline of submission to invasive technology. And their strategies to do so, regardless of intent, have gently eased us into that very state of indifferent acceptance with which we now regard the government’s surveillance apparatus.
Apple’s new iPhone X, for example, which features state-of-the-art facial recognition technology, signals a massive step forward in the adoption of biometrics. While Apples claims that these hyper-detailed images of our faces will remain secure on our phones (which apparently doesn’t stop them from sharing them with third party apps), one can imagine the power that any advertiser will have over us with the newfound ability to pick us out in a crowd, or even detect our real-time emotional state.
Though, here we are, gawking at yet another ostentatious Apple keynote, applauding at the newfound ability to send a talking panda emoji that tracks our facial structures.
Facebook now invites users to login using images of their face, under the guise of “improved security,” even as they quietly take out patents on facial-based emotion tracking technology and actively lobby against state legislation to protect citizens’ biometric data from private advertisers. Though, hey, I’m sure they’re doing it with the best intentions.
(How does Facebook make their money again?)
And yes, while facial recognition is nothing new, isn’t it suspicious that the timing of its mainstream adoption coincides with many national airports implementing facial recognition scanners at checkpoints, even making it compulsory for passengers leaving the US? With little protections in place against such invasive identification, some privacy advocacy groups have rightfully posited that this kind of unregulated technology will extend far beyond airports and eventually lead to a “perpetual lineup,” which is a nice way of saying that police will be able to monitor minority communities and political dissenters like never before.
Considering the implications of such a dystopian future, is anyone surprised that it’s mostly wealthy white dudes who are touting the merits of this next-generation technology?
The future has never seemed so out of touch.
The Amazon Echo and other voice-activated “assistants” seem to embody this new tone-deaf disconnect as well. While it’s disturbing for some that consumers are willing to install an always-on, internet-connected microphone into their homes (especially as Amazon rolls out its secretive cloud services for the CIA), it also isn’t surprising that many don’t seem to care.
Do you think it’s an accident that Alexa and Siri sound like unthreatening white women?
These brief examples only scratch the surface, but as tech companies continue to push the boundaries of our privacy, while increasing their margins through third party advertising and government contracts, one would think that the public would start to voice greater concern. And while many people do, somehow Apple, Amazon, Facebook and the rest continue to grow unfettered. How is that possible?
I think the answer is clear: these companies have deliberately exploited our adherence to Commodity, providing us a sense of constant comfort and “optimization,” sprinkled with doses of dopamine.
The ones that swiftly recover from any perception of suspicious activity know that the answer always lies in the next iteration, announced with spectacle, wrapped in playful language, and bow-tied with the hollow promises of “cutting-edge and convenient.”
So, maybe Orwell was wrong. People won’t be threatened into submission by an all-powerful authoritarian, they’ll do it themselves with the next update.
The author is an active member of Oakland Privacy