Skip to content
GitLab
Explore
Sign in
Register
Primary navigation
Search or go to…
Project
B
blog
Manage
Activity
Members
Labels
Plan
Issues
Issue boards
Milestones
Wiki
Code
Merge requests
Repository
Branches
Commits
Tags
Repository graph
Compare revisions
Deploy
Releases
Package registry
Model registry
Operate
Terraform modules
Monitor
Incidents
Service Desk
Analyze
Value stream analytics
Contributor analytics
Repository analytics
Model experiments
Help
Help
Support
GitLab documentation
Compare GitLab plans
Community forum
Contribute to GitLab
Provide feedback
Keyboard shortcuts
?
Snippets
Groups
Projects
Show more breadcrumbs
rhatto
blog
Commits
db7af95a
Unverified
Commit
db7af95a
authored
5 years ago
by
rhatto
Browse files
Options
Downloads
Patches
Plain Diff
Updates books/sociology/counterrevolution
parent
e9585820
Branches
Branches containing commit
No related tags found
No related merge requests found
Changes
1
Hide whitespace changes
Inline
Side-by-side
Showing
1 changed file
books/sociology/counterrevolution.md
+69
-0
69 additions, 0 deletions
books/sociology/counterrevolution.md
with
69 additions
and
0 deletions
books/sociology/counterrevolution.md
+
69
−
0
View file @
db7af95a
...
...
@@ -1191,3 +1191,72 @@ Counterinsurgency goes domestic:
are: outwardly you must treat every civilian as a friend; inwardly you must
consider him as a rebel ally until you have positive proof to the contrary.” 2 This
mantra has become the rule today—at home.
[...]
In Exposed, I proposed a new way to understand how power circulates in the
digital age and, especially, a new way to comprehend our willingness to expose
ourselves to private corporations and the government alike. The metaphors
commonly used to describe our digital condition, such as the “surveillance
state,” Michel Foucault’s panopticon prison, or even George Orwell’s Big
Brother, are inadequate, I argued there. In the new digital age we are not forcibly
imprisoned in panoptic cells. There is no “telescreen” anchored to the wall of our
apartments by the state. No one is trying to crush our passions, or wear us down
into submission with the smell of boiled cabbage and old rag mats, coarse soap,
and blunt razors. The goal is not to displace our pleasures with hatred—with
“hate” sessions, “hate songs,” “hate weeks.” Today, instead, we interact by
means of “likes,” “shares,” “favorites,” “friending,” and “following.” We
gleefully hang smart TVs on the wall that record everything we say and all our
preferences. The drab uniforms and grim grayness of Orwell’s 1984 have been
replaced by the iPhone 5c in its radiant pink, yellow, blue, and green. “Colorful
through and through,” its marketing slogan promises, and the desire for color-
filled objects—for the sensual swoosh of a sent e-mail, the seductive click of the
iPhone camera “shutter,” and the “likes,” clicks, and hearts that can be earned by
sharing—seduce us into delivering ourselves to the surveillance technologies.
And as the monitoring and marketing of our private lives changes who we
sharing—seduce us into delivering ourselves to the surveillance technologies.
And as the monitoring and marketing of our private lives changes who we
are, power circulates in a new way. Orwell depicted the perfect totalitarian
society. Guy Debord described ours rather as a society of the spectacle, in which
the image makers shape how we understand the world and ourselves. Michel
Foucault spoke instead of “the punitive society” or what he called
“panopticism,” drawing on Jeremy Bentham’s design of the panoptic prison.
Gilles Deleuze went somewhat further and described what he called “societies of
control.” But in our digital age, total surveillance has become inextricably linked
with pleasure. We live in a society of exposure and exhibition, an expository
society.
[...]
And that’s what happened: taxpayers would pay the telecoms to hold the data
for the government. So, before, AT&T surreptitiously provided our private
personal digital data to the intelligence services free of charge. Now, American
taxpayers will pay them to collect and hold on to the data for when the
intelligence services need them. A neoliberal win-win solution for everyone—
except, of course, the ordinary, tax-paying citizen who wants a modicum of
privacy or protection from the counterinsurgency.
[...]
In my previous book, however, I failed to fully grasp how our expository
society fits with the other features of our contemporary political condition—
from torture, to Guantánamo, to drone strikes, to digital propaganda. In part, I
could not get past the sharp contrast between the fluidity of our digital surfing
and surveillance on the one hand, and the physicality of our military
interventions and use of torture on the other. To be sure, I recognized the deadly
reach of metadata and reiterated those ominous words of General Michael
Hayden, former director of both the NSA and the CIA: “We kill people based on
metadata.” 20 And I traced the haunting convergence of our digital existence and
of correctional supervision: the way in which the Apple Watch begins to
function like an electronic bracelet, seamlessly caging us into a steel mesh of
digital traces. But I was incapable then of fully understanding the bond between
digital exposure and analog torture.
It is now clear, though, that the expository society fits seamlessly within our
new paradigm of governing. The expository society is precisely what allows the
counterinsurgency strategies to be applied so impeccably “at home” to the very
people who invented modern warfare. The advent of the expository society, as
well as the specific NSA surveillance programs, makes domestic total
information awareness possible, and in turn lays the groundwork for the other
two prongs of counterinsurgency in the domestic context.
This diff is collapsed.
Click to expand it.
Preview
0%
Loading
Try again
or
attach a new file
.
Cancel
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Save comment
Cancel
Please
register
or
sign in
to comment