| Phil Burpee |
Phil Burpee, Columnist
They're coming. They've
got HD cameras and some of them are the size of bugs. You can get one
at the Source that you can hover outside your neighbour's bedroom
window with its little video camera whirring away, and post the
results on YouTube right now. Sunbathers, woodland meditators,
roof-top dreamers, solitary contemplatives, lovers on their blanket,
tai-chi dancers, lone riders on the wild range, mothers with babes at
breast, walkers under the sky, placard-carriers,
minders-of-their-own-business, any body, anytime, anywhere -
somewhere there's coming an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) to check
you out. And they are coming in exponential numbers, such that every
precept as to physical privacy in our cityscapes and landscapes and
homescapes will be swept away without regard.
The time of universal
surveillance is upon us. To put it in simplest terms - it won't take
a cruiser with wheels and a driver to nab you for doing 130 on Hwy. 3
- you'll get done by drone, live-streaming from a thousand metres up.
And it will no longer be a mystery as to who is gathered on the steps
of the Legislature protesting dubious or harmful government policy -
video-equipped UAVs with facial-recognition apps will buzz the crowd
like some evil birds, reporting to their masters in the bowels of a
distant security office, marking you for special attention, and
possible apprehension for political deviance. The Eye on the Sky just
took on a disturbing glint.
We've pretty much got
used to the idea of UAVs over the last number of years in the form of
the military drones much-loved of the U.S. military in its various
excursions in the Middle East. So pleased, in fact, have American
authorities become with this technology, that President Obama now far
surpasses his predecessor in the Oval Office in the deployment of
these weaponized flying robots for not only surveillance purposes,
but more pointedly for the targeted killing of distant villains. Not
only does this allow for the taking out of troublesome individuals
deep in enemy territory, but it does so without the spilling of a
drop of Uncle Sam's blood, and far from the prying eyes of either
international media, or the pernickety gaze of the Geneva Convention
on War Crimes, or the similarly inconvenient Rules of Engagement,
which have historically, and necessarily, governed any battlefield -
and without which murder and chaos far exceeding the so-called norms
of conflict quickly devolve.
These are, of course,
geek toys writ large. Military men aren't anywhere near smart enough
to render such magic into actuality. Curious nerds with delicate
fingers and hacker's blood coursing through their veins started to
figure out how to get small, computerized flying machines into the
air years ago. These resultant 'bots', as they're lovingly called,
have now morphed into myriad shapes, forms and applications, up to
and including fighter-jet size beasts costing millions of dollars
each which can do everything a piloted craft can do, but without the
moral or physical variable of having a human being in the cockpit.
Indeed, whereas up until fairly recently any of these machines
(including terrestrial equivalents) required some distant 'pilot' or
'driver' sitting at a computer terminal in an air-conditioned games
room bunker somewhere in Tel Aviv or Kansas to make it go and do what
it was supposed to do, it is now rapidly becoming possible to
mission-program such a device such that it can operate entirely
independent of any overseer, and go about its business using GPS
technology to achieve its destination and affect its appointed job -
such as motoring in about four feet off the ground at a hundred and
fifty miles an hour and exploding amongst a bevy of ne'er-do-wells.
We may recall the crude antecedents of such machines in the form of
the old cruise missile of the eighties and nineties - pretty much
just reef sharks on the evolutionary scale of things - but effective
enough in their day. Program one of these puppies in and blast it off
for glory. Leave some turbans smoking in the rubble. Only now it
might be the size of a hummingbird, and it will have come in through
your bedroom window with the night-breezes - boom. Or perhaps
it is a whole swarm of hummingbirds - boom-ba-da-boom, boom, boom.
Times have changed
though. And whatever you think of President Obama's ongoing rewriting
of the rules of war, the fact is that we have inexorably entered a
new phase of being on this planet. The robots have come. And our deep
and traditional notions of societal and moral constraints are being
rigorously stressed. We already know that much of what we have, since
ages old, considered to be well-worn barriers of privacy have been
significantly eroded with such phenomena as Facebook and on-line life
in general. Now we will have to contend with great waves of UAVs
buzzing around our world on an infinite variety of business. Some of
this business will be highly beneficial mind you - tracking a lost
child, checking crops, covering dangerous news stories, monitoring
the scale and extent of natural disasters, etc. But much of it will
be simply intrusive and well beyond the limits of what we have come
to expect as constituting freedom of movement and a certain
inalienable right to the sanctity of person. The fence is no more.
The whirring birds are gathering.
So here's a now familiar
refrain - "If you're not guilty, you have nothing to fear."
This is the deeply flawed rationale typically touted about by such
the likes as Vic Toews, our Federal Minister of Correct Thinking, or
various police chiefs lamely seeking to assuage public concerns as to
increasingly intrusive forms of internet monitoring and citizen
surveillance in general. This excuse is often and persistently put
forward to cover up fundamental erosion of civil liberties by usually
right-wing elements for whom control is paramount, and any such
niceties as rights of free expression and rights to public
demonstration are troublesome anachronisms - the sooner done away
with the better. In the United States for instance, under the Patriot
Act brought in by Tweedle George and Tweedle Dick, the principle of
habeas corpus has been summarily dumped and discarded. The
implications of this are immeasurable. This principle, which
underlies at the most profound level British Common Law and
jurisprudence, as practiced both in Canada and the U.S. as elemental
to the functioning of liberal democracy, is described as 'a writ
requiring a person to be brought before a judge or into court,
especially to investigate lawfulness
of his restraint.' (underlining mine). Here is the
assumption of innocence until proven guilty, and the compulsion for
the State to account for any such restraint forthwith. Legislation
such as the Patriot Act, which clearly resonates with certain
factions of the current government in Ottawa, seeks to deny a
citizen, on arbitrary grounds, spurious or otherwise, the fundamental
right to be brought before the judiciary, subsequent to any
apprehension, in a timely fashion in order for charges against him or
her to be heard. Without this all-important mechanism, we enter a
dark, Byzantine labyrinth of 'extraordinary rendition', unlawful
detention, assumption of guilt, and a general widening of the
abilities of the State to bypass the courts, and thereby likewise
bypass access to judgement by one's peers - a principle so profound
as to be virtually indistinguishable from what we choose to call
freedom. So, there is room for concern.
Back to the buzzing bots
then. The more we come to accept the breaking down of our right to go
about our lawful business, without undue let or hindrance or
otherwise intrusion, the more we abandon the expectations of same. We
already know there's a good chance a Predator drone is eyeballing us
if we go down to the States for a couple of flats of Budweiser.
That's probably fair enough in the larger scheme of things - borders
are borders and have always been subject to particular attention. But
picture this - you enter a public space to join other citizens in
demanding better accountability on the part of the government of the
day, and are met by one of a swarm of brisk little UAVs, which hovers
momentarily in front of your face, affecting a quick iris scan the
moment you look at it, and then buzzing off, even as it transfers
your biometric data to waiting trolls hunched over flickering
monitors. You've been tagged.
So, on the one hand
we've got some fat, pink frat boys out for a beery weekend at the
beach dispatching their little Radio Shack buddy to live stream a
close-up of some young lady's behind as she tries to relax and enjoy
some peace and quiet under the sun - and at the other extreme we can
see the Ruskies, who just can't let go of the familiar old bludgeon
called Thought Crime, and for whom a girl punk band called Pussy Riot
calling out Church and State for the ogres that they are is seen to
be such a threat that they may be sentenced to seven to ten years in
a labour camp just for thrashing out a one minute rant in a
cathedral.
We're gonna need new
laws if our liberal democracy is to survive. And I'm not confident
that we're going to be able to get on top of this. How do you turn
around mass video surveillance? And perhaps more importantly, how do
you turn around the growing acquiescence to its inevitability? We
have seen the undeniable benefits of citizen vigilance in the squares
of Tehran and Cairo with uploaded cell-phone images, and maybe that
will be the saving grace - almost nothing can be done in secret
anymore, and that's good - so long as we can maintain an open
Internet (another pregnant concern). But it will surely be a running
battle now between those who would keep the medium open, and those
who would constrain it to authoritarian use. Hell, even the CCTV
cameras at the MD dumpster raise the hackles on the back of my neck -
I grew up on the culture of 'Animal Farm' and 'Fahrenheit 451'. And I
live in the country, so if one of the little whirring, prying
monsters comes snooping around our place I can at least take it out
with a .22, like the miserable varmint that it is - but that won't
work for townies. Idiots and sinister schemers are loving these
things.
Well, if you happen to
be sitting on the throne one day soon, browsing through the collected
works of David Suzuki or a luridly detailed copy of 'The Decline and
Fall of the Conservative Party of Canada', leafing quietly through
your seditious material, thinking yourself safe from all prying eyes,
and you perchance to hear a faint buzzy/whirring sort of sound
seemingly emanating from your toilet bowl - and if you have not
indeed been otherwise partaking in unusually gassy foodstuffs - then
I say to you this - flush, flush, flush......flush as though your
very life and freedom depended on it!........ and be afraid!........
be very afraid!..............
Phil Burpee
August 4, 2012

No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for taking the time to comment. Comments are moderated before being published. Please be civil.