Slashdot Mirror


China's All-Seeing Eye

krou writes "Naomi Klein writes in Rolling Stone Magazine about China's Panopticon-like experiment called 'Golden Shield' taking place in Shenzhen using technology supplied by companies such as IBM, Honeywell, and General Electric. Klein writes: 'Chinese citizens will be watched around the clock through networked CCTV cameras and remote monitoring of computers. They will be listened to on their phone calls, monitored by digital voice-recognition technologies. Their Internet access will be aggressively limited through the country's notorious system of online controls known as the "Great Firewall." Their movements will be tracked through national ID cards with scannable computer chips and photos that are instantly uploaded to police databases and linked to their holder's personal data.' According to Klein, this is more than just a Chinese experiment, it's also one that holds ramifications for America and elsewhere: '...the most efficient delivery system for capitalism is actually a communist-style police state... The global corporations currently earning superprofits from this social experiment are unlikely to be content if the lucrative new market remains confined to cities such as Shenzhen. Like everything else assembled in China with American parts, Police State 2.0 is ready for export to a neighborhood near you.'"

32 of 358 comments (clear)

  1. uh oh by the+brown+guy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Anonymous Coward? Not for long...

    --
    Orbis terrarum est non altus satis
  2. heh, well ibm helped nazis too, so why not by coolsnowmen · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "using technology supplied by companies such as IBM, Honeywell, and General Electric."

    IBM making money at the expense of morality; nothing new here.

    http://www.ibmandtheholocaust.com/articles/auschwitz.html

    1. Re:heh, well ibm helped nazis too, so why not by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      From a purely economic point of view, the borders between fascism (of which national socialism is a variant, mixed in with some chauvinism) and capitalism are blurry. Or rather, capitalism as we know it.

      In a fascist economy, everything is secondary to industrial growth. It's an "ask what you can do for your country" world. You better not ask what your country can do for you, since you don't count. The strength of your country and its economy does. This goes hand in hand with laws that prefer the interests of industry and commerce, while ignoring the needs of the people.

      Bluntly, this is closer to what China is like today than any socialist or communist model. And thinking about it, we're moving there, too.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  3. Re:Bla bla bla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Bla bla bla... capitalist this... panopticon that... bla bla bla." Rolling Stone magazine? Give me a break. Excellent argument, so good that it does not and have to touch any of the issues raised by rolling stone magazine. (Even rolling stone magazine have published many good and informative article with regards to politics). Truely blah blah blah
  4. Re:Bla bla bla by commodoresloat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Rolling Stone magazine? Give me a break. Despite its counterculture reputation and its focus as a music/gossip magazine, Rolling Stone is consistently one of the better sources of news analysis available. This article is an excellent example of that, if you actually bother to read it (and it has already generated quite a bit of attention outside of slashdot, whether or not you agree with Klein's political leanings). An even finer example, IMHO, is Wallace-Wells' critique of the war on drugs.
  5. 1984 Quote by EEPROMS · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed--if all records told the same tale--then the lie passed into history and became truth. 'Who controls the past' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.'"

  6. George Orwell, anyone? by niktemadur · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Fortunately, somebody had the vision to warn us about this sort of thing, sixty years ago. I'm willing to bet that in China, a land where the government censors almost everything in sight, Orwell is banned.

    BTW, has 1984 ever been translated into Mandarin? If so, whoever did it, that person should have a statue erected in every Chinatown in the western world, just like Dr Sun Yat-Sen eventually in Shanghai and Beijing.

    --
    Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    1. Re:George Orwell, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I mentioned 1984 to a friend that lives in China and she has never heard of that book, or Orwell. So, yes, it is banned.

      Wow, somebody give this guy a Nobel Prize for his exhaustive research and well-reasoned conclusion.

    2. Re:George Orwell, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      okay, i am from china.

      i think many slashdotters have an incomplete information about the current status of internet freedom in china. i saw many threads on great firewall in slashdot. but hardly any discussion on the free speech on china's internet. presumably, i think, nobody reads chinese internet forum.

      if you look at some largest internet forums: tianyaclub.com, netease.com, sina.com. you will be very surprised to find out the freedom of speech.
      taking tianyaclub.com for example, it has 270,000 online readers (statistical data @ moment of writing this comment). old bbs-style threads are full of criticisms to the government. the official propaganda TV/newspapers are frequently derided. china's internet is not entirely as free as in the states. but freedom of speech is not entirely suppressed either. as long as the language doesn't
      cross the line, i.e., overthrowing the government, nobody cares. polices are busy at keeping the social unrest at poor rural areas under control.

      i had read rolling stone's article. frankly, i am quite surprised by the reaction. there are little discussion on the internet here. it is not that it is a tabooed topic. pretty much every thing could be openly debated on internet here. (of course, not including getting ride of ruling party). as far as i can tell, people are more concerned about corruption, rising house price, inflation.

      btw, George Orwell's books are available here in english book store. 1984, animal farm,etc...

    3. Re:George Orwell, anyone? by mppm · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I was in SZ a few months ago and will go back in the Fall. My girlfriend is there and she just got her new ID card. For the casual visitor the last thing anyone thinks of is that one is in a police state. There are security and police everywhere, but they mostly look bored and, as far as I could tell, they didn't have much to do. One is very safe walking around, even late at night. Try that in Philly, or Miami, or any large American city. Of course the population is mostly homogenous--they are all Chinese and, as such, have a common ground. The only thing keeping the Chinese from taking over the world is the communist party. The red tape (no pun) makes doing business very awkward. If they can kick the CCP we will all be speaking Mandarin in a few generations. I'd much rather live in SZ than, say, the Middle East or even Europe, now. My impression was that, in general, they really like Americans. Not many places in the world can say that. I'd suggest people go there and spend a month or two. Get your own ideas and make up your own mind.

    4. Re:George Orwell, anyone? by Squeeze+Truck · · Score: 4, Informative

      The bookseller in front of my apartment (Dalian, China) has about twenty titles in English. 1984 is three of them.
      Hell, I picked up a copy of the Federalist Papers at the Xinhua state-controlled bookstore.

      You guys need to calm down and stop jumping to conclusions. Very little is banned, and that not very well.

      --

      "Reactionaries must be deprived of the right to voice their opinions; only the people have that right." - Mao

    5. Re:George Orwell, anyone? by Jesus+IS+the+Devil · · Score: 4, Informative

      Um I don't think so. I've been those forums. If you write anything critical and have facts to back it up, often times it'll be closed/deleted. Just because someone is able to voice their opinion for a few minutes doesn't mean it will stick.

      There indeed is a lot of censorship. When was the last time you heard the media criticize the government? Like never. And what does 99% of the people see? Internet forum postings or television/newspaper?

      So to say that China is "almost" as free as other democratic countries is just as ludicrous as saying a mouse is as big as an elephant.

      --

      eTrade SUCKS
    6. Re:George Orwell, anyone? by CodeBuster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      as long as the language doesn't cross the line, i.e., overthrowing the government, nobody cares. Nobody cares as long as the person saying it is a nobody and remains obscure. However, it is convenient for those in power to have the ability to go back and dig up dirt on anyone who becomes a "trouble maker" or problem to somebody in power in the future. The fact that governments have these powers is dangerous, whether or not the actually use them, because they *could* use them if they wanted to against their political opponents. The mere suggestion or threat that the powers could be used or abused is enough to create fear and control. In fact, this was part of the original theory behind the Panopticon, it was not necessary to actually monitor the prisoners at all times because the prisoners could not tell when they were being monitored or when a previously made recording (once recording and database technology became practical) might be reviewed. The mere threat or possibility of monitoring created fear and control.
    7. Re:George Orwell, anyone? by CodeBuster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      One is very safe walking around, even late at night. Try that in Philly, or Miami, or any large American city. There are probably very few people who would take the position that a Police State is completely devoid of any possible benefits, fringe or otherwise. However, most of us who live in Europe and the United States are of the opinion that those benefits, which are probably few and far between, are not worth the costs of giving up what we regard as essential rights and freedoms. I for one will take a little crime any day if the alternative is effectively unlimited secret police powers to search, seize, and detain at will. I would rather have my freedoms and take my chances with those other people who might abuse theirs than see everyone stripped of their freedoms in the name of public safety.
  7. No problem by mark72005 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Put MediaDefender on it!

  8. Re:Is it April 1, 2009? by NoobixCube · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's nothing to do with them being Communists. Actually, if they were to do something with Communist motivation, it would be feeding the poor. This is more about stamping out sedition. Something any government could do, completely separate from their political style.

    --
    Admit it. You post strawman arguments as AC so you get modded Insightful for refuting them, rather than Troll
  9. Re:Is it April 1, 2009? by niktemadur · · Score: 4, Interesting

    These are Communists in name only, on two fronts:

    - Stalinism wasn't Communist, it was Stalinism. In that regard, whatever China's government practices, it's not Communism.
    - Communism on paper was never about putting antifreeze in toothpaste or lead in child toy's paint. That's the exact opposite, Xtreme Capitalism.

    It's heartbreaking how the least enlightened people end up running so many countries, and that goes for China present and past, too.

    Ever heard about The Great Sparrow Campaign? In the late fifties, the Mao government decided that sparrows, who ate seeds, were a public menace and implemented a nationwide campaign to kill the sparrows. They succeded, by having the population bang pots and pans in the streets, keeping the sparrows in the air until they dropped dead from exhaustion.

    As a result, locusts flourished, with their natural predator virtually gone, devastating the countryside, generating a famine that killed, by most estimates, between 35 and 40 million Chinese. All of it covered up, of course, there is not a single photograph that documents this massive catastrophe, even in the second half of the XX Century.

    Another fine example of unthinkably ignorant and incompetent government at work, in full effect, and never mind the symbolic Communist tag.

    --
    Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
  10. Re:Goodness, what trash by squidinkcalligraphy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    With due respect, this article isn't about a totalitarian state that watches it's citizens; it's about the fact that US companies are the one's who are making it possible.

    --
    "I think it would be a good idea" Gandhi, on Western Civilisation
  11. 1982 Quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Up here in space / I'm looking down on you,
    My lasers trace / everything you do,
    You think you've private lives / think nothing of the kind,
    There is no true escape / I'm watching all the time!

    CHORUS:
    I'm made of metal, my circuits gleam
    I am perpetual, I keep the country clean.
    I'm elected, electric spy,
    I'm protected, electric eye.

    Always in focus / you can't feel my stare,
    I zoom into you / you dont know I'm there.
    I take a pride in probing / all your secret moves,
    My tearless retina takes / pictures that can prove...

    (Chorus)

    Electric eye (in the sky)
    Feel my stare (always there)
    There's nothing you can do about it, develop and expose,
    I feed upon your every thought, and so my power grows!

    (Chorus)

    I'm Elected -
    Protected -
    Detective -
    Electric -
    Eye.

    - Judas Priest, Electric Eye, 1982.

    Orwell's 1984 isn't the only functional specification out there, after all.

    Germany was the proof-of-concept. Stalin's Russia and the Cold War Warsaw Pact countries were the alpha, which failed due to scaling concerns. China is the beta test site and release-candidate. Unistat goes live in 2009.

  12. Re:I'm being entirely serious. by ushering05401 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Be your own news source, instead of settling for second-hand sensationalism."

    So you are suggesting that once we succeed at being our own news source we keep that info to ourselves? If I chose Rolling Stone to disseminate the information I gathered firsthand it would immediately be devalued?

    The RS article is old news, all of which I have seen reported elsewhere in recent weeks, but I fail to see how it is counterproductive to publicize the evolution of surveillance states.

    On a side note, Rolling Stone being a glossy mag came about as a nod to the power of photojournalism in popular culture. There are anthologies published of RS photos and they hold significant historical and artistic value. As a disclaimer, I haven't been interested enough in pop culture to actually pick up an issue in years, but that doesn't mean the value isn't still there for others.

  13. Re:Bla bla bla by Davemania · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I am a bit dumbfounded by your approach to reading article. You need trust to read something ? What happened to critical anaylsis. I think most "reasonable" people will read an article and analysis the content of the article rather than taking the content on blind faith. You've basically judged an article simply by the publisher without even considering any of the issues brought up from the article. It seems the question isn't whether you should trust it or not, its whether you can make an informed judgment, and it doesn't seem you can.

  14. China is not commie by gregbot9000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And it's not Capitalist, it's a wonderful halfway point called fascist.

    From TFA: "Remember how we've always been told that free markets and free people go hand in hand? That was a lie. It turns out that the most efficient delivery system for capitalism is actually a communist-style police state"

    Free markets require the freedom to chose without coercion in order to be efficient for everyone involved. China does not have a free market. The transactions are not efficient for the low man on the totem pole, namely the worker. China is fascist, and the country is a giant form of monopoly that has huge profit margins by manipulating the labor supply and the rights afforded to individuals to drive down costs. Just because China is having huge profits does not mean they are more efficient.

    A lot of people will go on about the horrible violation to civil liberties all of these things China does are, but no one ever talks about the horrible damage these things do to the economic well being of the country.
    China IS going to undergo serious reform or revolution. It won't be possible to maintain any level of efficiency without the proper rule of law or a Meritocracy. China WILL become more efficient once more people start demanding a larger share, and the only way they can do this is through greater representation and markets, markets that need informed consumers who are not being forced to act against their best interests.
    All successful revolutions have come from the middle to upper class capitalists who are feed up with kings and lords ruling by mandate cutting into their bottom line. China is no different.
    From TFA "With political unrest on the rise across China, the government hopes to use the surveillance shield to identify and counteract dissent before it explodes into a mass movement"
    If someone is dissenting that means there is something that needs to be changed. That is the best example of why china, like the USSR, will hit a standard of living wall. Efficiency requires freedom.

  15. Re:I'm being entirely serious. by theheadlessrabbit · · Score: 4, Funny

    But you might start by getting involved. Be your own news source, instead of settling for second-hand sensationalism. great idea!
    how can we trust these lousy reporters, 'burn the lot of them' I say.

    Lets have everyone, all 300 million of you Americans go and pack up all your bags, move to China, walk up to a chinese government official, and ask them "what's going on?"

    thats a brilliant idea! you should go and get right on that.

    or, for the sake of efficiency, we can have a small number of people go into an area and report on things for the rest of us!
    yea!
    We could even give those people special training!
    Maybe they could even make a career out of going to these far away places on our behalf and reporting on events, situations and politics! what a brilliant idea!
    --
    -I only code in BASIC.-
  16. Re:Bla bla bla by niktemadur · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I agree that Rolling Stone is mostly padded with disposable fluff. But they always take their journalism seriously, so it's a great, subversive starting point for a good chunk of young people: buy the issue for their article on Panic At The Disco, then when you're bored, end up reading the article on how the Bush government has deregulated industrial pollution. And suddenly, shazam! A spark has gone off in your mind and your curiosity is piqued, and you've begun your life's journey as a conscious citizen.

    You know what the Greek term is for the citizen who does not participate in public affairs? Idiotis. Rolling Stone has planted the seed to obliterate the idiotis for a huge amount of people.

    --
    Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
  17. Re:Klein's a Leftist with an agenda, not a journal by canecubo · · Score: 4, Informative
    "To see the illogic of this, all one has to do is see that the countries that are the freest also tend to be the most capitalistic. The ones that are the most politically repressive also tend to be the most anti-capitalist."

    Sadly, you're so blinded by your ideology you don't even see the lack of factual accuracy in this statement. There is a long tradition of authoritarian capitalism, here are just a few, for your reflection:

    • Tsarist Russia
    • The Second Empire (Napoleon III)
    • Prussia, later Germany
    • Nazi Germany
    • The authoritarian/fascist states of central and eastern Europe between the wars and during WWII
    • Spain under Franco
    • Greece under the Colonels
    • Iran under the Shah -- a violent and repressive regime if ever there was one
    • Chile under Pinochet
    • Brazil under authoritarian military rule
    • for that matter, all other Latin American dictatorships: Mexico, Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay, Peru, etc. etc.
    • Indonesia under Suharto
    • South Africa under Apartheid
    • The Philippines under Marcos
    • South Korea under Military Rule
    So as you see, the correlation between capitalism and true democracy is actually quite weak. I don't think the facts can be accused of being "illogical".
  18. Re:Goodness, what trash by demachina · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "that modern China represents a form of authoritarian capitalism whose efficiency is quite remarkable"

    I think its open to debate if China is remarkable for its "efficiency". It mostly just has lots of cheap labor, no labor unions and very weak pollution and safety regulation which means its a cheap place to do things like manufacturing. There are quite a few things working against its economic efficiency.

    A. The party officials that run the place are extremely corrupt. Corruption is good for business only if it swings your way. If it swings against you, or for your competition it is quite bad for business, and the unpredictability of corruption is especially bad for business.

    B. The legal frameworks in the country are extremely poor. This is a plus if you ware a bootlegger ripping off your competition's product, its not so good if your IP and products are the ones being ripped off.

    C. Not sure exactly why but China did apparently pass new labor laws around the first of the year and they undid some of the slave labor aspects of being a worker in China. Workers did actually get some rights under the new laws and it appears they are going to cause a significant spike in the cost of labor, along with the simple fact labor isn't as abundant in China as it once was. This along with a number of other factors is causing wage inflation and making China less and less attractive to Capitalism. The factors that made China boom can also work against it and lead to a bust and for the boom to move elsewhere.

    D. China's one child policy is starting to cause a severe shortage of young workers since it began in 1979. Their population is going to start become senior citizen heavy like Japan and the U.S. which has a lot of negative economic consequences. Most older workers can't stand the dormitories and 6-7 day work weeks in China's factories so as the young labor pool drops its going to hammer their sweat shop manufacturing industries.

    E. Censorship might have its positives in that it helps eliminate dissent but it also means you can do some incredibly stupid stuff and get away with it because you can suppress knowledge of your stupidity. A free press and a free Internet can server a useful purpose in that it can eventually expose corruption, incompetence and stupidity and led to corrective action if the press and freedom of speech works. For example in the U.S. the free press went dysfunctional after 9/11 and untold stupidity was perpetrated by the Bush administration like the war in Iraq, torture and domestic spying. The press still isn't very healthy but America has started to throw the Republican's out of power for their incompetence, though the Democrats are much of an improvement. In China is if the ruling party turns bad, there are no alternatives except for changing one set of Communist party leaders for another in an internal power struggle.

    F. The spiking cost of oil is suddenly starting to work against globalization. Not sure how accurate it is but someone on CNBC said the cost to ship a container from China to the U.S. has quadrupled recently from $2K to $8K and if oil prices continue to spike its going to be less and less attractive to ship goods half way around the world. Its already working against heavy goods with a low labor component like steel. The more expensive fuel gets the less likely you are going to offshore manufacturing for the U.S. and Europe to China. Mexico may become increasingly attractive again for the U.S. labor pool.

    --
    @de_machina
  19. If it hasn't worked for England, why anywhere? by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Despite the presence of many centralized CCD cameras in London, crime levels have yet to be reduced.

    If police cannot effectively track and follow criminals, what makes anyone think China can do any better tracking and following dissidents? It's a lot more obvious on a camera when a real crime is being committed, far less so when a thought crime is...

    What makes anyone think we should not laugh at the Chinese for attempting this? Let them waste their money on this fruitless pursuit of technology that someone with a square of cloth or a bit of paint can work around.

    People would be wise to remember that China has done a lot worse things than point cameras at people in the past. It seems like dissidents would be better off with a China that has fewer actual agents on the streets to collect and track people, and more worthless cameras collecting so much data they are unusable.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  20. Re:Klein's a Leftist with an agenda, not a journal by demachina · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A key point about canecubo's list is that many of these regimes were at least condoned by the U.S. while many were puppet regimes out right installed by the U.S. just because they were anti communist, anti union and pro big business. Nazi Germany was openly embraced by the elites in the U.S. right up to 1939 and sometimes after. George W. Bush's grandfather, for example, was the American banker for the Thiessen family who bankrolled Hitler's rise to power.

    If the United States is the guiding light to Capitalism and Freedom around the world, how come the U.S. is so closely aligned with so many repressive regimes. The answer is because capitalism has no real correlation to freedom. Capitalism is just as much at home in repressive right wing states as it is in liberal democracies. There is no real correlation between economic system and governmental model.

    Capitalism does in fact flourish in right wing states, often very oppressive ones. Unbridled Capitalism has a nasty tendency towards wealth concentration in the hands of an elite few and the people with all the money almost inevitably seek to control all the levers of political power because it protects, supports and nourishes their economic interests. This is a cocktail which often leads to right wing dictatorial governments which are no friends to freedom. In particular they often are extremely fond of breaking up labor unions, because labor unions are good for workers but bad for profitability. They are also fond of rigging elections or getting rid of them all together because ruling elites are small and easily outvoted if you let all the poor unwashed masses have an actual say in their government. In the U.S. this has been accomplished by a two party system where both parties are controlled by the ruling elites and which never offer an actual choice to ordinary people.

    The U.S. being a free society can mostly be attributed to the immense wisdom of our founding fathers who did create a remarkable framework for a free society. Unfortunately, its been slowly unraveling ever since. I think if the founding fathers saw the horror that is the Federal government, the state of civil liberties, and our two party system today, they would no doubt launch a second revolution to topple it and restore the government outlined in the Constitution which has been almost completely obliterated by our two political parties and the corporations and ruling elites which own them.

    Capitalism is about profit, pure and simple. Freedom doesn't really have anything at all to do with profitability and often gets in its way. Capitalism and Freedom can coexist, in fact Capitalism is a helpful ingredient for freedom since it is extremely beneficial to control your own wealth rather than letting a bureaucratic state do it for you. Unfortunately Capitalism can and does flourish in repressive right wing states, always has and probably always will.

    --
    @de_machina
  21. Re:Bla bla bla by MrHanky · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, why develop critical reading skills when you can rather lay your trust in known authority. If a source is good, the information will be good, if a source is bad, the information will be wrong. I know this because everything I read confirms my worldview.

  22. Re:I'm being entirely serious. by Christoph · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Be your own news source...

    I have visited Shenzhen twice and posted my photos of Shenzhen. I took photos in public with a large camera/lens with no trouble from the authorities. I was hassled by the shoe-shine scammers and massage parlor hawkers near the Shangri-La hotel in Luohu, but my photos were not sensored by customs and my gear was not stolen/confiscated.

  23. Re:Is it April 1, 2009? by Asic+Eng · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, is the Pope catholic? Seriously - is he? That would depend on whether he really believes in the religion he preaches - some Popes in the past did not, but in modern times that's not actually a problem for the catholic church. I'd say the same criteria would have to be applied to any ideology: if you believe in an ideology and base your policy on it - then your reference to it is not just symbolic. Was the Mao regime (and that does not just include himself, but the vast numbers actually running the country) communist? Did they read Marx and believe in his ideas? Who can claim that their claim to be communists is less valid then their own? Is real communism only defined by people who are "theoretical communists" - i.e. people who never actually attempt to run a country on their own? I think Mao has a much better claim.

  24. Re:Bla bla bla by cduffy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, but what you're doing to the article here is called ad hominem, and it's a fallacy. If you want to ignore it on account of the publisher, feel free to do so -- but if you're going to speak regarding the article's merits, it behooves you to read it first.

    It's a heckuvalot more informative than your post, and raises legitimate issues (ie. mechanisms in use to circumvent laws specifically forbidding export of law enforcement equipment to China) even should you choose to ignore the editorializing.