Sci-Fi Stories That Predicted the Surveillance State

Daniel_Stuckey writes "Just to address one thing straight away: one of your favorite science fiction stories dealing, whether directly or indirectly, with surveillance is bound to be left off this list. And 1984's a given, so it's not here. At any rate, the following books deal in their own unique way with surveillance. Some address the surveillance head-on, while others speculate on inter-personal intelligence gathering, or consider the subject in more oblique ways. Still others distill surveillance down to its essence: as just one face of a much larger, all-encompassing system of control, that proceeds from the top of the pyramid down to its base."

Comments

Nothing to predict

[hessian]

All technology is used by those who are in power, or want power.

That surveillance is one of those powers isn't particularly new. People had networks of spies in ancient times.

The real question is the people in power. They will have this power, and they will use it; toward what end? And, what is their level of moral rectitude?

I don't think we can use rules, laws and regulations to keep them in line. They need to be good people.

Re:Nothing to predict

[i.r.id10t]

Again, the reasoning behind the 2nd amendment here in the US.

If "they" won't be good for the right reasons, then fear is a good motivator.

That said, how about a more recent book or pair of books? Little Brother and Homeland both by Cory Doctorow @ craphound.com

Re:Nothing to predict

[TomR teh Pirate]

Please. The 2nd Amendment has never, ever done anything to prevent the government from steadily eroding 1st-Amendment, 4th-Amendment, or any-other-Amendment rights. Don't like NSA spying? Where are the 2nd Amendment nuts to put things right? Oh that's right...they're cooped up in fox holes in Idaho, where they've had their asses handed to them on an as-needed basis not by the US Army, but by tiny little SWAT teams. It's a tired trope, and frankly laughable.

Re:Nothing to predict

[mirix]

I keep hearing this line... but the US govn't has been rotten to the core for ages, and I still see no uprising.

When is this 'refreshing the tree of liberty' thing going to happen? Never?

They don't seem to be terribly afraid of your pea-shooters, either... letting people have guns is apparently less of a threat to power than losing votes due to further restricting them. They get to run roughshod over all the other rights, as long as folks are satisfied with having their arms.

Re:Nothing to predict

[bdwebb]

The idea is that every citizen in the country has a right to bear arms so that, in the event the government decides they want power indefinitely and implements a new governmental structure, there are millions of guns and citizens to prevent them from outright declaring the constitution invalid. The fact that our constitutional rights and amendments have been ERODED over years seems instead of simply stricken from the record to me represents a direct result of the 2nd amendment's existence..otherwise we would never have returned from martial law following any one of the wars that our country has gone through. Until the "Patriot" Act was introduced, the government was essentially unable to find and/or put into law an overarching 'workaround' that allows them to essentially do whatever they want. This is being a bit general but unless you're retarded you know what I'm getting at.

Maybe instead of the random errant 'nuts' that you describe we should all take a personal responsibility and march on Washington and force our elected officials out of office for not working as agents of the people and therefore violating the entire purpose of their postings. Most of those 'nuts' were sane people driven to paranoia by the things that most of us ignore outright as SOP for the government. Maybe if we were all a little nuttier and didn't have one-dimensional opinions like yours, we wouldn't have things like PRISM and the Patriot Act.

Re:Nothing to predict

[BlueStrat]

Please. The 2nd Amendment has never, ever done anything to prevent the government from steadily eroding 1st-Amendment, 4th-Amendment, or any-other-Amendment rights.

Wrong.

Might want to research what occurred in Athens, TN in the 1946 "Battle of Athens".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)

Might also want to find out what's happened through history to people who have been disarmed by their governments.

Innocents Betrayed: The True Story of Gun Control http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPMqfXIJpNE

The 2A isn't about civilians going toe-to-toe with a regular army. It's about making it a very costly proposition for enemies of the people of the US both foreign and domestic.

Strat

Re:Nothing to predict

[lightknight]

The 2nd Amendment isn't meant, necessarily, for the populace to storm the Senate every single time they pass something that is disagreed with; you do its proponents a dishonour to paint them this way.

The 2nd Amendment is a poison pill, a reminder in a way, for the day that comes sooner or later, as no government can resist decay, when its own must dismember it, turn the soil, and grow something new. It's there to remind them that what they are doing is the right thing, that they have the complete backing of the original progenitors of this government to slay the Leviathan when it forgets its contract, and believes itself to be God. That's so they do not shed a tear at its funeral, and do not tarry from the work that will need to be done, as quickly or slowly as they prefer, when the time comes. Contrary to the Supreme Court's belief that it is the sole interpreter of the US Constitution, a mistruth that has been propagated for far too long as it is, the power has, and always will, rest with the People. I do, however, find it touching that the US Government would prefer to hold court over whether it is following its own social contract inside one of its own courts....stocked with its own choice of judges.

Re:Nothing to predict

[quenda]

The government still changes by means of election,

So far as I can see, the election changes very little. Giving people a choice of two figureheads is not democracy.
Real democracy needs transparency, accountability and rule of law. Whether there is one party, or two slightly different parties, running things is a relatively minor point.

Re:Nothing to predict

[C0R1D4N]

Small arms keeping everyone armed is still a good fighting force even without drones and missiles. While the second amendment only applies to personal weapons and not artillery or ordinance the US govt is unlikely to launch cruise missiles into its own infrastructure to put down rebellion. In a true civil war the military itself will divide and both sides will have access to military hardware.

Re:Nothing to predict

[dkleinsc]

They don't seem to be terribly afraid of your pea-shooters, either... letting people have guns is apparently less of a threat to power than losing votes due to further restricting them.

Why would they be afraid of guns, when their side has drones, tanks, ICBMs, sonic weapons (these have already been deployed against peaceful protests), smart bombs, a state-of-the-art spying network, sophisticated propaganda systems, etc?

Besides, if you really wanted to hurt the people that control this country, you'd:
A. Organize massive labor strikes. I'm talking "Nobody is working in California this week" kind of massive.
B. Stop shopping as much as possible.
The reason is that the money they use to control everything has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is from the pockets of the rest of us.

Re:Nothing to predict

[xstonedogx]

I think you greatly underestimate how difficult it is to wage war on your own populace. Imagine Iraq, but with everyone armed, your own troops defecting, and every person you kill potentially related in some way to people who are on your side. Oh, and any infrastructure you destroy is your own.

Re:Nothing to predict

[AHuxley]

The US gov will try to hide form the optics of a "mass arrest".
Every political leader understands Tiananmen Square, the US had its Bonus Army en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army
The US seems to be going for generational change re the 2nd Amendment- taxation, total registration, education (via youth, movies, tv), criminalization, locked transportation away from any ammo, more police questions in legal open carry states.
Your 2nd Amendment "should" cover some basic gun rights in your city or State, but jail time and fines might be the everyday reality despite Federal court cases over the years.
The US gov has learned from the Vietnam protests that "mass arrests" include some very well connected authors, lawyers, wealthy students and press.
With the risk of HD footage and sound, a good legal team a day in open court is not the the chilling effect it once was.
The US gov seems to favour infiltration, the mass use of state and federal "Agent provocateur" (infiltrate left and right wing groups and ensure crimes on camera) i.e. group leaders can be arrested just before protests
The protesters are then offered deals to bring in more quality arrests, after an event to be protested are offered 'fines' vs risking court, turned into tame busy work movements or people are moved around Federal jail system for a few week, months..
The individual is broken with lack of sleep, food, no contact with their legal team, medication withdrawl, or face a type of "Soviet punitive psychiatry" until their paperwork is found.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MERRIMAC
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_RESISTANCE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Core
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/04/18/patriot_games
Show the evolution of US thinking on ideas like "mass arrest" - go for the person. Map out then tame, shape any "movement" leaving nothing but informants and tame groups ready to join any real protesters.

Re:Nothing to predict

[BlueStrat]

The second amendment was because the Founding Fathers feared a standing army.

That reason is only one of multiple reasons for the 2A. Read some of the letters and other writings of Washington, Jefferson, etc. Read the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers and Common Sense.

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence ⦠from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable ⦠the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference â" they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington

"The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside ⦠Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." - George Mason - Co-author of the Second Amendment
during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788

It's impossible to eliminate guns in the US short of turning it into N. Korea.on steroids and locking pretty much everyone up in camps. As long as the US Government has guns and large, ridiculously-porous borders, the criminals will be armed and they will be the only civilians with guns.

If a civil war broke out in the US, it's guaranteed the military will fracture. Not only is the US military all-volunteer, but much of it is currently made up of National Guard. They ain't all gonna snap a salute and frag grandma and the babies, regardless of being labeled "domestic terrorists/rebels/insurgents", or whatever lame dissociative label the government attaches to them. They're not all dumb enough to believe obvious BS, or to all go along with it.

More than you think will instead reply to such orders with something like; "I'm sorry Sir, that's an illegal order. Under the UCMJ and standing/general orders, I and those under my command are forced to disobey your illegal order and obligated to immediately inform your superiors in the command chain of the details of this incident." (Not sure of the exact wording and language. Probably varies by the branch of service. Didn't feel like doing the search.)

Strat

Re:Nothing to predict

[smooth wombat]

To an outsider it just looks like there's no difference at all between the parties, and that everything is set up to try to force people to think "well if I don't vote [Republican|Democrat], then those damn [Democrats|Republicans] will get in!"

There are many of us on the inside who have the same opinion.

Not 1984

[Solandri]

The book you want is Huxley's Brave New World. Instead of overlords controlling people through power and domination, people allow themselves to be controlled in exchange for the pleasantries of modern life - sex, entertainment, and other trivialities. As long as they get as much of those as they want, they don't give a damn what else is going on in society or who is controlling it. As the saying goes, you attract more flies with honey...

Re:Not 1984

[jimbrooking]

Bread and circuses, the Romans knew, were necessary for a well-ordered society.

Re:Not 1984

[newcastlejon]

The book you want is Huxley's Brave New World. Instead of overlords controlling people through power and domination, people allow themselves to be controlled in exchange for the pleasantries of modern life - sex, entertainment, and other trivialities. As long as they get as much of those as they want, they don't give a damn what else is going on in society or who is controlling it. As the saying goes, you attract more flies with honey...

There was much more to it than that. The Savage (whose name escapes me) rejected all those supposedly pleasant things while the citizens, having been conditioned since before they were born, accepted them. Take the epsilons, for example: they weren't afforded much at all in the way of luxury, yet still served the state and might have fought to preserve the status quo if their development hadn't been retarded to the point where they couldn't even grasp the concept.

When people talk about Ninteen Eighty-Four, they often focus on the telescreen, to the exclusion of the mass surveillance of citizens by their peers. Similarly, with Brave New World the state essentially breeding people to be satisfied with what little they have takes second place to soma and free love that is (perversely) mandatory.

There was a pause; then the voice began again.
"Alpha children wear grey. They work much harder than we do, because they're so frightfully clever. I'm really awfully glad I'm a Beta, because I don't work so hard. And then we are much better than the Gammas and Deltas. Gammas are stupid. They all wear green, and Delta children wear khaki. Oh no, I don't want to play with Delta children. And Epsilons are still worse. They're too stupid to be able "

The Director pushed back the switch. The voice was silent. Only its thin ghost continued to mutter from beneath the eighty pillows. "They'll have that repeated forty or fifty times more before they wake; then again on Thursday, and again on Saturday. A hundred and twenty times three times a week for thirty months. After which they go on to a more advanced lesson." ... "Till at last the child's mind is these suggestions, and the sum of the suggestions is the child's mind. And not the child's mind only. The adult's mind too—all his life long. The mind that judges and desires and decides—made up of these suggestions. But all these suggestions are our suggestions!

As for 1984, literary analysis was never my strong suit, but if asked I'd say that Orwell was afraid that an oppressive state would turn men against their fellows; I can only imagine what he would say about a world where people surrender their privacy willingly.

A little off beat, but...

[msobkow]

I always thought Star Trek had a little bit of surveillance society in it, because the computer was always listening for you to say "Computer" and give it a command. Mind you, the Enterprise *was* as close to a military ship as the ST society had in the original series, so I guess it might be understandable.

Re:A little off beat, but...

[safetyinnumbers]

And it would give someone's location whenever asked.

Stainless Steel Rat called it frighteningly close

[thinktech]

I'm disappointed that Harry Harrison's "Stainless Steel Rat" is not at the top of this list. Written in 1961, it's entire premise is about a thief that operates in a society with computer surveillance tracking everyones every move. Facial recognition, camera and car tracking, etc, etc. I've re-read this many times and it's almost frightening how close it is to reality. Even to the point of most of the populace being comfortable with the intrusion.

Philip K. Dick - A Scanner Darkly

[adminstring]

...is another classic that belongs on the list.

Much more shocked

[barlevg]

I was much more surprised to read, in an out-of-print '80s novel written by a lesser-known SF author, about drone operators remotely carrying out surgical strikes halfway across the planet, all while being denied any credit or commendation because the traditional military community doesn't consider them "pilots."