4 ms·
>The world of 1984 does indeed seem unsustainable because everything seems to be based on negative emotions, and there are no(?) examples in history of such a s
by cf498 7y ago
>The world of 1984 does indeed seem unsustainable because everything seems to be based on negative emotions, and there are no(?) examples in history of such a system surviving for a significant time.
Unfortunately we are working on more and more technical means which could enable such a system to persist. Many options to overthrow such systems are already getting less and less successful. With scale able mass surveillance it is (or will be in the future) possible to quell any unrest before it becomes mass unrest. Which is not that hard if you have enough information early enough, can actually process that data and have a functioning security apparatus.
To give an example, in Germany Soccer fans are categorized by the police in A - normally peaceful fans, B- open to join a riot and C- looking to start a riot. Majority of fans are category A, a minority are category B and a few are category C. For the police its generally sufficient to quell category C so category B (or even A if things really go south) wont become a problem for them. Similarly, there is a different willingness of people to go out and protest to topple a regime. Its a lot easier to join in when there are already hundred of thousands in the streets but very few will risk trying to start something like that. Being able to prevent the individuals from the last group from acting up is sufficient to quell the threat of a regime getting toppled.
Another point is that surveillance is becoming more and more absolute. Its not just targeted at the population or even the category C equivalent but everyone, including the people keeping the regime running. In the end you are left with an negative apparatus without anyone actually profiting from it which reinforces itself eternally by complete surveillance of every last individual, which are dealt with as soon as they try to organize with others. Its the perfect prison we are building for ourselves.
- Nasrudith 7y agoSurveillance has ironically been wildly overestimated in their capabilities - even though it is certainly bad in its "half mirror" form it isn't omnipotent. They always need entities willing to follow orders and the who has all answers which are "bad" in some way including from abilities limited abilities in preference for by loyalty, limited loyalty but able, or under influence. If they become sick of the status quo surveillance can't stop them from deciding they would rather be "king" instead or a more generous "king" would sit better on the throne. Weaponized autonomous drones may change that but subsitutes subvertability for loyality. Both meat and machines for the dictators of their hellscape require maintenance and means of sustaining and grasping control weakens them. That tangent aside - if nobody can stop a subject from doing x /right now/ and they don't care about being known it is nothing buy the illusion of control. We have seen how it is a farce against terrorism as it fails to prevent anything and only at best helps to convict the violent people already out to gain attention who also often don't get trials anyway.