War, Free Labor, MySpace, and AT&T

This is really an extended comment for J's post "Immaterial Labor = I'm Material Labor?"

This is a great, well-thought out post that truly is an addition to our collective work of trying to understand what these "new" conceptions of labor truly mean (and why people would do all this "free labor" in the first place).

I'd like to extend your argument out a bit. What happens as we (members of society) get more and more used to "free labor"-type activities?

First, I admit that my train of thought is along the lines of the old adage - "You give someone an inch and they will take a mile..." I think it is useful to realize that once certain ideas become common sense (it is ok for Google to scan my email to sell my information to advertisers, because my e-mail is "free" from Google), this same mode of thought can be translated to other possibilities as well (it is ok for my government to install surveillance cameras on every street corner, because they are trying to save me from terrorists).

Take for example a recent (7/30/07) poll done by the Washington Post and ABC News. When asked the question, "Some people support the use of surveillance cameras in public places as a way to help solve crimes. Others say these cameras go too far as a government intrusion on personal privacy. What's your opinion - do you support or oppose the increased use of surveillance cameras in public places?" 71% of respondents supported the use of surveillance cameras to "help solve crimes" while 25% were opposed to the "increased use of surveillance cameras".

Of course, any of you that study agenda setting or survey design realize there are serious problems with this question in the first place. The 71% of respondents in support of surveillance cameras are not stating that they support increased government control, but rather that they value social well-being "help solve crimes" over personal concerns "intrusion on personal privacy". That aside...

I am making a "slippery slope" argument in a way. But I am making this argument because of the real consequences I see happening as a result of the culture of terror, what has been fabricated by particular interests (government and private) to excuse further control over the population in order to keep us "safe from terrorists". I see creepy things going on and I am trying to understand them.

For example, the Lower Manhattan Security Initiative in NYC is a $15 million capital expenditures plan to "help safeguard bridges, tunnels, and infrastructure as well as everyone who lives, works, and does business downtown." What they forget to mention in this press release is that authorities will install around 3,000 "security" cameras in the Manhattan financial district (The Week "Someone's watching you" 09/28/2007). These new surveillance cameras are digital and will be able to create profiles (Oh Cool!!! Do you mean like a MySpace profile???) of potential deviants (Oh, I guess it isn't like MySpace....well?). According to The Week, "If a camera detects someone leaving a bag or package, it will sound an alarm. This elaborate system will also have the capability to transmit images to the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI. When fully implemented by 2010, cameras will be recording millions of ordinary New Yorkers going about their lives."

I am not sure what comes first - increased corporate surveillance for profit or increased military/government surveillance for control - but I suspect they are interrelated. As the Wire Tapping scandal showed us, the two social structures often work hand in hand.