If it wasn't the Walmart bathroom camera lawsuit in 2009, it should have been something else. After all, Walmart is a corporation, which should be able to do whatever it wishes in its private property spaces. Shoppers there have always had to relinquish some degree of dignity and pride for the privilege of lower prices. It is the price one must pay for bargains--the greater the savings the more dignity one must sacrifice to get it. I have to admit, reading about the Walmart bathroom cam scandal caused me a shiver or two, hair raising on the back of my neck. Did they have such cameras operating the only time I shopped at a Walmart in Boise, when I still traveled for work and found myself needing a pair of dress pants and stopped in the latrine? Had that just happened to be the day I hadn't heeded Mom's warning? Had they spied my pee-stained BVDs? Had I turned around to reveal a skid mark? God, I hope not.
Still, I shouldn't have felt shocked that, perhaps, someone also recorded the fact that I "shook it more than twice" after urinating. It's just a habit--not an implication. Honest. I would say "there's nothing to see here," but that might be revealing a tad too much. By now, though, I have to accept that as water under the bridge (or down the pipe, so to speak). My question today is, when will Big Brother (or Sister) get his/her fill of documenting our every move? The history of the surveillance state is long and nefarious, so let's consider some examples of how we got here...
Cameras are pretty much everywhere now. In 2008, The LA Times posted an article noting the 4,775 cameras dotting the Washington, DC, landscape and the fact that then-Mayor Adrian Fenty sought to increase that number by about a thousand. By 2011, Homeland Security Today could crow about the 7,000+ closed circuit cameras on the DC Metro transit system alone, 5,500+ of which monitored buses and 1,100+ closely watched the trains. Though the article bemoaned the possible cuts in Department Homeland Security grants to increase the numbers of these devices, my guess is that the contractors who supply and maintain these video systems conduct a thriving business. After all, in a slow- to no-growth economy, even with a lull in terrorist activities, what better way to catch a pick-pocket in the act than through those "eyes-in-the-skies"? And graffiti artists beware.
But history tells us that humankind (and perhaps even hominidkind) has long had a penchant to keep a watchful eye on his neighbor.
Ancient hand- and arm-printing database, the forerunner of fingerprinting.
Pre-dating fingerprinting was the pictured example of the ancient, hand- and arm-print, cave wall database, which was successfully used in apprehending those pesky, agrarian sod-busters who threatened the hunter-gatherer way of life, and later, those poachers, who threatened the then-developing agrarian society. Could DNA databases and even computer chip implantation lurk far behind?
Ancient poachers caught in the act by stone age sketch artist.
The hints for subverting this technology were already in-the-works, as almost certain ancestors of today's DKos contributors set about to subvert the status quo with contributions of their own.
Ancient salami hunt thought to be sketch-shopped by left-leaning, anarchist cave dweller.*
In what could be seen as a forerunner of photoshopping and the left-wing sarcasm factory to come, these subversive cave artists hummed along as they engaged in their own nefarious activities.
With such a storied past, surveillance overreach should not surprise us today. Indeed, as fundamentalist preachers have reminded us, God, Himself, can be seen as the "prime mover" in more ways than one. His satellite-like oversight of the Garden of Eden and swift descent to prosecute Adam and Eve for their succombing to serpentine temptation evidences an early, resounding success for the practice of spying. This story also substantiates the fact that one should not heed the words of talking animals, including dinosaurs who co-existed with humans (further documented by said dinosaurs' snide remarks throughout episodes of The Flinstones). Mr. Ed? Need I say more?
But who can blame the animals for their rebelliousness anyway? Isn't it we who have put them under a microscope, studied their most intimate behavior, allowed them to do our dirty work for such small recompense? As if a bag of oats or Meow Mix can compensate them for all that they've done for us. Worst of all, we deny them their privacy during their own most intimate act.
State-supported researchers spying on fruit flies in flagrante delicto, perfectly acceptable?
Say what you will, as we humans continue to develop the technology for better invasion of privacy, should we really be surprised as that technology gets turned upon ourselves?
*Printed with permission of the artist, Dieter Braun, from his blog, http://dieterbraun.blogspot.com/