The engines of repression

Dakinkat hipped me to Take This Lollipop, saying that this exposure of Facebook's intrusiveness would be right up my alley. Indeed so.

But as you watch that video, forget about the creepy stalker; instead, picture the NSA and the CIA. And now picture yourself as a protester: If you own a cell phone, you are trackable by GPS. Since Facebook now requires you to divulge your cell phone number, they can tell if you are part of the protests even if you've mentioned nothing about your participation online. The dataminers know your name, your address, your place of business, your family members, and your location 24/7. That's why the CIA funded Facebook in the first place.

And if you use an iPhone, you can't defeat GPS by taking out the battery. That's why the phone was designed that way.

Incidentally, Google asked me for a cell phone number when I signed into blogger a couple of weeks ago. I declined to provide one; fortunately, they let me sign in anyways. Let's see how long that situation lasts.

On a related note: In 2009, the cops in Pittsburgh zapped a G-20 protester named Karen Piper with a Long Range Acoustic Device (LRAD), which caused permanent hearing loss. She's suing the police department.

I hope she wins -- but win or lose, her case highlights an important problem confronting all future protest movements: Non-lethal weaponry.

One of the major proponents of non-lethal weapons, Colonel John Alexander, used to justify his work with these words: "Would you rather be shot with a bullet?" This is deceptive. The problem with non-lethal weaponry is that it lowers the threshold for use. A cop -- if he's sane -- won't fire his gun unless he has reason to believe that someone poses a serious threat. But a cop may use an LRAD on someone he considers merely annoying.

As long-time readers know, I am not a revolutionary. I believe in slow and steady progress, achieved (whenever possible) by working within the system. History proves that revolutions can destroy the rebels along with those rebelled against.

Nevertheless, the threat of revolution is the only thing that has ever kept any government honest and responsive to the people. Non-lethal weaponry is designed to eradicate that threat. The primary impetus for the development of these devices has always been internal "security," not any external threat.

If revolution becomes impossible, tyranny becomes inevitable.

As I've said before: The USSR would still exist if it possessed the kind of non-lethal weaponry we now have in our arsenals.