As we close out the last few weeks of 2024 I've been thinking about 1984, the dystopian novel and cautionary tale written by George Orwell in 1949. It talks about the dangers of mass surveillance, totalitarianism, and repression of individuality in our society. If you haven't read it then you should get a copy and read it. You might want to locate a copy soon as it will probably end up on a "banned books" list sometime in the next year due to the actions of the incoming administration.
I remember reading 1984 in a literature class in middle school. Everyone in the class liked the book, but we had a sense of security, thinking that our country's democratic principals and our system of checks and balances would keep our future safe from the horrible 1984 scenario. To us, 1984 was just an amusing curiosity and the chances of mass surveillance, unchecked repression, and totalitarianism ever actually becoming our collective reality were very small. When the year 1984 actually arrived, the country gave itself a pat on the back, secure in the belief that George Orwell was wrong. His book was considered an example of exceptional literature, but thankfully hadn't turned out to be historically accurate.
Over the next 20 years I heard many references to 1984. These references were usually in response to a company's policy of limiting its employees' ability to do things that would, in the opinion of the company's leadership, harm the company or give people outside of the company a bad impression of the organization or it's leaders. We usually just laughed them off, but occasionally they felt a little too much like what was described in Orwell's book.
At one company where I worked they implemented software that mainly monitored network devices and generated alerts when a device became non-functional. The name of this system was "Big Brother," a clear nod to 1984's phrase "Big Brother is Watching You."
One of the capabilities of this software was that it could capture network traffic from a user's computer, save it, and later decode it so that it could be reviewed by Human Resources. They requested this a few times, but we made sure to provide so much data to them each time that it would take a team of 10 dedicated people at least two lifetimes to review. Everyone was used to URL filtering and reporting, but this was different. After all, it was understandable that a company doesn't want to pay someone to hide out in their office and troll the internet for porn all day.
Those of us responsible for the care and feeding of this monster were older and had experienced the internet at the beginning when it was a learning and collaboration tool for academics and scholars rather than the money-making cesspool it is today. In those early days you could be confident that the content you found there was considered, at least by it's creator, to be accurate. Today you can't believe hardly anything you find on the internet is actually true. Most of it was created to get you to do something that you wouldn't otherwise want to do. It's mostly just marketing something, whether that's a product you order (and may or may not ever receive), a subscription to some publication of little or no value, or the promise that if you make a donation then the world will be a much better place for it. I know that's a cynical view, but I believe it's pretty accurate. As a side note, I'm not going to ask you to buy anything, subscribe to anything, or donate to anything. You can go figure out how to make the world a better place on your own. You don't need me for that.
Ok, back to 1984. The incoming Trump administration has a roadmap for what they perceive to be their "roadmap for governing." It's called Project 2025. Trump has claimed that he doesn't know anything about it, but he's already packing his cabinet with Project 2025 authors. I'd like to go through all 900+ pages with you, but that would be ridiculous so I just want to sum up a few points and if you're curious about what will shape the next 4 years of your life (and likely much longer afterwards) you can go read it for yourself.
First, I want to admit that I haven't read through the whole thing myself. I've read several sections and that was enough to make me terrified of what it contains. I'll just tell you about one section here. It's the section regarding the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). You might think the FCC only deals with radio and TV, but it does much more. One of those things is that it has the power to regulate the internet transmission of data.
Currently, the content allowed in internet transmission of data is regulated by the carriers and platforms. An example of a carrier would be Verizon or Unite Networks. An example of a platform would be Meta (Facebook), X, ABC News, and the countless other news platforms and social media apps. The platforms are responsible for content moderation, which means they are controlling what users are allowed to post on the different platforms. For example, you would get banned pretty quickly on Facebook by posting hate speech directed toward a minority, minors performing sex acts, etc. You get the picture. Generally bad stuff. The platforms are responsible for deciding what permissible content means and they can act to prevent it or to permit it up to a point.
Project 2025 wants to save us all from our content being censored by the platforms and carriers. In their opinion, Facebook not allowing us to post negative remarks toward a group or an individual is an infringement on our First Amendment right to free speech. And not just for Facebook. It is for all social media platforms, internet carriers, and broadcast media. Project 2025 wants to save us from this horrible scenario by placing responsibility for content moderation squarely in the hands of the government. They will decide what is allowed and what is prohibited. On the surface it may sound like it will level the playing field and make social media and other platforms safer places, but let's really think about it for a minute.
Do you really want a bunch of Washington bureaucrats deciding what news you're allowed to see and what is blocked from your view? Would you trust them to decide what's important to you? Are you ready for social media platforms to be banned in the US because they won't submit to the Trump administration's demands to control their content? How will you communicate with friends overseas? If other countries don't agree to to US government content moderation on some scale then messaging to and from the US (email, social media, web) could be blocked entirely for those countries.
Basically, you'd be cut off from anything the government doesn't want you to see. Does this scenario sound familiar? To me it sounds like 1984. And it sounds like Germany in the 1930's. As Hitler rose to power the first thing he did was control the media and the flow of information. Then he created an "us and them" scenario in which he blamed the Jews for everything he perceived to be wrong with Germany. According to Trump, our country's problems are caused by immigrants. Us and Them.
There are many more jewels like this in Project 2025. Every section is presented in terms of their benefits to the country, but if you take the time to really think about it then you'll find that, in actuality, it was developed to concentrate power in the hands of a few people and remove the checks and balances that keep them from doing bad things to us for their own gain. It implements the same environment as Germany had in the 1930's and places Donald Trump, a convicted felon and lifetime con man, in a position of unchecked power.
I guess you can decide if that scenario is ok with you, but for me it's not.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Feel free to comment, but please be considerate of others.