Borderland

Here on the edge of the edge of the continent, my family’s view of the 2008 Olympic Games is a little fuzzy since we’re too far out of town for cable service, and the rabbit ears antenna won’t pull down the local broadcast signal. We do (as of 6 months ago) have a decent wireless internet connection, though, so it looks like we can follow along on the web if we feel like huddling around the computer. But it just won’t be the same as using the tube.

I’ve been getting my news about the Games on the net, where there’s been a lot of publicity about China during the run-up to the opening ceremony. Stories about the $40 billion spent on infrastructure, the devastating earthquake in May, choking smog in Beijing, media censorship and the detention of political activists, the military occupation in Tibet, and China’s economic ties to Sudan have highlighted various criticisms from human rights groups.

But this, according to Naomi Klein, may all be a part of “China’s sheer awesomeness.” Klein writes:

The games have been billed as China’s “coming out party” to the world. They are far more significant than that. These Olympics are the coming out party for a disturbingly efficient way of organizing society, one that China has perfected over the past three decades, and is finally ready to show off. It is a potent hybrid of the most powerful political tools of authoritarianism communism — central planning, merciless repression, constant surveillance — harnessed to advance the goals of global capitalism. Some call it “authoritarian capitalism,” others “market Stalinism,” personally I prefer “McCommunism.”

She sees the Olympics, for China, as a showcase for attracting foreign investment. For some US companies, the Games offer a market not only for consumer products, but also for the latest cyber-surveillance technologies to ensure the safety of athletes and VIP’s. According to Klein, “there are now 660 designated ’safe cities’ across the country,” with cutting-edge surveillance equipment that will remain in place and even be expanded once the games have become ancient history.

Klein’s article is an updated version of a longer piece published in Rolling Stone last May. She tells the story of a visit she made to China. She spoke to a young entrepreneur there who is developing face-recognition software based on code he bought from a US firm, L-1 Identity Solutions, a US defense contractor. Klein says, “You have probably never heard of L-1, but there is every chance that it has heard of you.” L-1 has a database of over 60 million records.

The Chinese surveillance system, supported by US multinational corporations like Honeywell, Cisco, and General Electric (owner of NBC, the Olympic broadcast network) is ambitious, reminiscent of Orwell’s Big Brother. Not only does the system employ thousands of hidden video cameras, but it includes speech and face recognition capabilities, all linked to a database that tracks phone calls and credit card transactions, among other things. It’s part of a larger project that offers one-stop shopping for police investigations.

The larger project is known as the Golden Shield, or the Great Firewall, and was documented in 2000 by Greg Walton, a British researcher commissioned by the human rights group, Rights and Democracy, to look into how Chinese security forces were using information technology to monitor political activists. He made a connection between Western firms and the state security systems, but his findings were overlooked in the wake of the 9/11 attack on the WTC. According to Klein, rather than sparking critical outrage, Walton said, “…the paper was ‘mined for ideas’ by the U.S. government, as well as by private companies hoping to grab a piece of the suddenly booming market in spy tools.”

Knowing that state security functions are being contracted out to companies like L-1 is not reassuring:

Over the past decade, contracting for America’s spy agencies has grown into a $50 billion industry that eats up seven of every 10 dollars spent by the U.S. government on its intelligence services. Today, unbeknownst to most Americans, agencies once renowned for their prowess in analysis, covert operations, electronic surveillance and overhead reconnaissance outsource many of their core tasks to the private sector.

I wonder, who regulates the military-industrial complex, when the line between public and private ceases to exist? Where are the limits?

Ah, well…but this isn’t really what the Olympic Games are about, though some would want to make it so. Anywhere a large spotlight is shined, people will try to use it. The Olympics generate a lot of goodwill, a lot of drama, and a lot of money.

I’m still going to enjoy the competitions - those that I get to watch, anyway. I always feel inspired watching people who’ve dedicated themselves to reaching beyond conventional limits in pursuit of excellence.