Tech-talitarianism and the Diffuse Panopticon Model

by · Published · Updated

The Modern Tower of Babel from the film “Metropolis” (1927)

Totalitarianism is an authoritarian ideology, within which all power – individual and societal – is generated and held (or claimed to be) by a monolithic, all-encompassing state. A dictator or tyrant is a hallmark of such a form of government, though invariably working in concert with this head of state is a concentrated oligarchy. This is accomplished and maintained through the use of a number of political, social, and cultural tools, namely:

  • A pervasive secret police force;
  • the proliferation of single party, pro-regime, anti-dissident, anti-outsider propaganda;
  • monopolistic state control over all aspects of the economy;
  • a state-monopoly on force;
  • an ideology of socio-cultural “oneness.”

Historically, totalitarian states have been overt; that is to say, while the government and its media will provide their public with optimistic and pleasant propaganda, their complete and total control over virtually all aspects of life is openly admitted and acknowledged. The propaganda utilized by such a regime will serve the purpose of justifying this arrangement to the public, rather than hiding it.

While the fact of total state control is admitted (and perhaps even exaggerated), police activities are kept mostly hidden from the public. Secret police forces execute the will of the regime, and essentially are the “teeth” of the totalist ideology.

Because it would be neither practical or useful for the state to merely round-up the entire citizenry to ensure perpetual political dominance, it employs psychological manipulation through constant and intense propaganda. This may mean posters and books, though it may also mean regular radio or television broadcasts by some high-ranking official, maybe even the dictator himself. It may mean a constant bombardment with state media, through which commands are doled out to the public. Most importantly, this psychological control and propaganda comes in the form of compulsory, government-operated school. It is this long indoctrination process that conditions the masses to be susceptible to the totalist propaganda they will be forced to accept for the rest of their days. This is the same process that convinces people (typically when they are young and vulnerable) that it is necessary for the state to be a monolithic, all-powerful entity; that this is the highest expression of benevolence attainable by humanity, and that the citizen should be proud to die for the state, should the opportunity present itself.

A fundamental aspect of totalist ideology is that the realization of the perfect, omnipotent, omnipresent society (i.e. Utopia), which would effectively mean the “end of history,” is inevitable; that is, the Samsaric patterns of history would burn away, and out of those ashes would arise a new type of world, one marked by a sort of god-like collective – or simultaneous – consciousness. This is due in part to the fact that every permutation of totalitarian ideology has its own historical “lens.” In other words, it is claimed that all of history (and therefore all of history’s tragedies and injustices) can be reduced to one simple problem. For the Nazis, all history was a struggle between the races. Thus, certain actions taken by the state were not only justified but necessary to put an end to this bitter historical cycle. Likewise, Communist ideology reduces all history to the struggle between the rich and the poor; thus the state is needed to correct the perceived flow of history and ensure eternal justice and equality. It is undeniable that both of these things (race and class) are important factors in history. Factors. The totalitarian mistake (or lie) is that one factor alone serves as a sufficient explanation for all historical occurrences. Basically, totalitarian ideologues treat questions of history the same way they treat questions of society: Despite the complex and dynamic natures of both, there is only one single, centralized, unchallengeable answer to any conceivable question. In fact, if the schools and propaganda and social engineering do what they’re intended to (which they tend to do), the rich nuance of history and society is likely to pass unnoticed by ditch-digger and intellectual alike.

The totalitarian is not content with merely frightening people into “agreeing” with him. It is absolutely imperative that his will, his influence, his power, lives within the very core of his people’s souls, so to speak. The totalitarian is a “true believer” par excellence. For what typically start out as good intentions (though usually highly fantastical and utopian), the individual is sacrificed in favor of the collective. Though such a level of total awareness – total control – has indeed been attempted in the twentieth century, it is my opinion that true totalitarianism is only possible if achieved by way of specific technological advances used purposefully and in tandem, particularly:

  • The Internet;
  • mechanical and/or digital human augmentation;
  • constant, high-definition audio and video surveillance;
  • biometrics;
  • synthetic drugs;
  • continuous, comprehensive, and convincing propaganda (introduced by schools and other institutions, then endlessly parroted by the media and the population alike) from cradle to grave;
  • highly effective and mobile police and military;
  • a centrally organized technocratic society;
  • and the technological creation and facilitation of a mass collective – or group – consciousness.

Only with these tools – paired with a totalist or utopian ideology – will the totalitarian be able to program his, her, or its population.

The Diffuse Panopticon Model

In the late eighteenth century, British social theorist Jeremy Bentham devised what could be described as a symbolic microcosm of a totalitarian system. Merging the Greek words for “all” (pan) and “seeing” (optikos), Bentham proposed a new sort of prison, which he dubbed “panopticon.” There are four elements comprising Bentham’s original panopticon model:

A. Psychological Disciplinarian

B. Physical Punishment

C. Imprisoned Subject

D. Closed Setting

The setting (D) is circular and closed off from the outside. Within its structure, running all the way around the wall, are small cells inhabited by prisoners (C). Between these prisoners and the center of the circle is empty space, perhaps taken up by guards, or perhaps not. Either way, this space serves as physical punishment (B), as in the case of there being guards, there is the treat of violence; if the guards are not present, the space isolates the prisoner, contributing to their helplessness and powerlessness. At the center of the circle is a tower, within which there may or may not be a watchman. The prisoners are unable to tell either way from their cells. The potential of the presence of the watchman acts as the psychological disciplinarian (A), as the prisoners are constantly motivated to act as if they are being watched, even when they are not. Though initially posited as a plan for prisons, Bentham also suggested the utility of a panoptic structure for schools, hospitals, and workhouses, saying the panopticon model was “a new mode of obtaining power of mind over mind, in a quantity hitherto without example.” 

Because of its diagrammatic appearance, we will refer to Betham’s model as “The Panopticon Eye Model.”

“The Eye Model,” conceived by Jeremy Bentham in 1791

Though a truly Benthamite prison was never built, the concept of the panopticon has survived these past two centuries, and is now, in a sense, reified by modern technology. The “new” panopticon, in its material form, differs substantially from the theoretical Eye Model, which is made up of concentric circles of power: “rings within rings.” The new panopticon is diffuse; there are potential “eyes” everywhere.

Instead of being limited to one building, let us say that the closed setting of the Diffuse Panopticon Model is extant, interconnected computer technology (D). So long as one is in the presence of “smart” technology, one is within the walls of the new panopticon. The imprisoned subject (C) is less obviously a captive than in the first case: They may go about their business, they may travel, they may produce, they may consume, they may appear and think themselves free, but they are always operating within the confines of the surveillance grid. Because the Diffuse Panopticon is extrapolated out and superimposed upon the whole of society, the punishment aspect (B), when applied to this model, becomes two-parted. First, as in the Eye Model, there is the threat of isolation. Digital misconduct (however – and by whomever – it may be defined) can result in censorship and de-platforming. In the physical world, it can be the enforcement of the law itself. Specifically, it represents the continual presence of the threat of state-sanctioned physical attack on a member of the society (C) as a result of constant surveillance. Finally, the key element of the new panopticon is the algorithmic culmination of data (A) created by people (C) acting within the technological society (D). It is not a watchman, it is The Network. Just as in Bentham’s plan, nobody knows when or if they’re being watched. In this model, the subjects (C) don’t necessarily know what information about them has already been accumulated, though we all know that companies like Google and Facebook are paying very close attention to our clicking and tapping habits. From traffic cameras to in-store security cameras; from webcams to Siri; from social media to Alexa, one can never be sure if they are really, truly alone. One of many advantages (if I dare use that word) of the new model is that, even if somebody isn’t watching through that particular surveillance camera now, somebody can always go back and access the footage later. The implications of this are tremendous: The All-Seeing Eyes can – partially – transcend time itself.

Predominant technologies play a vital role in establishing social norms; the mere presence of a given technology will actually change the way people interact. Whereas in Bentham’s panopticon there was one, central watchman or psychological disciplinarian, in this model it is unquantifiable. The citizenry has no way of knowing when they are or are not being monitored.  The interconnectivity of these devices produces what Marshall McLuhan called “all-at-onceness”; when one device learns something, the entire network learns it almost simultaneously. This means that the technology is constantly updating and improving the intelligence grid: The Diffuse Panopticon is a positive feedback mechanism. There are potential “eyes” everywhere, and because of this omnipresence, acting as if one is always being watched – scrutinized and under the implicit threat of force anywhere within the grid – becomes internalized, normal, expected behavior. In such circumstances, the panopticon would be realized, for the sheep would become their own sheep dogs, ensuring the growth of the system at the cost of individual’s autonomy and privacy.

“The Diffuse Model” – An observation of technological control in the early 21st century

Because of the simultaneous and ever-present nature of such a system, and the self-regulation it psychologically instantiates, panopticism is inherently totalitarian. To reiterate, panopticism as it actually exists (i.e. the Diffuse Model) is a social feedback mechanism – a cybernetic device or process – that manufactures conformity and promises obedience, not a building with cells and a watchman. Not all prisons need walls. As was stated above, it is my opinion that true totalitarianism is only attainable once certain technological conditions are met. The Diffuse Panopticon Model is the means to this end. This new panopticon makes possible a new totalitarianism; not the tyrannies of Hitler or Stalin or Mussolini or Mao, which may one day be scoffed at as infantile and futile attempts at realizing pure and true collectivism. This is a technological tyranny of biblical (or “Babel-ical”) significance, for it requires the total reconstruction of the nature and conditions of humankind, by humans. Be weary while ascending, lest ye plummet and be buried.

Further Research:

Tags:

You may also like...