Techno feudalism

[Akka]

What Japan managed the West will never manage, because the West was brainwashed to hate collectivism, for centuries. Japan reached their point on the curve precisely through collectivism - a concept very tough to accept to many "free" westerners, so, I wouldn't count on following in Japan's big footsteps with small feet. They earned what they have through their labour within a very strict cultural frame. Right now the way for Westerners (and the Chinese) to deal with crime is surveillance. The question remains - who will perform the surveillance? Microsoft/Google/insert favourite, or an organisation which is specifically forbidden by societal consensus from monetising their subjects and mandated by that society to prevent crime: state police, departments of public security, or what have you.

You DO realize that Western Europe in general actually has LOWER crime than China, don't you ? Or are you so taken with your dream of totalitarian control that you simply prefer to ignore this ?

That means you will succeed in making yourself a puppet of commercial supergiant, who will definitely provide you with as much security as you can carry. Unlike public mandate extended to government agency, Your opinion will be irrelevant to the firm. You will be placed into a situation, where you won't have choice, as it often happens with commercial monopolies.

False dilemma : A false dilemma, also referred to as false dichotomy or false binary, is an informal fallacy based on a premise that erroneously limits what options are available. The source of the fallacy lies not in an invalid form of inference but in a false premise. This premise has the form of a disjunctive claim: it asserts that one among a number of alternatives must be true. This disjunction is problematic because it oversimplifies the choice by excluding viable alternatives, presenting the viewer with only two absolute choices when, in fact, there could be many.

 

[Zardnaar]

Where's the line between oligarchy, authoritarian and fascism?

 

[Snowygerry]

You DO realize that Western Europe in general actually has LOWER crime than China, don't you ? Or are you so taken with your dream of totalitarian control that you simply prefer to ignore this ?
(...)

Obviously - to simplest way to walk the streets safely at night is to not live in a city with millions of others - I am usually the most dangerous one out there

 

[Moriarte]

You DO realize that Western Europe in general actually has LOWER crime than China, don't you ? Or are you so taken with your dream of totalitarian control that you simply prefer to ignore this ?

Oh, suddenly we are not talking Japan anymore?

OK, let's talk W. Europe. Only this time I am setting the statistical boundaries. Lets talk London and Beijing.

You do realise there is a higher/comparable ratio of cameras in central London than in central Beijing?

London: 100 cameras per 1000 people (2025)

How Many CCTV Cameras Are In London? | 2025

London is often referred to as one of the most surveilled cities in the world, How Many CCTV Cameras Are in London? Find out in our detailed blog.

securealarmcctv.com

Beijing: 55 cameras per 1000 people (2021)

Infographic: The Most Surveilled Cities in the World

This chart shows the most surveilled cities in the world.

www.statista.com

Pay attention, this is what demonstrating statistics looks like. Using capital letters instead of statistics is good enough for a pub, but not good enough for CFC.

This piece of statistics clearly shows that in the real world this European capital uses exactly the same totalitarian tool as their Chinese counterpart. And rightly so.

A false dilemma

Don't hold back now. Bless us with your alternative methods to maintain order in large cities. Can't wait to start living without too many cameras, like the Japanese.

 

[Snowygerry]

This piece of statistics clearly shows that in the real world this European capital uses exactly the same totalitarian tool as their Chinese counterpart. (...)

Only London apparently, all the others are Asian cities, which makes sense since most of the world population lives there..

More population = more "need" for control.

 

[Akka]

Oh, suddenly we are not talking Japan anymore?

You are the one who claimed that Japan didn't count, don't try to put the blame on me.

OK, let's talk W. Europe. Only this time I am setting the statistical boundaries. Lets talk London and Beijing.

You do realise there is a higher/comparable ratio of cameras in central London than in central Beijing?

London: 100 cameras per 1000 people (2025)

How Many CCTV Cameras Are In London? | 2025

London is often referred to as one of the most surveilled cities in the world, How Many CCTV Cameras Are in London? Find out in our detailed blog.

securealarmcctv.com

Beijing: 55 cameras per 1000 people (2021)

Infographic: The Most Surveilled Cities in the World

This chart shows the most surveilled cities in the world.

www.statista.com

Pay attention, this is what demonstrating statistics looks like. Using capital letters instead of statistics is good enough for a pub, but not good enough for CFC.


This piece of statistics clearly shows that in the real world this European capital uses exactly the same totalitarian tool as their Chinese counterpart. And rightly so.

I'm not sure that you should be this condescending when what you post more or less only shows you're a) cherry picking and b) contradicting your claim. Maybe you should actually pay attention to what your source shows...

First, London is actually a weird outlier and the worst offender in the West when it comes to surveillance. By comparison, Paris has a whopping 3 cameras per 1000 inhabitants (and that's a significant rise compared to before), while having nearly identical crime level than London, at 58 vs 55. Seems that your hard-on for surveillance doesn't translate in actual results when using actually comparable situations.

Second, your source proves actually the very opposite of your claim : only London is up there when it comes to European cities, while China is taking 7 out of the 10 spots. So, as you say in the real world, European capitals actually DO NOT use the same totalitarian tools as China.

Don't hold back now. Bless us with your alternative methods to maintain order in large cities. Can't wait to start living without too many cameras, like the Japanese.

Better wealth redistribution, public services and less inequality - I mean, do I really have to point that crime is MUUUUUUUUUUCH more correlated to poverty than to how many CCTV are put up at crossroad ?

Also, simply not going for worse seems like a pretty good solution. Western Europe is already pretty safe without having to resort to Big Brother, what exactly is the NEED to go full totalitarian ? Except that you just seem to like the idea of having everyone monitored constantly ?

 

[Moriarte]

I'm not sure that you should be this condescending

Next time you’re not sure - don’t open up with your fantasies about my dreams and what you think I like.

For now, since you are unable to stay on topic in the banner - I am finished with you.

 

[Akka]

Next time you’re not sure - don’t open up with your fantasies about my dreams and what you think I like.

For now, since you are unable to stay on topic in the banner - I am finished with you.

Wow, someone is mad about being proved wrong and ridiculing himself.

 

[Lexicus]

"Techno-[political term]" is usually kinda BS, as @innonimatu says it is just old-fashioned capitalism (which is similar to feudalism in many respects) hiding behind a kind of mirage of "tech" that is able to bedazzle many midwits into believing this is something other than rent-seeking par excellence.

 

[Samson]

This is a vert important issue that I have been on about for years. Why in this day and age are even Extinction Rebelion are organising on fecesbook I cannot understand.

Social media

We are all on here, which probably means we have a well above average exposure to social media, but we should all be thinking how we can have a revolution if all our social connectionas are recorded in Palo Alto. I think ditching Facebook should be peoples first priority.

I can recomend mastadon, but I never did the big tech social media thing.

Messaging

She recomends signal. This has to be loads better than Whatsapp, but it is still a single organisation that has to be trusted. There are decentralised solutions. For the widest availability PGP encripted emails is my prefered option, but it does not hide the metadata. Veilid is a solution that sounds interesting, but I have not tried it and it sounds "very beta". Jami works well as messagign app, though the video conferencing leaves a lot to be desired and is not the level of security of Veilid.

Mobile Phone

Andriod is a real problem. It is built into mobile phones at a very deep level. There are truely open source alternatives, but I have never tried to use one. My solution has been to not let my phone near my secure information, but it is getting harder and harder these days.

Payments

It is getting harder and harder to subsist without remote payements, and these generally have to go through big tech. I rate monero as a solution to this, there are more and more online services offering payment through things like BTCPay that simplify the process. Some people hate that idea though.

 

[Samson]

"Techno-[political term]" is usually kinda BS, as @innonimatu says it is just old-fashioned capitalism (which is similar to feudalism in many respects) hiding behind a kind of mirage of "tech" that is able to bedazzle many midwits into believing this is something other than rent-seeking par excellence.

There is the difference that it is much easier to throw off. You have to eat, and ig your food comes from capitalism you have to engage with capitalism. You do not need to use fecesbook or google.

 

[Akka]

There is the difference that it is much easier to throw off. You have to eat, and ig your food comes from capitalism you have to engage with capitalism. You do not need to use fecesbook or google.

I'd say it's actually the opposite, it's much harder to throw off.

First because it's, precisely, less directly aggravating. You don't have food, it's fight or die - much more reason to rebel. You're constantly indirectly and invisibly monitored ? That won't (directly and visibly) kill you. Much less riling up. It's easier to tolerate and ignore, up to the point where we end up into the :

Second (and that's the most dangerous aspect), because it's an actual shift in the realm of what is possible. The tools to control people are becoming automated and able to process data in real-time, making it an actual possibility to put a virtual cop or spy behind everyone constantly, rather than just an autocrat's wet dreams. That's where the "techno-feudalism" part comes from, people holding the information tools might be able to construct a cage devoid of human factor from which it will be flatly impossible to get out.

 

[Samson]

I'd say it's actually the opposite, it's much harder to throw off.

First because it's, precisely, less directly aggravating. You don't have food, it's fight or die - much more reason to rebel. You're constantly indirectly and invisibly monitored ? That won't (directly and visibly) kill you. Much less riling up. It's easier to tolerate and ignore, up to the point where we end up into the :

I agree there definatly seems to be a need to push people away from big tech, but still that is easier that armed rebelion.

Second (and that's the most dangerous aspect), because it's an actual shift in the realm of what is possible. The tools to control people are becoming automated and able to process data in real-time, making it an actual possibility to put a virtual cop or spy behind everyone constantly, rather than just an autocrat's wet dreams. That's where the "techno-feudalism" part comes from, people holding the information tools might be able to construct a cage devoid of human factor from which it will be flatly impossible to get out.

I agree they could, but they are not there yet. We could all ditch andriod and fecesbook tomorrow, and host all our posting on tor. We have the tools of our liberation, and have had them since before we went over to big tech. We do not need to break any laws, spend any money, just a little bit of a learning curve to get up to speed on the tech.

 

[Moriarte]

Hopping between FB, Mastodon and Signal is missing the point somewhat, I think. Ultimately, the ones who control infrastructure are the ones in control of discourse. Musk understands that, that’s why he was launching hundreds of satellites every year during the past decade. Twitter ties into that. Cars and Phones will be the next infrastructural step - building a unifying ecosystem, where he holds “the switch”. Whoever is serious about breaking away, igniting a rebellion or what have you should follow Musk’s playbook: Satellites-Private App-Private (non-swift) payment system-an army of sympathizers. And even then it’s difficult to escape the prospect of masked combat-hardened humourless fellas descending on ropes from the sky and “clearing the problem” in under 60 seconds.

So, for anyone not merely speculating and serious about building a new garden of Eden - start with accumulating a few billions in resources. The days of Che Guevara types of rebellions are over.

 

[Samson]

Hopping between FB, Mastodon and Signal is missing the point somewhat, I think. Ultimately, the ones who control infrastructure are the ones in control of discourse. Musk understands that, that’s why he was launching hundreds of satellites every year during the past decade. Twitter ties into that. Cars and Phones will be the next infrastructural step - building a unifying ecosystem, where he holds “the switch”. Whoever is serious about breaking away, igniting a rebellion or what have you should follow Musk’s playbook: Satellites-Private App-Private (non-swift) payment system-an army of sympathizers. And even then it’s difficult to escape the prospect of masked combat-hardened humourless fellas descending on ropes from the sky and “clearing the problem” in under 60 seconds.

I agree there are different levels of control. The physical infrastructure of the net is a big one, and the vunerability of the cables certainly does seem to increase the power of Starlink.

Cars and Phones are a different type of physical infrastructure. The current trend of merging them on a physical and legal level is frightening, but we do all have a choice. Old cars are more reliable than new cars, if no one buys a car that spies on them no ome will make one. The same applies to phones, but we need to sort of the software infrascructure to make it easy and safe. I think phones should be principally docker hosts, but whatever the solution it is easier than inventing the internet without the internet, and we did that.

Twitter is not physical infrastructure. There is every chance that the mainstream will move to something else, and it will be left fighting over the right wing attention with Trump Social, Truss Social and all the others. It could well be the next MySpace, and it will be the population, mostly the kids, who decide what the next one will be. If this is a truly open one and anonymous one it could make a real difference in the future.

So, for anyone not merely speculating and serious about building a new garden of Eden - start with accumulating a few billions in resources. The days of Che Guevara types of rebellions are over.

We have the tools for indaviduals to communicate and cooperate internationally like neve before, the time for people lead revolutions is here.

 

[Verbose]

"Techno-[political term]" is usually kinda BS, as @innonimatu says it is just old-fashioned capitalism (which is similar to feudalism in many respects) hiding behind a kind of mirage of "tech" that is able to bedazzle many midwits into believing this is something other than rent-seeking par excellence.

No, capitalism is ONLY like feudalism in the sense that they both deal in unequal power relations. Pretty much everything else about them of consequence differs.

 

[EnglishEdward]

....if no one buys a car that spies on them no one will make one...

Alas governments like cars that spy on you, they only worry if they think it is a foreign government spying on them.

It is likely that such safety monitoring and reporting will become a mandatory regulatory requirement.

And if all new cars spy on one, one really does not have much of a choice.

And the state will happily legislate to make it illegal to drive old cars without such capability.

You can try walking, but remember micro chipping of dogs and cats is mandatory in the UK now.

 

[Samson]

Alas governments like cars that spy on you, they only worry if they think it is a foreign government spying on them.

It is likely that such safety monitoring and reporting will become a mandatory regulatory requirement.

And if all new cars spy on one, one really does not have much of a choice.

And the state will happily legislate to make it illegal to drive old cars without such capability.

You can try walking, but remember micro chipping of dogs and cats is mandatory in the UK now.

Not if no one buys them, as can be seen with the rollback of EV mandates. Old cars are cheaper (in the UK by a vast amount), more reliable and easier to fix. We all have a choice.

 

[EnglishEdward]

For various reasons governments work hand in hand with the corporates.

At the moment you have a choice, but I do not think that choice will remain.

 

[EnglishEdward]

The EV mandates were rolled back because they were over
optimistic, and production could not keep pace with them.