Resistance through Surveillance?

‘Among the obligations of the state’s highest official is the job of informing the nation regularly by means of the radio about his activities and their justification. The task of the radio does not end, however, with the transmission of these reports.
Beyond this, it must organise the collection of reports, i.e. it must transform the reports of those who govern into responses to the questions of those governed. Radio must make exchange possible.
Should you consider this utopian, then I ask you to reflect on the reasons why it is utopian.’
Bertolt Brecht, 'Radio as a Communications Apparatus' (1927)
I don't think it lessens the force of the various critiques of the G20 'riot' from participants and non-participants if we acknowledge that we missed a trick here somewhere. One of the most irksome things about the day itself, other than the kettling of course, was its overwhelming mediatisation. That had already been signalled by whoever wrote the Zizekian graffito 'enjoy your spectacle!' on the steps of the Royal Exchange, and is fully, depressingly visible in the images of photographers outnumbering crusties as the windows of RBS were smashed in. And yet, while there's still no question that as an attempt to provide direct resistance to capital (which, as I tried to argue before, was not really the point - these things are self-described 'street parties', self-governing encampments or attempted temporary autonomous zones, not Make Poverty History-style Oedipal 'protests', and need to be judged on their own terms, which are deficient in a very different way) the G20 manifestations have, almost accidentally, generated the biggest archive of police brutality seen in this country since the Miners Strike.
This is still a failure, as capitalism as an economic system and as a totality, partly through its most symbolic citadel (and that symbolism is deeply dated), the Bank of England, was the target. But nonetheless, for the majority of the population, the police have always been the people who help you if you're burgled, who you want as 'bobbies on the beat', occasionally disdained as the dozy plod but certainly not thought of as a paramilitary force like the French CRS. The record of police brutality as it affected Brixton or Toxteth, Orgreave or Wapping, has never quite been mainstream. In this case it suddenly has gone mainstream, and the reasons for this are inextricably to do with both the police's own desire not to be surveilled, and the self-surveillance in which we all now indulge. First of all, this record was compiled soon after a law was passed making it effectively illegal to photograph a policeman if a connection, however tenuous, could be established between their activities and 'the war on terror'. I noticed myself when trying to get out of the kettle with a press pass how anyone, be they American cameramen or South African news anchors, were subject to its strictures, enormously pissing them off - but to make an exception for them would totally destroy the kettle's overwhelming logic - many press people were kept in for 7 hours. Secondly, the record was not just compiled or distributed by the usual suspects. Much as I wouldn't want to slag off the likes of Indymedia (glad they do what they do, etc), what is noticeable about this is the unexpected uses of mainstream new media.
Usually, when people film political events on their cameraphones or budget DV cameras, it's to put a macabre spin on events where the trajectory is already known in advance. Nothing new about the 7/7 bomb attacks came out of the commuters' self-surveillance other than the bleak vistas of lines of people filing along tube tunnels, making jerkily, grainily clear something we already knew was latent. Yet these acts of political tourism, self-surveillance, call them what you will, have given us a record of policemen whacking women in the face, crashing with their shields into crowds of climate campers with their hands in the air chanting 'this is not a riot', of beaten photographers in orange visibility vests, Police Medics with truncheons raised, and most obviously, in the act of manslaughter, all of them viewed by thousands on YouTube. And although there has indisputably been a rise in the level of police aggression over the last year, there's little new here. What is new is that we now have the record, and can hold them to it, and these records are documented by entirely mainstream news sources. This isn't just based on photography and film, but the slippages in the ego-projections of the social networking sites - Facebook messages incriminate coppers out for 'beating up some long haired hippys', marchers asked to spy have evidence against their would-be spymasters.
In all this we can see outlines of the media-as-response envisaged by Bertolt Brecht at the turn of the 1930s, the democratisation of the technological apparatus creating the possibility for 'responses of the governed', presaging the total democratisation not just of art, but of the media in its widest form. We should be careful not to get carried away, as this has huge limitations - as anyone who recalls Los Angeles 1991 could attest - and the conspiratorially minded could fairly consider the whole thing a cover-up to save the bankers, the armed guard of capital setting itself up as one gigantic patsy. Nonetheless, not only have we seen media usually employed for inane self-promotion suddenly turned into a self-surveillance turned outwards at those who obsessively survey us, we have also ensured that the next time this happens - as it will - there's a chance we can break out of the old circuits, as police tactics will be very, very closely scrutinised. That's if we use the opportunity as something other than proof of our own righteousness.
9 Comments:
Fine post, Owen. Can you say more about the limitations vis-a-vis LA '91? I have my own ideas of what you might mean, but what are you talking about--the riots themselves? the inability of the videotape to provide a conviction?
It's not likely to make demonstrations safer, though, is it? Change police tactics, maybe, make the violence a little more circumspect. I'd bet that alongside the official review of public order policing there will be other, less official reviews of what's the smartest thing to do in such a circumstance.
Besides, police brutality as a cliched Zizekian spectacle has been around for a while, including the mainstream - we've all seen the photos of unarmed demonstrators with blood streaming down their faces, being pulled by officers made faceless by their riot gear. Anonymous, amorphous, yet official and sanctioned violence that I think societally we're fairly desensitised to, not to speak secretly and not so secretly supportive of. In that respect, do you think that the narrative changed substantially from the day after the march, when the police was being praised for keeping the order? Because that would be the key for me - violence from the state will always be tolerated if those are the parameters.
I know we've all seen the photos of bloodied faces, I suppose the difference is in the sequential nature of these videos. Looking at the bloodied head of the demonstrator the Mail reader is able to rationalise 'well, maybe they threw a Molotov cocktail' - it's not the same if you see a film of a woman remonstrating with and then being hit by a police officer.
If the question is:
do you think that the narrative changed substantially from the day after the march, when the police was being praised for keeping the order?then I would say yes, quite clearly. The image of the crusty smashing in RBS is, at least for the moment, been almost completely supplanted by the image of the policeman throwing the passer-by to the ground. Of course the police will try to minimise the damage either by singling out a 'few bad apples' (though, again, I'd argue the mounting footage makes that difficult) or by acquitting the blindingly obviously guilty (hence my Rodney King reference). The question is whether their tactics more generally can be employed in the same way, and I do think there's a chance they could be put on the back foot when this happens again. It's a small, accidental, maybe even only potential opening, but I think we should at least take notice of it.
The question is whether their tactics more generally can be employed in the same way, and I do think there's a chance they could be put on the back foot when this happens again. It's a small, accidental, maybe even only potential opening, but I think we should at least take notice of it.Oh, absolutely, and I really hope you're right. Perhaps my view trends cynical due to the fact that nothing has changed in my own country in the eight years after Genoa. Acts of murder and torture by the police were very effectively metabolised and normalised there, and to the limited extent that it was briefly caught engaging in a counter-narrative, the mainstream media got back to its job of mouthpiece of the police in remarkably short order. I wonder if it's going to be the case here too. First of all, what if a bystander hadn't died? Would those videos have been shown at all? And to what extent is this story likely to inoculate the public, make the death of one or two civilians per demonstration the price that one pays for an orderly society, with the automatic shifting of the blame to the demonstrators?
More generally, I'm sceptical that diffuse surveillance of the "Big Brother is you, watching" kind can be an effective weapon of dissent - it seems too integral to the functioning of power to me.
I have the same suspicion of this diffused surveillance, and I'm usually very sceptical about the attempt to find something sexily liberatory about it - but I do think something has happened here which 'we' (erm, and by we I suppose I just mean a small group of leftists on the internet) haven't really commented on - the sudden existence of this record, which undeniably came about because of a series of, more-or-less, accidents. But it may go absolutely nowhere, and Genoa is certainly a relevant and extremely depressing counter-example.
Change police tactics, maybe, make the violence a little more circumspect.Or massively more obvious. If I was the police I'd be tempted to come up with a response along the lines of, ok, no more kettling, can we use tear-gas and watercannons now, please? And arm TSG (or whatever it calls itself instead) with tasers, please?
All this would need fairly substantial retraining and "repurposing" (ugh) of standard UK police tactics - but if the old techniques (violence off-camera, lie about any mishaps) is breaking down, why not?
(By the way: has anyone noticed how the prohibition on showing cops in riot gear has broken down? Newspapers and TV used to be very circumpsect about showing police with shields and truncheons, only putting them on public display when absolutely necessary.)
has anyone noticed....yes - and I think this may have something to do with how much they annoyed the hacks and photographers who got kettled.
if I was the policeCome the glorious day, JD...
This is obvious, but still delights me: the people who are able to make these records of police behaviour can do so because of their capital investment in the technologies of consumer electronics. Nothing makes you "really there" quite like not being "really there" but instead mediating through your media devices. "Have mobile; will document."
I, too, often feel like I'm not really having an experience unless I have my camera with me and can photograph, flickr, and get feedback from my "friends in the computer."
Maybe the revolution will ONLY be televised?
Come the glorious day, JD...I've designed the uniforms already.
("kalet")
Post a Comment
<< Home