|
War Profiteers Card Deck
Playing deck spoofs “Iraq’s Most Wanted”
go to article
New Guatemalan law recognizes
indigenous languages
go to article
No place to hide
On-screen Matrix brings to mind off-screen
attacks on privacy rights
By Roberto Lovato
If you’re scared of terrorist attacks, take the blue pill. If you’re
scared of your government, take the red. And if you see trouble ahead
and you want to get ready, then by all means go, get back on the reality-ripping
ride of the Matrix trilogy. You can catch a glimpse of the war against
the machines and see for yourself if it bears any resemblance to the silent
war being waged since 9/11 -- against us.
Newsweek’s declaration of “The Year of the Matrix”
points to a global obsession with the three-part series by wunderkind
directors Andy and Larry Wachowski. This time out, their collaboration
with special effects oracle John Gaeta -- reportedly the most expensive
and technically complicated 14 minutes in film history -- has drawn a
lot of attention. The Matrix Reloaded has
new special effects and new characters; both will provide the massive
Matrix cult -- action flick junkies, philosophers,
pop culture theorists, cyberpunks, geeks and non-geeks, and everyone else
-- with their drug of choice.
Set in 2199 (or close to it -- the machines have erased real time) The
Matrix Reloaded pits what remains of a free,
rebellious humanity against energy-sucking machines that have conquered
earth. Expectations for the sequel -- will it be bigger? better? -- are
fantastically high. But there’s more to it than special effects and
a bigger budget: what’s changed radically is the off-screen world
we live in.
Since 9/11, important thematic elements of the Matrix trilogy have become
closer to our lives, as close as the cell phone, Wi-Fi, computer, handheld
PC, and other digital communications devices. The films’ surveillance
systems bear more than a family resemblance to the real-life ones that
today are digitally plugging into to the devices we happily shop for and
have come to depend on.
The trilogy opens with the story of a computer hacker named Neo (Keanu
Reaves) and a rebel unit led by Morpheus (Laurence Fishburne), who believe
Neo is “the One,” able to break the computer code of the Matrix
and free humanity before the machines reach Zion, “the last human
city.” The second and third installments, The Matrix
Reloaded and Matrix Revolutions, continue where the
first leaves off, following the action as it builds to the final battle.
Most of the first film takes place in the green confines of the Matrix
-- “a computer-generated dream world,” according to Morpheus,
used by the machines to keep humans living in absolute ignorance while
they’re grown and harvested to meet the energy requirements of their
captors. Protagonists in the films need telephones to travel between the
Matrix and the real world -- a state of affairs not too far removed from
our reliance on cell phones and Web sites in cyberspace, where our personal
interests -- political, sexual, commercial, you name it -- leave digital
footprints that don’t easily erase.
The movies are about much more than computers and action. The Matrix is
as much a surveillance system as it is an illusion-making machine. When
Morpheus holds up a battery and tells the disbelieving Neo about a system
built “to keep us under control,” the moment extends far beyond
a cyberpunk movie. Cumbersome and clichéd Big Brother dies, and
Morpheus heralds a symbol of surveillance fit for digital times.
Post-9/11, spying -- the technology and the laws permitting electronic
surveillance -- has undergone enormous changes. Privacy activists, technologists,
and scientists are struggling to make it palatable for popular consumption;
meanwhile, John Poindexter, John Ashcroft, and George W. Bush, appealing
to a nation buffeted by fear and frustration, have accelerated their efforts
to implement the new system.
Parallels between Matrix-style surveillance and the system being mounted
by the Bush administration are undeniable. By itself, the controversial
Total Information Awareness program is the most colossal surveillance
project ever conceived. When TIA is combined with laws like the USA PATRIOT
Act, and new technologies, the world starts resembling the stuff of cyberpunk.
On the other side of the surveillance question, privacy activists are
working hard too, identifying issues and inventing strategies at events
like April’s Computers, Freedom, and Privacy Conference in New York.
Lawyers like Peter Swire examine spy-friendly laws, and technology experts
like Bay Area nuclear-freeze activist and digital folk hero Phil Zimmermann
discuss how to improve encryption technology to protect privacy. Despite
legal and technological intricacies, the Gordian knot at the busy conference
was less technical and more human: science got us into this trouble, but
in the long run only people can win a war against machines and the machinations
of the state.
The Bush administration is investing hundreds of millions of dollars in
surveillance technology, including data-mining programs like CAPPS II
and TIA that rapidly sort through gargantuan amounts of material in search
of patterns. A day’s worth of wireless communications, e-mails, or
credit-card transactions can, for example, yield considerable information.
The hope is that worldwide spying will lead to the capture of terrorists.
But privacy advocates worry that the lives of loyal, innocent citizens
will be ruined as they stumble into electronic dragnets aimed at criminals.
More than a few individuals in the more than 4.5 percent of the population
now on government “watch lists” have found themselves trapped
in the legal and technological purgatory created since 9/11. Aware of
the dangers, Swire tried to address these types of issues as chief counselor
for privacy in the Clinton administration. “More and more,”
he observed during an interview at the conference, “you can think
of your bank or your phone company as a deputy of the state when it comes
to turning over records about your bank transactions, your e-mails, and
your social security number, your phone calls.” Swire’s position
has not been filled since he vacated it in 2001.
Ones and zeros define and envelop Americans as much as they absorb characters
in the Matrix. “The Matrix brings up a lot of different
issues of concern to us,” said Chris Hoofnagle, legislative counsel
with the Electronic Privacy Information Center, during a recent interview.
“For example, one that’s been on our minds a lot lately is location
tracking. Because of a very well-intentioned federal mandate that requires
cell phones to disclose location when you dial 911, many different cell
phones will be transmitting what’s known as automatic location information
to the carrier.” Noting the similarities between fact and fiction,
he added, “Something you see in The Matrix is the idea that
you can track somebody though a cell phone. This is becoming a reality.”
Location tracking is only a small part of the debate triggered by legal
and technological initiatives. Just five days after The Matrix
Reloaded hits theaters worldwide, debate in Congress will reopen
about TIA. The most controversial and Matrix-like of the Bush proposals,
it not only clears the way to gather all available information about US
citizens but also allows information gathering about millions of people
around the world. And under a not-yet-introduced bill known as “Patriot
II,” secret arrests, warrantless surveillance, and indefinite detentions
would become part of the so-called war on terrorism.
Defenders of the Bush surveillance agenda don’t see a basis for any
comparison. “TIA is not the Matrix,” said Michael Scardaville,
homeland security policy analyst with the Heritage Foundation, from his
Washington, DC, office. “The idea that programs like TIA are comparable
to the Matrix goes well beyond even the comparisons to George Orwell’s
Big Brother. A research effort designed to better analyze database information
is not the same as a vast computer machinery world that enslaves people
as batteries.”
Hoofnagle and other electronic privacy advocates generally agree that
the blockbuster Matrix movies don’t exactly predict the future
of Bush’s surveillance initiatives. The surveillance aspects of the
films don’t reflect contemporary surveillance with scientific precision,
and surveillance is only a subtext in the film. For many, however, the
Matrix films offer a more contemporary and hip metaphor than industrial-age
1984 does at a time when digital images have overwhelmed written
words in the popular consciousness.
Matrix fan Zimmermann can move anonymously in cyberspace with Pretty Good
Privacy, software he developed. It scatters digitally encoded information
so it cannot be understood by unintended users -- like government operatives.
The most popular publicly available encryption software in the world,
it effectively provides the user with privacy in an electronic world that
challenges privacy. It is so good that in 1996 the US government tried
to put Zimmermann in jail, saying that PGP might get into the hands of
terrorists. Zimmermann fought back, and with lots of help from the privacy
and tech communities, he won.
PGP empowers people to safeguard their privacy. “There has been a
growing social need for it,” said the understated inventor. “That’s
why I wrote it -- if privacy is outlawed, only outlaws will have privacy.”
The timing of the release of The Matrix Reloaded couldn’t
be better for privacy activists, who hope the film will help people connect
with issues raised in their lobbying campaigns, lawsuits, and critical
research. Hopefully, audiences will better understand the resemblance
between the struggles of Neo, Trinity, and Morpheus and those facing activists
opposed to TIA and similar antiprivacy initiatives. What happens next
will determine the future of real-world privacy. Only outlaws live free
from surveillance in the Matrix trilogy. Here in this world, it’s
time to find a red pill of our own. Free your mind.
Source: Independent Press Association
back to top
War Profiteers Card Deck
Playing deck spoofs “Iraq’s Most Wanted”
On May 15, peace activists released a deck of “War
Profiteers” playing cards in direct response to the infamous deck
of “Iraq’s Most Wanted” cards distributed to US troops
by the Pentagon. The “War Profiteers” deck identifies 53 individuals
and institutions in the oil, military, government, media, and policy sectors
(including ‘wildcard,’ President G. W. Bush). The groups’
aim is to expose, “The links among corporations, institutions, and
government officials that profit from endless war,” according to
the group’s website: www.warprofiteers.com.
Almost identical in appearance to the Pentagon’s deck, each card
contains short, often humorous, exposés designed to, “shine
the light of public scrutiny onto the individuals and institutions that
are reaping obscene profits by cultivating a climate of perpetual war”
according to John Sellers of the Oakland, CA based Ruckus Society, which
sponsored the project. While poking fun at some of the most powerful people
in the United States, the cards are all factual, including references
to specific corporations and their past dealings with dictators and repressive
regimes.
Unlike the deck produced for the US Military, this pack will be widely
distributed. In a subtle jab at the original deck, the War Profiteers
deck reserved the ‘shadow figures’ (used by the US as a space
filler for members of the Iraqi government for whom they could not find
photos) to represent the “Shadow Government” of Globalization:
the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, The World Trade Organization
and the under-exposed Export Credit Agencies.
The group says that if there is enough interest they will print more cards
and may possibly even produce an “International Edition” which
would include such figures as Ariel Sharon of Israel and Tony Blair of
Great Britain.
Each suit in this deck represents a category of war profiteers:
 US government
officials (because they love you)
 Oil, gas, and
energy companies
 Heads of
industry, finance, media, policy, and hype
 Military and
defense contractors
To view the deck, please visit www.warprofiteers.com
back to top
New Guatemalan law recognizes
indigenous languages
By Néfer Muñoz
San Jose, Guatemala, May 30 (IPS)— A new law in Guatemala,
the birthplace of the ancient Mayan civilization, officially recognizes
23 indigenous languages for the first time, and requires that state funds
be made available to rescue tongues that are in danger of disappearing.
The Law on National Languages, which went into effect this week, maintains
Spanish as the Central American nation’s official language, but recognizes
23 native tongues, most of which began to emerge over 4,000 years ago.
An estimated 65 percent of Guatemala’s 12 million people are descendants
of the Mayan Indians, while another large proportion of the population
is made up of people of “mestizo” or mixed-race heritage.
Many of Guatemala’s indigenous people do not speak Spanish, or do
so only poorly.
“This is a major achievement, because Guatemala is a country where
there is still heavy racism and discrimination,” Domingo Sosa, president
of the Academy of Mayan Languages of Guatemala, said in an interview with
IPS.
The Academy will be in charge of enforcing the new law, which was approved
by Congress on May 7 and came into effect on May 26.
The law recognizes 21 Mayan languages, as well as the Xinka tongue, and
the language spoken by the Garifunas, an ethnic group comprised of the
descendants of African slaves and indigenous people.
The new law amounts to a historic, long overdue act of justice, which
takes a step towards righting wrongs that began to be committed when Spanish
conquistador Pedro de Alvarado reached what is today Guatemala in 1524,
said Sosa.
“Ya’ol utzil” (“this is what is going to bring us
peace”) he added, with emotion, in K’iche’ (Quiche), the
most widely spoken Mayan language in Guatemala.
The 28-article law stipulates that all national provisions, statutes and
regulations are to be translated into the 23 recognized languages, that
all public institutions must provide services in those languages, and
that the state is to earmark funds for rescuing native tongues that are
in danger of dying out.
The 21 Mayan languages recognized by the new law are k’iche’,
q’eqchi’, mam, kaqchikel, poqoman, ch’orti’, awacateko,
uspanteko, mopan, sipakapense, sakapulteko, achi, akateko, chuj, itza’,
ixil, jalateko, q’anjob’al, tekiteko, pogonchi and tz’utijil.
Although their use was not banned in the past, public and private institutions
did not offer services in those languages, and this is the first time
the government has recognized the rights of ethnic groups to have access
to education, justice, health care and other services in their native
tongues.
Another important aspect of the new legislation is that it permits Spanish
names of people and towns to be changed to names in the Mayan, Garifuna
or Xinka languages.
“I am deeply moved, because the Mayan languages are now being recognized,
479 years after the invasion by the Spaniards,” the president of
the Mayan League, Daniel Matul, told IPS.
back to top
|
