We don’t notice it anymore—the cameras, the clicks, the silent trackers embedded in our apps. Yet they monitor each step, each conversation, each dissenting thought. Whether we live in Moscow, New York, Singapore, or Tehran, we are being watched. In democratic societies, we give up our freedoms gradually; in authoritarian regimes, they are taken without consent. How many of us truly feel at ease under the gaze of an omnipotent eye?
Yet many of us invite surveillance into our lives. We claim to value privacy, but we eagerly hand over our most intimate details for the sake of convenience. Our smartphones, bought with our own money, listen to our desires, and algorithms serve us ads promising fulfillment. Our music playlists are curated by previous choices, and our browsing history shapes the content we see. We think we’ve chosen convenience, but our habits and preferences are sold to corporations, which profit enormously from our data. We believe we exercise free will, but the reality is that the technological landscape presents us with choices shaped by unseen forces. The freedom to choose feels, more than ever, like an illusion. Perhaps George Orwell was a prophet—his vision of omnipresent surveillance has become our reality.
Political dissenters have long been subject to the watchful eye of the state. Centuries ago, spies or secret agents followed dissenters, intercepted letters, and eliminated perceived threats. In recent decades, technological developments have given us digital tools, which have been used by dissenters to organize protests and promote free speech, including #BLM and #StudentProtestBD. But the digital realm, meant to empower through democratic access to knowledge, has become a double-edged sword. These technologies also track, monitor, and suppress resistance, giving governments new ways to maintain power and control. Under the guise of national security and fighting terrorism, we are persuaded that these efforts have our best interests in mind. We look away as counterterrorism measures and policing erode democratic principles.
Authoritarian states are explicit in the use of surveillance for social control, suppression of dissent, and political coercion. Technologies such as facial recognition and biometric databases are used to target dissidents and minority communities. Autocrats use private information to extort, silence, or coerce opponents and others. Journalists, newspapers, and publications are surveilled, creating barriers to accurate information and freedom of expression. Under such circumstances, we don’t know what is true anymore.
The expansion of surveillance technologies has profound implications for marginalized groups. In both democracies and authoritarian regimes, religious minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals, ethnic minorities, migrants, and the poor are subject to heightened scrutiny. For them, surveillance is more than just a security measure—it’s a threat to their very existence. Policing, profiling, harassment, border patrols, checkpoints, and informants transform daily life into a landscape of fear, where exposure can lead to devastating consequences.
Surveillance is therefore also linked to inequality. Wealthier people can afford more privacy-enhancing devices and services, while the poor have no option but to be surveilled, especially if they participate in online services. Wealthier countries and corporations develop and profit from surveillance technology, which is then sold to poorer or authoritarian states. This exacerbates global and national inequalities and contributes to repression in those regions.
In this culture of surveillance, writers, artists, filmmakers, and other creatives often find themselves under scrutiny, either for the ideas they express or simply for who they are. The result? Self-censorship. The fear of retribution silences many before the state can, transferring the mechanisms of control from the governments to the artists themselves.
Yet, it’s not only governments and multinational corporations that engage in surveillance. Everyday interactions are not free from the dynamics of surveillance either. Neighbors, family members, colleagues, and even friends can become agents of scrutiny, policing one another through judgment, gossip, and exclusion. This social surveillance perpetuates conformity, marginalizing those who deviate from societal norms. LGBTQ+ individuals, migrants, and others are particularly vulnerable to the effects of norm enforcement and self-censorship.
In Issue 41, Shuddhashar FreeVoice delves into the pervasive power of surveillance. We explore its many forms—digital, personal, state, and institutional—and its effects on people worldwide. Among the articles are ones that consider the US, India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Eritrea, Greece, and Iran, many of them from first-hand experiences. Writers explore historical examples of surveillance, ethical considerations, and societal implications.
From the victims of surveillance to those who enforce it, from the subtle mechanisms of human surveillance to the complex digital networks, we invite you to join us in this critical discussion. Surveillance isn’t just an abstract concept—it shapes our reality. Wherever we are. Every day.
