
Venezuela: My experience in the surveillance state - grey-area
http://boingboing.net/2013/07/08/snowden-and-venezuela-my-biza.html
======
rafaelm
This is only one story of the many, many times opponents to the Chavez and now
Maduro government have been recorded, and exposed to public ridicule live on
national TV by government sanctioned programs.

Hugo Chavez even used to call in and congratulate the guy that used to run La
Hojilla. What more approval do you need than getting congratulated by the
leader of the revolution!

During the last presidential election this guy even dragged out what he said
was a statement by a former police officer that said the he caught Capriles
(the opposing presidential candidate) fellating another guy in a car outside a
house. I don't know if that statement was true or not, but it was constantly
used to ridicule him live on TV.

My sister is friends with a girl who is married to a journalist. These guys
hacked her e-mail and found some personal pictures of her in the beach with
her husband and he showed them on national TV and exposed them to ridicule,
saying that he was a cheapskate that wouldn't pay for his wife's boob job,etc.

Karma is a bitch though. The TV show is now cancelled because the guy used to
report to his cuban minders in regular meetings that were recorded. Somehow
one of these recordings was leaked and he was caught bad mouthing a ton of
people in the government, including Cabello, the most powerful guy in the govt
right now (even more than Maduro).

------
grey-area
I found this article fascinating, more because of the background it gives on
the current situation in Venezuela than because of suggestions of Snowden's
possible exile there. It truly does sound like Venezuela is close to dystopia,
exactly the sort of dystopia that Snowden (and many others before him) have
warned about. The routine use of surveillance on television shows to discredit
opponents at all levels of the system is terrifying. Who hasn't said something
in private which could easily be taken out of context, and used to construct a
plausible smear and destroy a career? Even the TV host who abused access to
recordings, Mario Silva, was eventually hoist by his own petard - the whole
story resembles the show trials and purges under Stalin, where no-one was
safe, not even party members.

While this might be useful ammunition for the US administration to smear
Snowden by association, and is probably darkly amusing for residents as they
watch their government talk about asylum for a whistleblower on the very
powers they abuse, I actually think it's far more interesting as an example of
a surveillance state gone awry.

~~~
mpyne
> While this might be useful ammunition for the US administration to smear
> Snowden by association

The U.S. won't even have to hardly mention all this. All they need to say is
that Snowden fled to Hugo Chavez's native land, on purpose, and public opinion
will be sealed in the U.S.

~~~
grey-area
Perhaps I have more confidence in the perspicacity of the US public than you,
and you should also note this is a global issue, not just a US one. To me this
story says more about the dangers of a surveillance state than about Snowden.

[http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-
ins...](http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-
institute/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=1919)

------
pvnick
Snowden never claimed to be an idealistic saint. He's only human. He's facing
the same, or worse, inhumane treatment as Bradley Manning [1]. I doubt he
really cares at this point the politics of the country that keeps him safe. I
know I wouldn't.

Besides, if this whole ordeal can even partially force the US to return to
being the shining beacon of human rights it pretends to be, it'll be harder
for countries like Venezuela to point to them and say "see? Look they're doing
it too."

[1] [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/12/bradley-
manning-...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/12/bradley-manning-
cruel-inhuman-treatment-un)

~~~
mpyne
He's not facing the same treatment as Bradley Manning initially received,
unless he has some military background none of us are aware of.

~~~
autodidakto
An earlier article submitted here was by the the pentagon paper's guy (who
decided not to go into exile), in which he said Snowden did the right thing
and would have ended up like BM had he stayed.

~~~
mpyne
While I understand that the authority that you're appealing to is considered
canonical, it's still an appeal to authority. Ellsberg has no more actual
insight into the treatment one should expect to receive in the civilian
justice system than any other 2013 hacktivist. After all we have the _existing
example_ of the NSA whistleblowers who _did_ stay, and while they were not
treated kindly by the judicial system, they were not treated anywhere close to
as badly as Pfc. Manning.

Besides which, if it's true what Ellsberg and Snowden claim about how there is
apparently a class of civilian crime that is liable to having you receive
Quantico-brig suicide-watch treatment without due process then that would
already be a much larger problem than the NSA.

Instead it looks awfully convenient that Snowden was the world's biggest fan
of U.S. judicial oversight right up until it became possible he might himself
have to answer to that same judicial system, whereupon it suddenly turned into
banana republic justice...

~~~
autodidakto
Since we're both fans of logic, I'll make small nitpicks:

I wasn't appealing to authority because I wasn't making an argument -- just
making sure you knew of the articles existence. Also, in reference to "it's
still an appeal...": You shouldn't imply that an appeal to authority is always
wrong (It's only wrong if the authority is not appropriate; and it's never
implied that authorities are infallible). However, you rightly went on to
attack the authorities arguments -- but like I said, nitpick for fun.

One thing that's not clear to me is your last paragraph. Why was Snowden
approving of judicial oversight? My understanding was that he had faith that a
broken system might repair itself, then upon realize it was only getting
worse, leaked the info to the public. Escaping this system afterwards wouldn't
be hypocrisy.

------
stfu
Yes, his is incredibly bad stuff. But let me put it into context:

I would love to read a similar run down on what amount of money, intelligence
and human resources the US has pured so far in the Venezuelan opposition.

After the Cuban fiasco these actions became definitely less outrageous, but it
seems save to assume that the US is not standing on the sidelines at election
time in counties with a US critical government.

Morales' European grounding shows quite clearly what kind of globally
coordinate hell the US services can create for countries unwilling to
surrender. Consequently almost no democratic nation is able to withstand this
kind of internal and external pressure politics - as demonstrated so vividly
by the outcome of Snowden's asylum requests.

And it still remains a big question mark in how far these three nations are
not just going to use him as a bargaining chip for future negotiations with
the US.

I am wondering myself how a nation could theoretically withstand US pressure
without having a well oiled internal spying and propaganda machine.

~~~
rafaelm
So because there is a "threat" from a foreign nation, the government is
allowed to spy on its citizens critical of the government and expose them and
ridicule them live on national TV?

Sounds very similar to the "terrorist threat" excuse another surveillance
state is using.

~~~
scarmig
I'm torn. Venezuela's government has had more than its fair share of real coup
attempts in the recent past, so there is an actual non-imaginary threat there,
instead of terrorist bogeymen.

The fact that Chavez and his boys did launch one of those coups originally,
though, makes me less inclined to give benefit of the doubt. Why should I have
to take sides between two groups of bad guys? There's an honor in condemning
everyone who violates human rights.

~~~
gasull
The US has also had very real terrorist attacks, like the 9/11\. That isn't a
excuse for a surveillance state.

Security is NEVER a valid excuse for a surveillance state.

------
narrator
So in 20 years every country is going to be a surveillance state. How does
this alter the sci-fi universe? Is every sci-fi novel taking place in the
future going to have to be some spin-off of 1984 to maintain credulity? Did we
all not want to hear that? Is there any room for alternate future visions of
civilization given that they are all variations on a panopticon theme? Is this
some sort of political singularity in the making?

~~~
rayiner
There are more than a few steps from surveillance of Facebook accounts to
Orwellian dystopia. There is more to 1984 than just surveillance (mind
control, etc). Whether one leads inexorably to the other depends in large part
on what you think of democracy. If you think that an educated people can be
easily manipulated and controlled with doublespeak, as they are in 1984, then
some sort of dystopia is likely, and frankly that's the case whether we have a
surveillance state or not. If, on the other hand, you think people are mostly
rational and capable of determining rationally what sort of world they want to
live in, then that will always create a bulwark against tyranny.

I'm personally in the latter camp. I think that a generation of millennials,
who don't particularly value privacy and don't see much wrong with the
government monitoring certain communications when they voluntarily post every
little detail of their lives on Facebook for hundreds or thousands of people
to see, are still nonetheless rational people who will stand up against any
infringement of the things they really care about: house and home, family,
their means of making a living, etc.

My bigger concern is actually with regards to automation and robots. Despotic
regimes depend on having military force. That is they only way they can
suppress the will of the majority. But soldiers are just people, and pitting
soldiers against their own countrymen is an unstable equilibrium in the long
term. It's not sustainable in the face of actual public opposition. But
automation and robots changes that equation. It makes it possible for a few to
rule the many without relying on the inherently unstable situation of trying
to keep hundreds of thousands or millions of soldiers loyal to the despots
against their own families. To the extent that dystopia keeps me up at night,
that's what I worry about, not surveillance.

~~~
unclebucknasty
I seldom agree with you (I think maybe once), and the first paragraph of this
post alone is loaded with statements with which I'd disagree.

But you cannot be accused of being uninteresting.

I mean, you spend so much time here smacking down people's concerns about very
real things that are happening in the news as we speak. NSA-spying, growing
government power, curtailed liberties, etc. You have a tendency to
characterize people on the other side of that argument as conspiracy
theorists, or otherwise irrational and on the fringe.

But, what keeps you up at night is the possibility of an army of killer robots
controlled by a couple of multi-billionaire megalomaniacs holed up in a
subterranean fortress.

Wow.

~~~
jivatmanx
More or less total surveillance and indefinite storage exists today.

It takes very little creativity to imagine this being abused. Choose a few
keywords, and you can easily identify everyone in the U.S. with any
significant civil libertarian.

Once you've got the list, all you have to do is prevent these people from
getting political power, and voila, 1984.

The robot thing definitely takes more creativity to think of than that.

More generally, I tend to think that all Brute Force methods are the most
crude, and a last resort even in a tyranny.

~~~
rayiner
If you think that it takes an elite cadre of civil libertarians to protect the
country from 1984-style dystopia, then surveillance is indeed a scary thing.
But surveillance isn't going to do anything against broad-based public
opposition. If you think the masses of ordinary people are capable of
preventing a 1984-style dystopia through majoritarian mechanisms, then
surveillance is a lot less scary.

------
ianferrel
This is terrible and it's good that it's seeing some press as a result of
Snowden's plight. But the author tries to imply that Snowden is somehow
approving of Venezuela's policies.

Seeking asylum isn't an endorsement of Venezuela. It's a last-ditch-effort to
stay free against government oppression.

~~~
privong
> Seeking asylum isn't an endorsement of Venezuela. It's a last-ditch-effort
> to stay free against government oppression.

It's not clear that jumping out of the pan and into the fire is the best
option though.

~~~
aptwebapps
I think most people would prefer the US's version of government oppression to
Venezuela's, but might change their mind if they thought they were going to go
away for long time if they stayed in the US.

------
contingencies
With regards to interpretation, which is clearly slanted in one direction
here, just because Venezuala's government haven't yet secured their rule to
the point where doing the surveillance in secret and neglecting the potential
popular effect of leaking interceptions is politically viable, doesn't mean
they're necessarily more of a surveillance state than the US, UK, or many
others.

Perhaps it just makes them a more playful, immature and open version of a
surveillance state. Sort of like the NSA's cutesie two year old puppy.
(Meanwhile the US, Europe, the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and China
gnash rabid teeth in the dog house proper - the sign above the door reading:
"for grownups only".)

------
fieryeagle
Very useful article. This is nothing less to be expected from a Communist bloc
nation. Public media smearing is just one facet of oppression.

If we are talking about Snowden as a beacon for freedom of speech and basic
human rights, his move would seem like an unwise one. However, he is but flesh
and blood like any of us so running to an oppressive state for relative safety
is just fine. Survival comes before ideal.

------
kposehn
Excellent article.

I would like to say that I was aware already of Venezuela's tactics, but I
knew nothing until this article and the follow-up research I've done. Makes
Snowden's choice seem rather odd/silly now.

~~~
zwegner
Snowden didn't leave the US to escape surveillance (as he's made clear, that
doesn't really help). He left to escape a lifetime in prison.

~~~
mpyne
> He left to escape a lifetime in prison.

Like, Obama could just order the jury to convict him and order the judge to
sentence him to prison? Neat system, that.

~~~
alan_cx
In a secret trial, yes.

~~~
mpyne
Are we already throwing U.S. citizens into secret trials now?

If so that would be a far graver threat to liberty than mere surveillance.
Where's the outrage over that then?

------
junto
It seems plainly obvious to me that Snowden's only option will be to reside at
the leisure of a state that is a natural enemy of the US.

Any country that is a friend to the US is not safe to Snowden. However, I
cannot think of a single stable democracy that would risk the wrath of the
United States.

Snowden has a secondary problem with countries such as Venezuela, is that they
are inherently unstable. Should the current Venezuelan government fall and
switch to a pro-US government, then I assume he has a rather big problem on
his hands.

------
D9u
_...a man who is now in disgrace himself because, in a weird twist of fate, a
recording of him was leaked and broadcast on TV._ The irony! Live by the
sword, die by the sword.

NSA = Nothing Sacred Anymore

One would think that with the past experiences of US President's wiretapping
enemies and the resulting scandals, that the current administration would seek
that fabled "moral high ground" and not stoop to such low levels.

However, at this point, Snowden doesn't really have too many options...

------
lambdasquirrel
One thing I haven't noticed in any discussion is how the Founding Fathers of
the U.S. turned to France (then a monarchy, and one less free than Britain)
for help during the Revolutionary War. That Snowden might need to flee to one
of these Latin American countries may be ironic, but it is the best practical
option, just as accepting French aid was the best option back then.

------
mrxd
Pretty terrifying that Venezuelans have to live without protection of the 4th
amendment! So glad that here in America oh wait...

