Little Brother, Big Implications

Cory Doctorow’s text Little Brother yields multiple implications for the society in which we (hopefully not blindly) reside.  Doctorow’s entertaining yet horrifying depiction of Marcus and his experience with the Department of Homeland Security, exemplifies a reactionary response to a terrorist attack with which we as a society, still feeling the aftershocks of terrorism,  are able to commiserate.  After reading much of the text, finding it at times a bit preachy or pedantic (particularly the Constitution debate in the classroom), although I am a strong advocate of individual privacy, freedom,  and anti-totalitarianism, I was overwhelmed with questions regarding the amount of privacy we actually have in America.  Are the events in Little Brother and the police state that San Francisco becomes that far-fetched?  In this age of technological wonder where smart phones are becoming more and more dominant, are we just implanting world-wide tracking and surveillance devices into our hips?

Unfortunately, in an attempt to answer these questions, I belive that given certain circumstances, a particular governing body such as the Department of Homeland Security would have the ability to invade our privacy(if they are not already) and take over through the use of force.  When a government body exercises too much undisciplined, violent control in an attempt to protect us from terrorists attacks, they eliminate our privacy and freedom in order to catch the “bad guys.”  However, if everything about any individual (you, me, him, her) was broadcasted, wouldn’t we all be incriminated at some level as a “bad guy?” 

Furthermore, Doctorow’s novel illuminates certain post-September 11th strategies implemented by Bush and company such as the Patriot Act.    This act elevates government agiencies’ ability to search phones, emails, personal records, etc.  Although the effects of the Patriot Act are not as evident as the mental torture and embarrassment Marcus experiences executed by the Department of Homeland Security in Little Brother, the Patriot Act can be seen through the lens of the novel, as a post-terrorist attack response that is ethically questionable (reading this novel has made me apprehensive about posting stuff like this online…)

What truly reached me from the novel, greatly pertaining to the discourse of English 5010, is Marcus’s ability to implement the use of technology to counteract the invasion of privacy and injustices brought on by the DHS.  It is through the use of the XNet that Marcus is able to communicate freely and organize resistance.  Therefore, the novel is not anti-technology but anti-technological abuse.  However, are people able to use technology without abusing it? (a question I believe will be exceedingly important as time precedes).  Marcus is able to resist the DHS because he is tech-savy.   If Little Brother’s protagonist was computer illiterate, I believe Cory Doctorow’s novel would have ended long before it begun.  Therefore, should we as instructors or future instructors be required to teach computer education to prevent tech abuse?

Leave a Reply