Episode

On today's episode we talk about the upsides of a surveillance state. The ongoing social dilemma of freedom vs security. The value of privacy. States of exception. And Deleuze's Postscript on Societies of Control.
Get more:
Website: www.philosophizethis.org/
Patreon: / philosophizethis
Philosophize This! Clips: / @philosophizethisclips
Be social:
Twitter: / iamstephenwest
Instagram: / philosophizethispodcast
TikTok: / philosophizethispodcast
Facebook: / philosophizethisshow
Thank you for making the show possible. 🙂

[@EnSokkROFL]

"A survellience state would eliminate crime" Sure, as long as we stop considering enslaving humanity as a crime..

[@acardinalconsideration824]

“The average man doesn’t want to be free. He simply wants to be safe.”

[@Z0mb13ta11ahase]

"Boo"

[@gethinfiltrator6700]

Truth doesnt fill your belly.

[@Elisha_the_bald_headed_prophet]

​@@gethinfiltrator6700neither does safety

[@t-nzama-ijongosi6668]

Last 3 years have been quite a revelation about how average and low can we go...In the name of "safety"

[@lajoiedeslivres]

Very good podcast. As French and read Foucault and Deleuze, I really appreciated your observations.

[@andrewbowen2837]

Perhaps there is no better exemplar of this debate than the Brothers Karamazov, specifically the Grand Inquisitor chapter. Doestoevsky champions freedom in all his works, but that one provides both sides of the argument. When you discussed the "dividual," in contrast to the individual, it brought to mind several ideas in material culture studies related to dividual personhood and New Materialisms. In short, the argument is that each person is made of their relations to other beings, things, and materials in complex networks or webs of interaction. Indeed, humans are never separated from the material world or things within it. This begs the question on if there really is individuality. It differs from what Deleuze was talking about in some regards, but is an interesting thought nonetheless.

[@mioszskrzynski7101]

Love your closing statement 😊 it's great to talk about important topics and find what suits us best. A nice day and a nice week to you sir as well 😊

[@simonherckens5509]

Somewhere around 30:00 sounds actually similar to the late work of Foucault, where he talked about the different ways in which people are given subjective identities (subjectivation) and by these identities are pushed (conduire in French) to act for themselves in accordance to 'what their subjective identity would do'. Foucault even traces this sublte form of power to the priests in christianity.

[@philosophizethispodcast]

Yes! Deleuze definitely is in part building off of Foucault's Pastoral power. Thanks for the intelligent contribution, my friend.

[@nathanielholzgrafe5274]

Really enjoyed Agamben's take on this debate. Solid episode.

[@heaven7360]

Thank you for offering women thinkers for people to read. There are many and are overlooked more often than not.. in my experience at least.

[@womp3571]

i havent been able to listen to your pod or do anything really this past year because its been so busy, but now i do have time and i just wanted to say thank you for everything you do! this pod has helped me alot since 2020 and been so interesting everytime i listen💗

[@markoslavicek]

I commented on the previous episode that I would like to heard about Deleuze in this one and now there he is ❤

[@michaelschuetz8890]

I also noticed that!🙂

[@markoslavicek]

@@michaelschuetz8890 Cheers 🍻 my faithful follower 😁

[@_PanchoVilla]

Great video

[@JessTarn]

"In order to ensure the security and continued stability, the republic has been reorganized into the first galactic Empire."--Darth Sidious

[@ffffffffffffffff5840]

Imagine how many jobs the death star created

[@manikandanc4893]

Great episode ! Thanks .

[@ioancorjuc4667]

I love this chanel.

[@user-ub8tn2uc1f]

Healthy Identity fluidity is required…it becomes self motivation to maintain a meta-personality in all the aspects of group identities in the environment.

[@jimmy-sees-stars8166]

I feel like this topic should be a prerequisite for speaking on the topic of American Gun Control. You cannot be totally safe and totally free without taking freedomes from your neighbors. The question is how free can your neighbors be before you feel unsafe?

[@user-ub8tn2uc1f]

Privacy…the right to one’s self in a group.

[@hsab5927]

thank you

[@dirtycelinefrenchman]

Great stuff, Is that follow-up episode still coming?

[@user-ub8tn2uc1f]

Privacy…the right to walk away…the right to one’s own self…the right to not comment.

[@jamessheffield4173]

The Constitution and the Ten Amendments are a good synthesis of reconciling both.

[@roseproctor3177]

we love u too!

[@zoewang9568]

I love this podcast!!!! It's brilliant and fun. But the transcripts in your website have not been updated since episode 181... REALLY import for English learners!

[@mohamadsfarahani963]

Ah listening to this in iran feels so familiar you hear a simpler version of these arguments daily

[@mohamadsfarahani963]

At least I hear it from my dad. there isn't much freedom for security people on the streets and day to day life anymore these days since that's the official government line

[@thatoneguyfromearth]

Hey a long time fan here, Armstrong actually only focused on Technical benifits and implications of mass surveillance he did not focus on social implications. For example A society with normal people following dogmatic religion and state with politicians with simmilar beliefs and worst human right abuses in humanity adopts mass surveillance. Now remember most religions committes human right abuses to protect it's status quo. You were atleast had freedom to not choose that religion now you can not even say a word agains human right abuse happening around you. You will be wiped out immediately by the state. And that's what Orwell feared about mass surveillance in 1984. And seeing our track record of human right abuses mass surveillance can only be beneficial if the state isn't filled with politicians with dogmatic religious beliefs.

[@wooniehyunjinnnnn3051]

Freedom comes with a great responsibility. Establishing a Surveillance System in a state is like saying the people or at least the majority of the ones living in that particular state are not worthy of this big responsibility. Overall, I think this is unfair and literally collective punishment. Not everyone, is involved in horrendous unjust acts, and to limit the freedom of the whole population even more than it already is and to that kind of extent may I add, just because of a specific part of population is itself very unjust. Sure the idea of a Surveillance system does have its justification, but it is better think of other, more ethical ways to ensure the safety of a particular population. One, that doesn’t punish the collective for the mistakes of limited groups of people.

[@lunalevi7482]

I think a lot of us listening to this podcast wouldn't trade it that much but I assume we're in the minority 😅😢

[@9000ck]

you don't need to ban books now. not enough people are able to actually, meaningfully read them.

[@4gegtyreeyuyeddffvyt]

Hi Stephen I’ve been a listener since episode 3! Can I get a ❤?

[@philosophizethispodcast]

Thank you so much! Hope you keep enjoying the podcast! :)

[@BinaryDood]

atomization doesn't end at the individual

[@ollimekatl]

It is better to exist in a savage nature, than to live under the laws of savage men.

[@rutygut5000]

Kids have to get various vaccinations before they can have the privilege of attending public school. Is it such a stretch to compare this to the covid vaccine or risk getting fired? The internet is comprised of other people's servers. Why shouldn't they be able to track who visits their own websites?

[@Firerose101]

Ask all the masked Karen’s during the pandemic

[@Sui_Generis0]

18:27 😂😂😂😂

[@user-ub8tn2uc1f]

Privacy or forced sharing…

[@fringefringe7282]

This is naive point of view. One thing is to observe all the things, another is ability to process the data and yet another is arriving at a proper conclusion.

[@mioszskrzynski7101]

7:00 I find it unconvincing that enough surveillance will change our behaviour so drastically. We can track how people act but that is not enough to gauge how people think. Even with absolute surveillance there is still risk of unintended actions. Therefore people would still feel unsafe, perhaps just to a lesser degree. Also would people even trust these systems? In todays' world people are able to escape responsibility even when there is credible evidence behind their crimes. Just because there is more of it won't cut it, our perspective would have to change. I know this is a minority but think about flat-earthers, right? People need more than credible evidence to believe. About military - what reason is there to disarm when having absolute information about everyone's military? Sure, it's impossible to hide anything, but it's only a part of the game. "We Will build tanks and put them near the border. Let them know their place." One could say It does change the importance of certain aspects, but doesn't change the rules od the game. Just because there is evidence of everyone's actions, does not mean that people will trust it to be used the way they want it to be used. Because who even has Access to it? It makes no sense to make a password to hide something from your government - sure - what about your neighbours though? Do you trust them enough? What about strangers? It is very important and decisive here, who is in posession of such insights, yet perhaps it is beyond the scope of this video😅 What I'm getting at is that such surveillance won't change much if people won't change the way they approach privacy and responsibility - and that's not a given Regardless, very fun video, as always 😊

[@daniel97401]

I had this conversation a week ago. Id rather live in China safe, than in my country free.

[@Z0mb13ta11ahase]

Why haven't you moved there?

[@daniel97401]

@@Z0mb13ta11ahase is life really that simple?

[@Z0mb13ta11ahase]

@@daniel97401 Is it that hard? How much do you really "rather" are you actively pursuing moving anywhere safer? I don't know where you live but in America it's rather easy to move somewhere safer if that is a high priority for someone. It generally comes with a lower standard of living by going somewhere rural, line up a job and a living space and then transfer yourself and your stuff and boom. I guess I'm questioning how much you truly believe your own statement. How much effort is worth the safety of living in China? Or put another way how much effort is "too much" for your own safety if you truly feel unsafe where you are?

[@daniel97401]

@@Z0mb13ta11ahase It is that hard, actually. Im not American, well not from 'America' the country anyways.

[@ffffffffffffffff5840]

@@daniel97401 is your country actually free?

[@-arche-7926]

Neat episode, but just to deride surveilance & police as „obviously necessary“ is silly, disregarding histories of anarchist theories & praxis (including Agamben himself).

[@christinemartin63]

Oh yeah, I see it. You will own nothing ... and love it. You will ask for that which will sicken and soft-kill you. You will give up your rights for security and convenience. You will adore your servitude and beg for more. Yikes! Where can I hide from the future??

[@jamie7546]

Promo-SM 😚

[@BartAnderson_writer]

Too much contemporary libertarianism especially in discussion of covid. Removes the issue from the social context (e.g. an era of alienated individualism and suspicion of the Establishment). Not an abstract existential issue, but one rooted in our time and place.