Surveillance as a positive good in itself, seems a truism today; & i don’t like it. I want to sometimes be in the dark. The question that never gets asked is: what are you keeping track for? Which is to say, in a modern surveillance society, everyone is guilty until proven innocent.
On the face of it, keeping track seems to be essential to maintaining control—but this is only an illusion. It doesn’t, in itself, give you any more power to determine an outcome; nor even to predict the outcome. It means refusing trust & ignoring the potential for reciprocity. Is this really efficient? I would say that the best organization is the least centralized, the one with the most independence in its parts, the kind that can swiftly adapt to change. Perhaps this requires acknowledging that keeping things within a certain scale is better than unlimited growth. Perhaps nobody would ever amass a billion dollars in such a wise society.
The source of the need for control is fear. Not from knowledge, but from ignorance. When you are deeply familiar with your world, you understand the kinds of things that are likely to happen. You might even accept that there are other agencies involved—maybe some of them, worth joining forces with. This is in fact how humans became human in the beginning. (Not by bumping off all our nearer relatives.)
From being intimately connected, comes the acceptance that is proof against arbitrary fearfulness. Instead of control, there is “flow” or “power-with”. And in the end, instead of ruthless surveillance (which nobody needs), you have a mindful awareness that gives you what you want to know, when you need it.