Migrant Routes Under Military and Police Surveillance

2019 ◽  
pp. 92-123
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Roberto Alvarez

I utilize my situated position as anthropologist, academician, and citizen to argue not only that we should “think” California, but also that we should “rethink” our state—both its condition and its social cartography. To be clear, I see all my research and endeavors—my research on the US/Mexico border; my time among the markets and entrepreneurs I have worked and lived with; my focus on those places in which I was raised: Lemon Grove, Logan Heights; the family network and my community ethnographic work—as personal. I am in this academic game and the telling of our story because it is personal. When Lemon Grove was segregated, it was about my family; when Logan Heights was split by the construction of Interstate 5 and threatened by police surveillance, it was about our community; when the border was sanctioned and militarized it again was about the communities of which I am a part. A rethinking California is rooted in the experience of living California, of knowing and feeling the condition and the struggles we are experiencing and the crises we have gone through. We need to rethink California, especially the current failure of the state. This too is ultimately personal, because it affects each and every one of us, especially those historically unrepresented folks who have endured over the decades.


1985 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 835-862 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Hiley

Modern British counter-espionage effectively began in April 1907, when a joint conference of naval and military officials, formed the previous year to consider ‘the Powers Possessed by the Executive in Time of Emergency’, recommended both an immediate strengthening of the laws against espionage, and a War is Office investigation of ‘the question of police surveillance and control of aliens’. These recommendations were to prove an important initiative, and did much to determine the course of British counter-espionage before 1914, yet at the time they probably seemed little more than an airing of old grievances unlikely to find new support, for they were among the last remnants n. of the abortive ‘Emergency Powers Bill’ which the War Office intelligence department had been advocating to strengthen home defence ever since the invasion scare of 1888. The 1906 joint conference had in fact hoped to further the cause of this great legislative package, with its radically new powers of access, requisition and seizure but, faced with the Liberal administration's commitment to the ‘continuous principle’ that a full-scale landing was impossible, had been forced instead to confine itself to the purely naval and military aspects of home defence. As its report confessed in April 1907, in the prevailing climate of opinion the only hope for the great ‘Emergency Powers Bill’ was as a series of ‘small and independent measures’.


1903 ◽  
Vol 3 (11-12) ◽  
pp. 692-694

On December 4, a joint meeting of the Kazan Society of Physicians and the Legal Society took place, in which the assistant professor A. I. Elistratov submitted a report on the topic: "medical statistics of defenders of medical and police surveillance of prostitution."


Biometrics ◽  
2017 ◽  
pp. 1575-1590
Author(s):  
Steve Mann

This chapter builds upon the concept of Uberveillance introduced in the seminal research of M. G. Michael and Katina Michael in 2006. It begins with an overview of sousveillance (underwatching) technologies and examines the “We're watching you but you can't watch us” hypocrisy associated with the rise of surveillance (overwatching). Surveillance cameras are often installed in places that have “NO CAMERAS” and “NO CELLPHONES IN STORE, PLEASE!” signage. The author considers the chilling effect of this veillance hypocrisy on LifeGlogging, wearable computing, “Sixth Sense,” AR Glass, and the Digital Eye Glass vision aid. If surveillance gives rise to hypocrisy, then to what does its inverse, sousveillance (wearable cameras, AR Glass, etc.), give rise? The opposite (antonym) of hypocrisy is integrity. How might we resolve the conflict-of-interest that arises in situations where, for example, police surveillance cameras capture the only record of wrongdoing by the police? Is sousveillance the answer or will centralized dataveillance merely turn sousveillance into a corruptible uberveillance authority?


Author(s):  
Jacqueline R. Kanovitz ◽  
Jefferson L. Ingram ◽  
Christopher J. Devine
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document