essay round 3 articles

THE AGE OF SURVEILLANCE

CAPITALISM. The Fight for a Human Future at the

New Frontier of Power

SHOSHANA ZUBOFF

PuBLICAFFAIRS

NEW YORK

Copyright© 2019 by Shoshana Zuboff

Hachette Book Group supports the right to free expression and the value of copyright. Tue purpose of copyright is to encourage writers and artists to produce the creative works tha_t enrich our culture.

The scanning, uploading, and distribution of this book without permission is a theft of the author's intellectual property. If you would like permission to use material from the book ( other than for review purposes), please contact [email protected]. Thank you for your support of the author's rights.

PublicAffairs Hachette Book Group 1290 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10104 www.publicaffairsbooks.com @Public_Affairs

Printed in the United States of America

First Edition: January 2019

Published by PublicAffairs, an imprint of Perseus Books, LLC, a subsidiary of Hachette Book Group, Inc. The PublicAffairs name and logo is a trademark of the Hachette Book Group.

The Hachette Speakers Bureau provides a wide range of authors for speaking events. To find out more, go to www.hachettespeakersbureau.com or call (866) 376-6591.

Sonnets from China, copyright© 1945 by W. H. Auden, renewed 1973 by Tue Estate ofW. H. Auden; and 'We Too Had Known Golden Hours;• copyright© 1951 by W. H. Auden and renewed 1979 by The Estate of W.H. Auden; from W. H. Auden Collected Poems by W. H. Auden. Used by permission of Random House, an imprint and division of Penguin Random House LLC. All rights reserved.

Excerpt(s) from Social Physics: How Good Ideas Spread-The Lessons from a New Science by Alex Pentland, copyright© 2014 by Alex Pentland. Used by permission of Penguin Press, an imprint of Penguin Publishing Group, a division of Penguin Random House LLC. All rights reserved.

Tue publisher is not responsible for websites ( or their content) that are not owned by the publisher.

Print book interior design by Six Red Marbles Inc.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Zuboff, Shoshana, 1951- author. Title: The age of surveillance capitalism : the fight for a human future at the new frontier of power /

Shoshana Zuboff. ·· Description: First edition: I New York: PublicAffairs, 2018. I Includes bibliographical references and

index. Identifiers: LCCN 2018003901 (print) I LCCN 2018039998 (ebook) I ISBN 9781610395700 (ebook) I

ISBN 9781610395694 (hardcover) Subjects: LCSH: Consumer behavior-Data processing. I Consumer profiling-Data processing. I

Information technology-Social aspects. Classification: LCC HF5415.32 (ebook) I LCC HF5415.32 .Z83 2018 (print) I DDC 306.3-dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018003901

ISBNs: 978-1-61039-569-4 (hardcover), 978-1-61039-570-0 (ebook)

LSC-C

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3

This book is dedicated to the past and the future: In memory of my Beloved, Jim Maxmin.

In memory of my courageous friend, Frank Schirrmacher. In honor of my children,

Chloe Sophia Maxmin and Jacob Raphael Maxrnin:__ I write to fortify your futures and

the moral cause of your generation.

THE DEFINITION

Sur-veil-lance Cap-i-tal-ism, n.

1. A new economic order that claims human experience as free raw mate-

rial for hidden commercial practices of extraction, prediction, and sales;

2. A parasitic economic logic in which the production of goods and services

is subordinated to a new global architecture of behavioral modification; 3. A

rogue mutation of capitalism marked by concentrations of wealth, knowl-

edge, and power unprecedented in human history; 4. The foundational

framework of a surveillance economy; 5. As significant a threat to human

nature in the twenty-first century as industrial capitalism was to the nat-

ural world in the nineteenth and twentieth; 6. The origin of a new instru-

mentarian power that asserts dominance over society and presents startling

challenges to market democracy; 7. A movement that aims to impose_ a new

collective order based on total certainty; 8. An expropriation of critical hu-

man rights that is best understood as a coup from above: an overthrow of the

people's sovereignty.

328 PART II: THE ADVANCE OF SURVEILLANCE CAPITALISM

territories are private and privileged, known only to the machines,

priests, and the market participants who pay to play in these new spaces.

though it is obviously the case that we are excluded because the knowled

is not for us, these chapters have revealed a deeper structural basis for o ··

exclusion. Now we know that surveillance capitalists' ability to evade ,r awareness is an essential condition for knowledge production. We are excludi.

because we are friction that impedes the elaboration of the shadow text

with it surveillance capitalism's knowledge dominance.

As to who decides, this division of learning has been decided by the de

larations and incursions of the owners of private surveillance capital as a

other essential condition of accumulation, enabled by the reluctance of

state to assert democratic oversight in this secret realm. Finally, there is

question of who decides who decides. So far, it is the asymmetrical power

surveillance capital unencumbered by law that decides who decides.

The commodification of behavior under the conditions of surveillan

capitalism pivots us toward a societal future in which an exclusive division.

learning is protected by secrecy, indecipherability, and expertise. Even whe.

knowledge derived from your behavior is fed back to you in the first text:

a quid pro quo for participation, the parallel secret operations of the shad ·

text capture surplus for crafting into prediction products destined for o~

marketplaces that are about you rather than for you. These markets do

depend upon you except first as a source of raw material from which surp

is derived, and then as a target for guaranteed outcomes. We have no for

control because we are not essential to the market action. In this future

are exiles from our own behavior, denied access to or control over knowled

derived from our experience. Knowledge, authority, and power rest with s

veillance capital, for which we are merely "human natural resources."

CHAPTER ELEVEN

THE RIGHT TO THE FUTURE TENSE

But He had planned such future for this youth:

Surely, His duty now was to compel

To count on time to bring true love of truth

And, with it, gratitude. His eagle fell.

-W.H.AUDEN

SONNETS FROM CHINA, IX

1 Will to Will

ake early. The day begins before I open my eyes. My mind is in motion:

· rds and sentences have streamed through my dreams, solving problems

.yesterday's pages. The first work of the day is to retrieve those words that

open a puzzle. Only then am I ready to awaken my senses. I try to discern

h birdcall in the symphony outside our windows: the phoebe, redwing,

e jay, mockingbird, woodpecker, finch, starling, and chickadee. Soaring

ve all their songs are the cries of geese over the lake. I splash warm water

,myface, drink cool water to coax my body into alertness, and commune

hour dog in the still-silent house. I make coffee and bring it into my

y, where I settle into my desk chair, call up my screen, and begin. I think. i. Jte these words, and I imagine you reading them. I do this every day of

week-as I have for several years-and it is likely that I will continue to

for one or two years to come.

I watch the seasons from the windows above my desk: first green, then an,d gold, then white, and then back to green again. When friends come

/

329

330 PART II: THE ADVANCE OF SURVEILLANCE CAPITALISM

to visit, they peek into my study. There are books and papers stacked on

surface and most of the floor. I know they feel overwhelmed at this sight

sometimes I sense that they silently pity me for my obligation to this

and how it circumscribes my days. I do not think that they realize how fr

am. In fact, I have never felt more free. How is this possible?

I made a promise to complete this work This promise is my flag pl

in the future tense. It represents my commitment to construct a future

cannot come into being should I abandon my promise. This future will

exist without my capacity first to imagine its facts and then to will them ·

being. I am an inchworm moving with determination and purpose ac

the distance between now and later. Each tiny increment of territory '

traverse is annexed to the known world, as my effort transforms uncerta·

into fact. Should I renege on my promise, the world would not collapse.

publisher would survive the abrogation of our contract. You would fi

many other books to read. I would move on to other projects. My promise, though, is an anchor that girds me against the vagaries of

moods and temptations. It is the product of my will to will and a compass

steers my course toward a desired future that is not yet real. Events may

inate in energy sources outside my will and abruptly alter my course in that I can neither predict nor control. Indeed, they have already done so.

spite this certain knowledge of uncertainty, I have no doubt that I am free. I

promise to .create a future, and I can keep my promise. If the book that I

imagined is to exist in the future, it must be because I will to will it so. I ·

an expansive landscape that already includes a future that only I can ·

and intend. In my world, this book I write already exists. In fulfilling my pr

ise, I make it manifest. This act of will is my claim to the future tense. To make a promise is to predict the future; to fulfill a promise through

exercise of will turns that prediction into fact. Our hearts pump our blood,

kidneys filter that blood, and our wills create the future in the patient dis

ery of each new sentence or step. This is how we claim our right to speak in

first person as the author of our futures. The philosopher Hannah Arendt

voted an entire volume to an examination of will as the "organ for the fu

in the same way that memory is our mental organ for the past. The pow

will lies in its unique ability to deal with things, "visibles and invisibles,

have never existed at all. Just as the past always presents itself to the mind

The Right to the Future Tense 331

'guise of certainty, the future's main characteristic is its basic uncertainty,

matter how high a degree of probability prediction may attain." When we

.er to the past, we see only objects, but the view to the future brings "proj-

s," things that are yet to be. With freedom of will we undertake action that

entirely contingent on our determination to see our project through. These

e acts that we could have "left undone" but for our commitment. "A will that

not free," Arendt concludes, "is a contradiction in terms."1

·' Will is the organ with which we summon our futures into existence. endt's metaphor of will as the "mental organ of our future" suggests that

is something built into us: organic, intrinsic, inalienable. Moral philoso-

ers have called this "free will" because it is the human counterpoint to the

of uncertainty that suffocates original action. Arendt describes promises

.'.'islands of predictability" and "guideposts of reliability" in an "ocean of

ertainty." They are, she argues, the only alternative to a different kind of

astery" that relies on "domination of one's self and rule over others."2

Centuries of debate have been levied on the notion of free will, but too

en their effect has been to silence our own declarations of will, as if we are

.. barrassed to assert this most fundamental human fact. I recognize my di-

experience of freedom as an inviolate truth that cannot be reduced to the .

viorists' formulations of life as necessarily accidental and random, shaped

external stimuli beyond my knowledge or influence and haunted by irratio-

and untrustworthy mental processes that I can neither discern nor avoid.3

The American philosopher John Searle, whose work on the "declaration" discussed in Chapter 6, comes to a similar conclusion in his examination

. "free will." He points to the "causal gap" between the reasons for our ac-

ns and their enactment. We may have good reasons to do something, he

es, but that does not necessarily mean it will be done. "The traditional

e of this gap in philosophy is 'the freedom of the will."' In response to the

rdid history" of this concept, he reasons, "even if the gap is an illusion it is

we cannot shake off .... The notion of making and keeping promises pre-

poses the gap .... [It] requires consciousness and a sense of freedom on the

of the promise-making and promise-keeping agent."4

· The freedom of will is the existential bone structure that carries the moral of every promise, and my insistence on its integrity is not an indul-

. ce in nostalgia or a random privileging of the pre-digital human story as

332 PART II: THE ADVANCE OF SURVEILLANCE CAPITALISM

somehow more truly human. This is the only kind of freedom that we

guarantee ourselves, no matter the weight of entropy or inertia, and irrespe

tive of the forces and fears that attempt to collapse time into an eternity

shadowboxing now, and now, and now. These bones are the necessary

dition for the possibility of civilization as a "moral milieu" that favors

dignity of the individual and respects the distinctly human capacities for

alogue and problem solving. Any person, idea, or practice that breaks

bones and tears this flesh robs us of a self-authored and we-authored fu

These principles are not quaint accessories, as Hal Varian and oth

suggest. Rather, they are hard-won achievements that have crystallizedo

millennia of human contest and sacrifice. Our freedom flourishes only as

steadily will ourselves to close the gap between making promises and kee '

them. Implicit in this action is an assertion that through my will I can ·

ence the future. It does not imply total authority over the future, of co

only over my piece of it. In this way, the assertion of freedom of will also

serts the right to the future tense as a condition of a fully human life.

Why should an experience as elemental as this claim on the future te

be cast as a human right? The short answer is that it is only necessary ri

because it is imperiled. Searle argues that such elemental "features ofh

life" rights are crystallized as formal human rights only at that mome°'.

history when they come under systematic threat. So, for example, the a. ity to speak is elemental. The concept of "freedom of speech" as a fo ·

right emerged only when society evolved to a degree of political com

ity that the freedom to speak came under threat. The philosopher obs

that speech is not more elemental to human life than breathing or being

to move one's body. No one has declared a "right to breathe" or a "rig

bodily movement" because these elemental rights have not come unde

tack and therefore do not require formal protection. What counts as a,

right, Searle argues, is both "historically contingent" and "pragmatic."5

I suggest that we now face the moment in history when the elem

right to the future tense is endangered by a panvasive digital architec

behavior modification owned and operated by surveillance capital, nee

tated by its economic imperatives, and driven by its laws of motion, all£

sake of its guaranteed outcomes.

The Right to the Future Tense 333

st simply put, there is no freedom without uncertainty; it is the medium

which human will is expressed in promises. Of course, we do not only

.. e promises to ourselves; we also make promises to one another. When we

our wills and our promises, we create the possibility of collective action

d a shared future, linked in determination to make our vision real in the

Id. This is the origin of the institution we call "contract," beginning with

·. Contracts originated as shared "islands of predictability" intended to mit-

uncertainty for the human community, and they still retain this mean-

"The simplest way to state the point of contract law is that it supports

shapes the social practice of making and keeping promises and agree-

.· ts," concludes one eminent scholar. "Contract law focuses on problems

fOOperation," summarizes another. "Contract law ... reflects a moral ideal

equal respect for persons. This fact explains why contract law can produce ine legal obligations and is not just a system of coercion," observes a

It is in this context that the destructiveness of the uncontract is most.

ly revealed. Recall Varian's assertion that if someone stops making

thly car payments, "Nowadays it's a lot easier just to instruct the vehic-

rmonitoring system not to allow the car to be started and to signal the

ation where it can be picked up." Varian calls this new capability a "new

tract form," when in reality the uncontract abandons the human world

ally binding promises and substitutes instead the positivist calculations

tomated machine processes.8 Without so much as a tip of the cap and a

-thee-well," Varian's uncontract disposes of several millennia of societal

tion during which Western civilization institutionalized the contract as

d achievement of shared will.

tis no secret that the institution of the contract has been twisted and

in every age, from the Requirimiento to the "slave contract," as in-

nt power imposes painful inequalities that drain the meaning, and

the very possibility, of mutual promising.9 For example, Max We-

arned that the great achievements of contractual freedom create

334 PART II: THE ADVANCE OF SURVEILLANCE CAPITALISM

opportunities to exploit property ownership as a means to "the achieveme

of power over others."10

However, today's uncontracts are unprecedented in their ability to·

pose unilateral power. They leverage the apparatus to combine pervasi

monitoring and remote actuation for an internet-enabled "new economi

that bypasses human promises and social engagement. 11 The uncontract ·

instead for a condition that the economist Oliver Williamson describes

"contract utopia": a state of perfect information known to perfectly ratio ·

people who always perform exactly as promised. 12 The problem is, as W

liamson writes, "All complex contracts are unavoidably incomplete ... parf

will be confronted with the need to adapt to unanticipated disturbances th

arise by reason of gaps, errors and omissions in the original contract"13

If you have ever seen a house built according to architectural plans, th

you have a good idea of what Williamson means. There is no blueprint

sufficiently details everything needed to convert drawings and specificati

into an actual house. No plan anticipates every problem that might arise,

most do not come close. The builders' skills are a function of how they c

laborate to invent the actions that fulfill the intention of the drawings as th,

solve the unexpected but inevitable complications that arise along the

They work together to construct a reality from the uncertainty of the plan. ·

Like builders, people in contractual agreements undertake this kin&,.

collaboration. It's not simply finding the way through a maze to an alrea

agreed-upon end point, but rather the continuous refinement and clari:fic

tion of ends and means in the face of unanticipated obstacles. This sociality.

contract may entail conflict, frustration, oppression, or anger, but it can

produce trust, cooperatio~, cohesion, and adaptation as the means thro.

which human beings confront an unknowable future.

Were "contract utopia" to exist, Williamson says, it would best be

scribed as a "plan" that, like other "utopian modes," requires "deep co

ment to collective purposes" and "personal subordination." Subordin.ati

to what? To the plan. Contract in this context of perfect rationality is.

Williamson describes as "a world of planning." Such planning was the

institution of socialist economics, where the "new man" was idealized as

sessing "a high level of cognitive competence" and therefore, it was espou

could design highly effective plans. 14 Varian deftly swaps out socialism's"

The Right to the Future Tense 335

.. an" and installs instead a market defined by surveillance capitalism's eco-

omic imperatives, expressed through a ubiquitous computational archi-

ecture, the machine intelligence capabilities to which data are continuously

pplied, the analytics that discern patterns, and the algorithms that convert

em into rules. This is the essence of the uncontract, which transforms the

~an, legal, and economic risks of contracts into plans constructed, moni-

red, and maintained by private firms for the sake of guaranteed outcomes:

ss contract utopia than uncontract dystopia.

In November 2016 the experience of three people in the small Illinois

wn of Belleville was testimony to what we lose when we subordinate our-

es to the dystopian rule of the uncontract. Pat and Stanford Kipping owed

. eir credit union $350 on their 1998"Buick. Once again, they could not make

eir monthly $95 payment. The Kippings' credit union enlisted a local repo n, Jim Ford, to take away their car. When Ford visited the Kippings' Belleville home, he was disturbed to

d an elderly couple who were forced to choose between buying medicine

making their car payments. Ford's initial response was to waive his re-

. ssession fees. The Kippings generously thanked him, invited him in for tea,

d shared their story. That's when Ford decided to bridge the gap between

certain reality and the stipulations of their contract. He did the human

g, calling the credit union and offering to pay the couple's debt.

The credit union manager insisted that Ford had to follow the "process."

.rd continued to invoke the ancient social principles of the contract, seek-

~ a way through the maze to something that felt like justice. Ultimately

manager agreed to "work with" the couple to see what could be done. It

't end there. Within twenty-four hours, an online fund-raising appeal

uced enough to pay off the Kippings' car, detail it, purchase a Thanksgiv-

turkey, and give the couple an additional gift of $1,000.

Most interesting is that when a local paper picked up the story, it quickly

viral across the web and traditional media. Millions of people read and

onded to this drama, presumably because it stirred memories of something

cious and necessary but now threatened with extinction. Jim Ford reminded

f the most cherished requirements of a civilized life: our shared assertion

ights to the future tense and its expression in the joining of wills in mutual

'tment to dialogue, problem solving, and empathy. He was eloquent on

PART II: THE ADVANCE OF SURVEILLANCE CAPITALISM

this point: "Just be nice to people. It's not that hard The fact that this has go

so crazy is kind of sad. This should be a daily thing, a normal thing."15

In the dystopia of the uncontract, this daily human thing is not nor

mal. What if the Kippings' credit union employed Spireon's telematics

merely had to instruct the vehicular monitoring system to disable the

There would be no loan manager engaging in a give-and-take with custo

The algorithm tasked to eliminate the messy, unpredictable, untrus1':o

eruptions of human will would have seized the old Buick. There would

been no shared tea time with the Kippings and no one to listen to their st

There would have been no opportunity to find an alternate route thro

the maze, no opportunity to build trust, no occasion for collective a<ction,

heartwarming holiday story ofkindness;no glimmer of hope for a human

ture in which the best of our institutions is preserved and fortified, no shar

challenge of uncertainty, and no shared freedom.

In the dystopia of the uncontract, surveillance capitalism's drive towar

certainty fills the space once occupied by all the human work of building an

replenishing social trust, which is now reinterpreted as unnecessary :fricti

the march toward guaranteed outcomes. The deletion of uncertainty is

brated as a victory over human nature: our cunning and our opportunism.

that's left to matter are the rules that translate reasons into action, the obje

measures of behavior, and the degree of conformance between the two. So

trust eventually withers, a kind of vestigial oddity like a third nipple or wis

teeth: traces of an evolutionary past that no longer appear in operational ii because their context and therefore their purpose have vanished.16

The uncontract and the for-profit circuits of behavior modificatio

in which it executes its objectives construe society as an acrid wasteland ·

which mistrust is taken for granted. By positing our lives together as alre

failed, it justifies coercive intervention for the sake of certainty. Against

background of the gradual normalization of the automated plan and its p

ners, the human response of one repo man bears simple witness to preci •

what surveillance capitalism must extinguish.

Human replenishment from the failures and triumphs of choosing

future in the face of uncertainty gives way to the blankness of perpetual c

pliance. The word trust lingers, but its referent in human experience diss

into reminiscence, an archaic footnote to a barely remembered dream

The Right to the Future Tense 337

dream that has long since faded for the sake of a new dictatorship of market

ns. As the dream dies, so too does our sense of astonishment and pro-

st We grow numb, and our numbness paves the way for more compliance.

athological division of learning forged by unprecedented asymmetries of

wledge and power fixes us in a new inequality marked by the tuners and

tuned, the herders and herded, the raw material and its miners, the ex-

ters and their unwitting subjects, those who will the future and those are shunted toward others' guaranteed outcomes.

So let' us establish our bearings. Uncertainty is not chaos but rather the

ecessary habitat of the present tense. We choose the fallibility of shared

romises and problem solving over the certain tyranny imposed by a domi-

. power or plan because this is the price we pay for the freedom to will,

founds our right to the future tense. In the absence of this freedom, the

re collapses into an infinite present of mere behavior, in which there can no subjects and no pr~jects: only ~bjects.

In the future that the surveillance capitalism prepares for us, my will and firs threaten the flow of surveillance revenues. Its aim is not to destroy us

simply to author us and to profit from that authorship. Such means have

imagined in the past, but only now are they feasible. Such means have n rejected in the past, but only now have they been allowed to root. We

ensnared without awareness, shorn of meaningful alternatives for with- awal, resistance, or protection.

The promise of the promise and the will to will run deeper than these

ormities. They remind us of that place again where we humans heal the

ch between the known and the unknowable, navigating the seas of un-

ty in our vessels of sh~ed promises. In the real world of human eavor, there is no perfect information and no perfect rationality. Life in-

es us to take action and to make commitments even when the future is

own. Anyone who has brought a child into the world or has otherwise his or her heart in love knows this to be true.

Gods know the future, but we move forward, take risks, and bind ourselves

ilthers despite the fact that we can't know everything about the present, let

the future. This is the essence of our freedom, expressed as the elemental

t to the future tense. With the construction and o½'llership of the new means eb,a½.oral modification, the fate of this right conforms to a pattern that we I

338 PART II: THE ADVANCE OF SURVEILLANCE CAPITALISM

already have identified. It is not extinguished, but rather it is usurped: comman

<leered and accumulated by surveillance capital's exclusive claims on our futures.•.

III. How Did They Get Away with It?

In the course of the last ten chapters I have argued that surveillance capital~

ism represents an unprecedented logic of accumulation defined by new eco-

nomic imperatives whose mechanisms and effects cannot be grasped with.

existing models and assumptions. This is not to say that the old imperatives-;

a compulsion toward profit maximization along with the intensification of

the means of production, growth, and competition-have vanished. How,

ever, these must now operate through the novel aims and mechanisms of

surveillance capitalism. I briefly review the new imperatives here, both as

summary of the ground that we have covered and as prelude to the questioll

How did they get away with it?

Surveillance capitalism's new story begins with behavioral surplus dis:

covered more or less ready-made in the online environment, when it wa~

realized that the "data exhaust" clogging Google's servers could be combined.

with its powerful analytic capabilities to produce predictions of user behav:~

ior. Those prediction products became the basis for a preternaturally lucrative

sales process that ignited new markets in future behavior.

Google's "machine intelligence" improved as the v_olume of data increased,

producing better prediction products. This dynamic established the extraction

imperative, which expresses the necessity of economies of scale in surplus accu-i

mulation and depends upon automated systems that relentlessly track, hunt,

and induce more behavioral surplus.· Google imposed the logic of conquest, d

fining human experience as free for the taking, available to be rendered as data; and claimed as surveillance assets. The company learned to employ a range of

rhetorical, political, and technological strategies to obfuscate these processes

and their implications.

The need for scale drove a relentless search for new high-volume suppH

of behavioral surplus, producing competitive dynamics aimed at corner·

these supplies of raw material and seeking lawless undefended spaces in whi._.

The Right to the Future Tense 339

to prosecute these unexpected and poorly understood acts of dispossession.

All the while, surveillance capitalists stealthily but steadfastly habituated us to

their claims. In the process, our access to necessary information and services

.became hostage to their operations, our means of social participation fused

with their interests.

Lucrative prediction products depend upon behavioral surplus, and com-

etition drove the supply challenges to a new level, expressed in the predic-

tion imperative. More-powerful prediction products required economies of

scope as well as scale, variation as well as volume. This variation occurs along

.two dimensions. The first is extension across a wide range of activities; the

second is the depth of predictive detail within each activity.

In this new phase of competitive intensity, surveillance capitalists are

orced from the virtual world into the real one. This migration necessitates

new machine processes for the rendition of all aspects of human experience

into behavioral data. Competition now occurs in the context ot' a rapidly evolving global architecture of ubiquitous computation and therefore ubiqui-

tous supply opportunities, as prediction products are increasingly expected to

approximate certainty and therefore to guarantee behavioral outcomes.

In a third phase of competitive intensity, surveillance capitalists discov-

ered the necessity of economies of action based on new methods that go be- -

yond tracking, capturing, analyzing, and predicting behavior in order to

intervene in the state of play and actively shape behavior at the source. The

· result is that the means of production are subordinated to an elaborate new

means of behavioral modification, which relies upon a variety of machine pro-

cesses, techniques, arid tactics (tuning, herding, conditioning) to shape indi-

"dual, group, and population·behavior in ways that continuously improve

. efrapproximation to guaranteed outcomes. Just as industrial capitalism

· as driven to the continuous intensification of the means of production, so

eillance capitalists are now locked in a cycle of continuous intensification

fthe means ofbehavioral modification.

.Surveillance capitalists' interests have shifted from using automated ma-

. e processes to know about your behavior to using machine processes to

ape your behavior according to their interests. In other words, this decar;ie-

d-a-half trajectory has taken us from automating information flows about you

340 PART II: THE ADVANCE OF SURVEILLANCE CAPITALISM

to automating you. Given the conditions of increasing ubiquity, it has beco

difficult if not impossible to escape this audacious, implacable web.

In order to reestablish our bearings, I have asked for a rebirth of asto

ishment and outrage. Most of all, I have asked that we reject the Faustian

of participation for dispossession that requires our submission to the mea

of behavio~al modification built on the foundation of the Google decla:r

tions. I am also mindful, though, that when we ask How did they get aw with it? there are many compelling reasons to consider, no one of whi ..

stands alone. Instead of simple cause and effect, the answers to our qu

tion constitute a broad landscape of history, contingency, quicksand, an

coercion.

Our question is even more vexing in light of the fact that in the gre

majority of surveys designed to probe public attitudes toward the loss of pri

vacy and other elements of surveillance capitalist practices, few of us favo

the status quo. In forty-six of the most prominent forty-eight surveys a

istered between 2008 and 2017, substantial majorities support measures£.

enhanced privacy and user control over personal data. (Only two early SUI' veys were somewhat less conclusive, because so many participants indicate

that they did not understand how or what personal information was beip.

gathered.) Indeed, by 2008 it was well established that the more knowledg>

one has about "internet privacy practices," the more one is likely to be ve ·

concerned about privacy.17

Although the surveys vary in terms of their specific focus and questio .

the general consistency of responses over the decade is noteworthy. For e ample, an important 2009 survey found that when Americans are inform1;.

of the ways that companies gather data for targeted online ads, 73-86 pe

cent reject such advertising. Another substantial survey in 2615 found 91 pe,

cent of respondents disagreeing that the collection of personal informatio

"without my knowing" is a fair trade-off for a price discount. Fifty-five pe

cent disagreed that it was a fair exchange for improved services. In 2016 Pe

Research reported only 9 percent of respondents as very confident in trus ·

social media sites with their data and 14 percent as very confident about tr

ing companies with personal data. More than 60 percent wanted to do mo.

to protect their privacy and believed there should be more regulations to p'r

tect privacy. 18

The Right to the Future Tense 341

Surveillance capitalist firms have tended to dismiss these survey results,

ointing instead to the spectacular growth of users and revenue. This discrep-

cy has confounded research and public policy. With so many people reject-

g the practices of surveillance capitalism, even considering how little most

.us actually know about these practices, how is it that this market form has . een able to succeed? The reasons are plentiful:

1. Unprecedented: Most of us did not resist the early incursions of Goo-

e, Facebook, ·and other surveillance capitalist operations because it was im-

ossible to 'recognize the ways in which they differed from anything that had

ne before. The basic operational mechanisms and business practices were

new and strange, so utterly sui generis, that all we could see was a gaggle

'.'innovative" horseless carriages. Most significantly, anxiety and vigilance

e been fixed on the known threats of surveillance and control associated

state power. Earlier incursions of behavior modification at scale were

derstood as an extension of the state, and we were not prepared for the on- ught from private firms.

2. Declaration as invasion: The lack of precedence left us disarmed and

med. Meanwhile, Google learned the art of invasion by declaration, tak-

what it wanted and calling it theirs. The corporation asserted its rights

bypass our awareness, to take our experience and transform it into d~ta,

daim ownership of and decisions over the uses of those data, to produce ategies and tactics that keep us ignorant of its practices, and to insist on th~

ditions of lawlessness required for these operations. These declarations

'tutionalized surveillance capitalism as a market form.

3. Historical context: Surveillance capitalism found shelter in the neolib-

zeitgeist that equated government regulation of business with tyranny.

:S "paranoid style" favored self-management regimes that imposed few 'ts on corporate practices. In a parallel development, the "war on terror"

ed the government's attention from privacy legislation to an urgent in-

st in the rapidly developing skills and technologies of Google and other

g surveillance capitalists. These "elective affinities" produced a trend

rd surveillance exceptionalism, which further sheltered the new market from scrutiny and nurtured its development.

4, Fortifications: Google aggressively protected its operations by estab-

. g its utilities in the electoral process, strong relationships with elected

342 PART II: THE ADVANCE OF SURVEILLANCE CAPITALISM

and appointed officials, a revolving door of staffers between Washington

Silicon Valley, lavish lobbying expenditures, and a steady "soft-power" c

paign of cultural influence and capture. 5. The dispossession cycle: First at Google and later at Facebook and o

firms, surveillance capitalist leaders mastered the rhythms and stages of

possession. Audacious incursions are pursued until resistance is met, £ lowed by a range of tactics frorn elaborate public relations gambits to leg

combat, all designed to buy time for gradual habituation to once-outragc;o.

facts. A third stage features public• demonstrations of adaptability and e

retreat, while in the final stage resources are redirected to achieve the s

objectives camouflaged by new rhetoric and tactics. 6. Dependency: The free services of Google, Facebook, and others

pealed to the latent needs of second-modernity individuals seeking resour

for effective life in an increasingly hostile institutional environment. 0

bitten, the apple was irresistible. As surveillance capitalism spread acr

the internet, the means of social participation become coextensive with

means of behavioral modification. The exploitation of second-moder ·

needs that enabled surveillance capitalism from the start eventually imb

nearly every channel of social participation. Most people find it difficulv

withdraw from these utilities, and many ponder if it is even possible.

7. Self-Interest: New markets in future behavior give rise to network$

fellow travelers, partners, collaborators, and customers whose revenues

pend on the prediction imperative. Institutional facts proliferate. The pizz~

owner on the Pokemon Go map, the merchant who saturates his shop

beacons, and the insurance companies vying for behavioral data unite in

race toward guaranteed outcomes and surveillance revenues.

8. Inclusion: Many people feel that if you are not on Facebook, yoµ

not exist. People all over the world raced to participate in Pokemon Go.

so much energy, success, and capital flowing into the surveillance capi

domain, standing outside of it, let alone against it, can feel like a lonely.

risky prospect.

9 . Identification: Surveillance capitalists aggressively present thems

as heroic entrepreneurs. Many people identify with and admire the fin success and popularity of the surveillance capitalists and regard them as

models.

The Right to the Future Tense 343

10. Authority: Many also regard these corporations and their leaders as

thorities on the future: geniuses who can see farther than the rest of us. It

easy to fall prey to the naturalistic fallacy, which suggests that because the

mpanies are successful, they must also be right. As a result, many of us are

:~pectful of these leaded expert status and are eager to participate in inno-

tions that anticipate the' future. n. Social persuasion: As we have seen repeatedly, there is an endless

~cade of beguiling rhetoric aimed at persuading people of the wonders as-

dated with surveillance capitalist innovations: targeted advertising, per-

lization, and digital assistants. Beyond that, economies of action are

tentionally designed to persuade us to follow one another along prescribed

qrses of action.

12. Foreclosed alternatives: The "dictato~ship of no alternatives" is in full

• ce here. We have seen that the behavioral value reinvestment cycle is in-

singly rare. The Aware Home gave way to the Google Horne. Surveillance

lism spread across the internet, and the drive toward economies of

e and action has forced it out into the real world. From apps to devices to

One Voice, it is ever rnore difficult to identify avenues of escape, let alone

uine alternatives.

13. Inevitabilism: The Trojan hqrse of computer mediation-devices,

ps, connection-enters the scene in a relentless deluge of inevitabilist rhet-

ic; successfully distracting us from the highly intentional and historically

. tingent surveillance capitalism within. New institutional facts prolifer-

.and stabilize the new practices. We fall into resignation and a sense of

lessness.

14. The ideology ofhumanfrailty: In addition to inevitabilism, surveil- .ce capitalism has eagerly weaponized behavioral economics' ideology of

an frailty, a worldview that frames human mentation as woefully irratio- and incapable of noticing the regularity of its own failures. Surveillance

. italists employ this ideology to legitimate their means of behavior rnod-

ation: tuning, herding, and conditioning individuals and populations in

that are designed to elude awareness.

15. Ignorance: This remains a salient explanation. Surveillance capitalists

· ate an abnormal division of learning in which they know things that

fnot know while compelled to conceal their intentions and practices

344 PART II: THE ADVANCE OF SURVEILLANCE CAPITALISM

in secret backstage action. It is impossible to understand something that h been crafted in secrecy and designed as fundamentally illegible. These s .

terns are intended to ensnare us, preying on our vulnerabilities bred by

asymmetrical division of learning and amplified by our scarcity of time,

sources, and support.

16. Velocity: Surveillance capitalism rose from invention to. dominati

in record time. This reflects its ability to attract capital and its laws of moti

but it also reflects a specific strategy in which velocity is consciously deplo

to paralyze awareness and freeze resistance while distracting us with imm

ate gratifications. Surveillance capitalism's velocities outrun democracy e

as they outrun our ability to understand what is happening and con~ider

consequences. This strategy is borrowed from a long legacy of political

military approaches to the production of speed as.a form of violence, m

tl kn " h k d " 19

-recen y own as s oc an awe. . ... These sixteen answers suggest that in the nearly two decades since the ·

vention of surveillance capitalism, existing laws, largely centered on pri

and antitrust, have not been sufficient to disrupt its growth. We need!~

that reject the fundamental legitimacy of surveillance capitalism's decl

tions and interrupt its most basic operations, including the illegitimate

dition of human experience as behavioral data; the use of behavioral s

as free raw material; extreme concentrations of the new means of produc

the manufacture of prediction products; trading in behavioral futures; the ,

of prediction products for third-order operations of modification, influe

and control; the operations of the means of behavioral modification; the.

cumulation of private exclusive concentrations of knowledge (the sha..

text); and the power that such concentrations confer, The rejection of these new institutions of surveillance capital and the:

larations upon which they are built would signify a withdrawal of social·

ment to surveillance capitalism's ainls and methods in the same way

once withdrew agreement to the antisocial and antidemocratic practices of

industrial capitalism, righting the balance of power between employers

workers by recognizing workers' rights to collective bargaining and outla

child labor, hazardous working conditions, excessive work hours, and so O

The withdrawal of agreement takes two broad forms, a. di5,

tion that will be useful as we move into Part III. The first is what I c

The Right to the Future Tense 345

unter-declaration. These are defensive measures such as encryption and

t)i.er privacy tools, or arguments for "data ownership." Such measures may

e effective in discrete situations, but they leave the opposing facts intact, ac-

owledging their persistence and thus paradoxically contributing to their

• itimacy. For example, if I "opt out" of tracking, I opt out for me, but my

'on does not challenge or alter the offending practice. The second form

disagreement is what I call the synthetic declaration. If the declaration is

eek," the counter-declaration is "checkmate," and the synthetic declara-

n changes the game. It asserts an alternative framework that transforms

opposing facts. We bide our time with counter-declarations and make life

e tolerable, but only a synthetic alternative vision will transform raw sur-

ance capitalism in favor of a digital future that we can call home.

I turn to the history of the Berlin Wall as an illustration of these two

s of disagreement. From 1961 through the early 1980s, courageous East

· ers carved seventy-one tunnels through the sandy soil beneath the city,

ding several hundred people a means of escape to West Berlin.20 The tun-

are testament to the necessity of counter-declarations, but they did not

g down the wall or the power that sustained it.

The synthetic declaration gathered force over decades, but its full .ex-

·on would have to wait until near midnight on November 9, 1989, when

ld Jager, the senior officer on duty that night at the Bornholmer Stree~

ge, gave the order to open the gates, and twenty thousand people surged

ss the wall into West Berlin. As one historian describes that event, "By

night of November 9, when the people appeared at the Berlin Wall and

anded to know of the border officials, Will you let us pass?, those peo-

ad become so certain of themselves, and the officials so unsure of them -

ir seventy years ago, the economic historian Karl Polanyi reflected on ays in which industrial capitalism's market dynamics would, ifleft un--

ed, destroy the very things that it aimed to buy and sell: "The commod-

;on disregarded the fact that leaving the fate of soil and people to the

PART II: THE ADVANCE OF SURVEILLANCE CAPITALISM

market would be tantamount to anniliilating them." 22

In the absence of s

thetic declaration, Polanyi's prophecy appears headed for fulfillment, and

fact alone must put us on alert. What does Polanyi's prophecy augur for o

time? Industrial capitalism followed its own logic of shock and awe, t~

aim at nature to conquer "it" in the interests of capital; now surveillan

capitalism has human nature in its sights. We have only gradually come t

understand that the specific methods of domination employed by industri

capitalism for more than two centuries have fundamentally disoriented

conditions that support life on Earth, violating the most basic precepts of ci

ilization. Despite the many benefits and immense accomplishments Qf ind

trial capitalism, it has left us perilously close to repeating the fate of the Eas .. ·.

Islanders, who wrecked the ground that gave them life, then fashioned sta ·

to scan the horizon for the aid and succor that would never come. If indu

trial capitalism dangerously disrupted nature, what havoc might surveillan

capitalism wreak on human nature? The answer to this question requires a return to imperatives. Indus

capitalism brought us to the brink of epic peril, but not as a consequence

an evil lust for destruction or runaway technology. Rather, this result was

eluctably driven by its own inner logic of accumulation, with its imperatiV..

of profit maximization, competition, the relentless drive for labor producti·

ity through the technological elaboration of production, and growth fund

by the continuous reinvestment of surplus.23 It is Weber's "economic orien

tion" that matters, and how that orientation merges with the specific form.

capitalism that rises to dominance in each age. Tue logic of industrial capitalism exempted the enterprise from resp

sibility for its destructive consequences, unleashing the destabilization of.

climate system and the chaos it spells for all creatures. Polanyi understo

that raw capitalism could not be cooked from within. He argued that it ,

up to society to impose those obligations on capitalism by insisting on

sures that tether the capitalist project to the social, preserving and sust · ..

life and nature. Similarly, the meaning of Polanyi's prophecy for us now can be gra

only through the lens of surveillance capitalism's economic imperati ..

they frame its claim to human experience. If we are to rediscover our.s

The Right to the Future Tense 347

? f astonishment, then let it be here: if industrial civilization flourished at the

:pense of nature and now threatens to cost us the Earth, an information civi-

zation shaped by surveillance capitalism will thrive at the expense of human

ature and threatens to cost us our humanity. Polanyi's prophecy requires us

P ask if we may yet avert this fate with our own synthetic declarations.

Parts I and II have been devoted to understanding the origins of surveil-

ce capitalism and identifying, naming, and scrutinizing its foundational

echanisms · and economic imperatives. The idea from the start was that

· g and taming are inextricable, that fresh and careful naming can bet-

equip us to intercept these mechanisms of dispossession, reverse their ac-

n, produce urgently needed friction, challenge the pathological division of

rning, and ultimately synthesize new forms of information capitalism that

. nuinely meet our needs for effective life. Social participation and individual

ectiveness should not require the sacrifice of our right to the future tense,

'ch comprises our will to will, our autonomy, our decision rights, our pri-

cy, and, indeed, our human natures. ,.However, it would be wrong to suppose that surveillance capitalism can

grasped solely through the prism of its economic action or that the chal-

ges we face are restricted to discerning, containing, and transforming its

dational mechanisms. The consequences of this new logic of accurnula-

.n have already leaked and continue to leak beyond commercial practices

o the fabric of our social relations, transforming our relationships to our-

es and to one another. These transformations provide the soil in which

eillance capitalism has flourished: an invasive species that creates its own

d supply. In transforming us, it produces nourishment for its own march

ard.

It is easier, perhaps, to see these dynamisms by looking to the past. The

rence between industrial capitalism and industrial civilization is the dif-

ce between the economic operation and the societies it produced. Tue

t of industrial capitalism that rose to dominance in the late nineteenth

arly twentieth centuries produced a specific kind of moral milieu that

. nse intuitively even when we do not name it.

Industrial capitalism was marked by the specialized division of lac.

with its historically specific characteristics: the conversion of craft

;to mass production based on standardization, rationalization and the I ,

348 PART II: THE ADVANCE OF SURV EILLANCE CAP ITALISM

interchangeability of parts; the moving assembly line; volume productiQ large populations of wage earners concentrated in factory settings; pro£ · sionalized administrative hierarchies; managerial authority; functional s cialization; and the distinction between white-collar work and blue-co work.

The list is illustrative, not exhaustive, but enough to remind us that · dustrial civilization was drawn from these expressions of the econo imperatives that ruled industrial expansion. The division of labor shaped ture, psychology, and social experience. The shift from craft to. hourly wa created new populations of employees and consumers, men and WQ wholly dependent on the means of production owned and operated by vate firms.

This was the crucible of mass society, its hierarchical a-gthority, and·

centralized bureaucratic forms of public and private power, all ofit haunt by the specters of conformity, obedience, and human standardization. Li were defined by institutions that mirrored industrial organization: sch hospitals, and even aspects of family and domestic life, in which ages stages were understood as functions of the industrial system, from training retirement.

At a time when surveillance capitalism has emerged as the domiil form of information capitalism, we must ask the question: what kind of lization does it foretell? The chapters that follow in Part III are intended initial contribution to this urgent conversation. I have said that there c no commitment to "guaranteed outcomes" without the power to make if What is the nature of this new power? How will it transform our societ What solution for a third modernity does it proffer? What novel strug · will haunt these new days, and what do they portend for a digital future we can call home? These are the questions that guide us into Part III.

Notes to Pages 321-331

CHAPTER ELEVEN

l. Hannah Arendt, The Life of the Mind, vol. 2, Willing (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1978), 13-14.

2. Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition ( Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998), 244.

3. See also the discussion in John R. Searle, Making the Social World: The Structure of Human Civilization ( Oxford: Oxford University Press, 201 O ), 133.

/4/. Searle, Making the Social World, 133, 136.

628 Notes to Pages 332-334

5. Searle: 194-95. See also Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz, who offers a pragmatic theory of human rights that is relevant to my analysis. He argues that "rights are those fundamental preferences that experience and history-especially of great injustices-have taught are so essential that the citizenry should be persuaded to entrench them and not make them subject to easy change by shifting majorities:' Rights, in this way, are derived from wrongs.

His is a "bottom-up'' approach because there is typically far more consensus on what constitutes a terrible injustice than there is agreement on the conditions for perfect justice. Alan M. Dershowitz, Rights from Wrongs: A Sfcular Theory of the Origins of Rights (New York: Basic, 2004), 81-96. '

6. Sir Henry Maine, Ancient Law (New York: E. P. Dutton & Co. Inc., 1861). 7. Liam B. Murphy, 'Tue Practice of Promise and Contract" (working paper, New

York University Public Law and Legal Theory, 2014), 2069; Avery W. Katz, "Contract Authority-Who Needs It?" University of Chicago Law Review 81, no. 4 (2014): 27; Robin Bradley Kar, "Contract as Empowerment," University of

Chicago Law Review 83, no. 2 (2016): 1. 8. Hal Varian, "Beyond Big Data;' Business and Economics 49, no. 1 (January

2014). 1his perfect information is what behavioral economists call "unbounded rationality" or "unrestricted cognitive competence:' See Oliver E. Williamson, The Economic Institutions of Capitalism (New York: Free Press,

1998), 30. 9 .. For a powerful examination of this problem in relation to click-wrap and other

forms ofboilerplate, see Robin Kar and Margaret Radin, "Pseudo-contract & Shared Meaning Analysis" (Legal Studies Research Paper, University oflllinois College of Law, November 16, 2017), https:/!papers.ssrn.com,

/abstract=3083129. 10. Weber argued that the "decentralization oflawmaking" expressed in the

"private ordering of contracts" does not necessarily produce "a decrease in the degree of coercion:' He warned that when a legal order imposes few "mandatory and prohibitory norms and ever so many 'freedoms' and 'empowerments; [it] can nonetheless ... facilitate a quantitative and qualitative increase not only of coercion in general but quite specifically of authoritarian coercion:' 1his is precisely how early-twentieth-century industrial employers used their rights of freedom of contract to employ child labor, demand twelve-hour workdays, and impose dangerous working conditions, and it is precisely how we have been saddled with illegitimate and audacious click -wrap agreements whose authors have found similar shelter in their claims to freedom of contract. See Max Weber, Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology, vol 2 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978),

668-81. 11. Hal R. Varian, "Economic Scene; If There Was a New Economy, Why Wasnt

There a New Economics?" New York Times, January 17, 2002, http:/ /WWW

Notes to Pages 334-344

.nytimes.com/2002/01/17/business/economic-scene-if-there-was-a-new -economy-why-wasn-t-there-a-new-economics.htrnl.

12. Williamson, The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. 13. Oliver E. Williamson, "Tue Theory of the Firm as Governance Structure:

From Choice to Contract;' Journal of Economic Perspectives 16, no. 3 (2002): 174.

14. Williamson, The Economic Institutions of Capitalism, 30.:_ 31, 52. With his usual insight, Evgeny Morozov made this connection in a prescient 2014 discussion of the origins of "Big Data" analytics in the ambitions of socialist planners. Evgeny Morozov; "The Planning Machine,". 1he New Yorker, October 6, 2014,, https://www.newyorker.com(magazine/2014/10/13/planning-machine.

15. "Repo Man Helps Pay Off Bill for Elderly Couple's Car;' ABC News, .November 23', 2016, http:/ /abcnews.go.com/US/repo-man-helps-par.s-off -bill-elderly-couples/story?id=43738753; Sarah Larimer, "A Repo Man Didn't Want to Seize an Elderly Couple's Car, So He Helped Pay It Off for Them Instead;' Washington Post, November 24, 2016, https://www.washingtonpost .com/news/inspired-life/wp/2016/11/24/a-repo-man-didnt-want-to-seize-an -elderly-couples-car-so-he-helped-pay-it-off-for-them-instead/?utrn_term =.5ab2lc4510ab.

16. Timothy D. Smith, Jeffrey T. Laitman, and Kunwar P. Bhatnagar, "Tue Shrinking Anthropoid Nose, the Human Vomeronasal Organ, and the Language of Anatomical Reduction," Anatomical Record 297, no. 11 (2014): 2196-2204, https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.23035.

17. Chris JayHoofnagle and Jennifer King, "Research Report: What Califori:tlans Understand About Privacy Offline" (SSRN Scholarly Paper, Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network, May 15, 2008), http://papers.ssrn.com /abstract=ll33075.

18. Joseph Turow et al., "Americans Reject Tailored Advertising and 1hree Activities That Enable It," Annenberg School for Communication, September 29, 2009, http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract"'l4782l4; Joseph Turow, Michael Hennessy, and Nora Drape{, "The Tradeoff Fallacy: How Marketers Are

· Misrepresenting American Consumers and Opening Them Up to Exploitation;' Annenberg School for Communication, June 2015, https://www.asc.upenn.edu

· /news-events/publications/tradeoff-fallacy-how-marketers-are-misrepresenting -american-consumers-and; Lee Rainie, ''.Americans' Complicated Feelings About Social Media in an Era of Privacy Concerns," Pew Research Center, March 27, 2018, http://yrww.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/03/27 / americans -complicated-feelings-about-social-media-in-an-era-of-privacy-concerns.

19. Filippo Toromaso Marinetti, The Futurist Manifesto (Paris, France: Le Figaro, 1909); F. T. Marinetti and R. W. Flint, Marinetti: Selected Writings (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1972); Harlan K. UTiman and James P. Wade, Shoik: .and Awe: Achieving Rapid Dominance (Forgotten Books, 2008).

I

630 Notes to Pages 345-352

20. Greg Mitchell, The Tunnels: Escapes Under the Berlin Wall and the Historic Films the JFK White House Tried to Kill (New York: Crown, 2016); Kristen Greishaber, "Secret Tunnels That Brought Freedom from Berlin's Wall;' Independent, October 18, 2009, http://www.independent.co. uk/news/world/europe/secret -tunnels-that-brought-freedom-from-berlins-wall-1804765,html.

21. Mary Elise Sarotte, The Collapse: The Accidental Opening of the Berlin Wall (New York: Basic, 2014), 181.

22. Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time, 2nd ed. (Boston: Beacon, 2001), 137.

23. Ellen Meiksins Wood, The Origin of Capitalism: A Longer View (London: Verso, 2002).