Get out of my face! Facial recognition technology could enslave mankind like never before

By: Robert Bridge

Advertised as the latest tool to give shoppers more convenience, facial recognition comes with deep costs to privacy and security. By the way, can anyone remember Silicon Valley asking for permission to use your face?

Mankind has long feared that some totalitarian state, as vividly described by visionary writers like George Orwell (1984), Aldous Huxley (Brave New World), and Yevgeny Zamyatin (We), will ultimately arise and enslave him in an inescapable technological dystopia.

However, it is not usually the technology, an inherently neutral force, which men fear most; the deep distrust is directed at the shadowy individuals behind the curtain who may be tempted to use their tinkering prowess for ulterior motives, like crushing human freedom underfoot.

Consider, for example, how futurists warned of the day when consumers would voluntarily line up for the pleasure of being ‘microchipped’ so as to more efficiently access the ‘matrix’ with a magical wave of the hand. Well, that drop of derangement has already seen the light of day. The technology, injected under the skin, was thought to be the end game, the so-called ‘mark of the beast’ according to some apocalyptic critics, as far as personal freedom is concerned. Unless human beings submitted to being electronically chipped, the doomsayers say, they would be barred from engaging in vital social activities, including shopping, banking or using the Internet. In effect a death sentence.

Today, however, with radical advances being made in the field of facial recognition technologies, it looks as though the promising chip has met its match.

In a recent article by Market Watch, a new ‘frictionless’ consumer dawn is on the horizon where cumbersome accessories like wallets and purses, together with the outdated cash and credit cards they hold, will be replaced by a payment scheme known as the “biometric mobile wallet.” Sounds like the ultimate gift this holiday season, right? Well, think again. First of all, the name of the technology is very misleading since there is no leather billfold to wrap up and place under the Christmas tree. That’s because the system works off an individual’s distinctive bodily features, face, fingerprints and retinas. In other words, the ultimate ‘face control.’

As to be expected, the article heaps boundless praise on the technology, which is on the verge of going live. Soon, harried shoppers will no longer have to fumble around in their purses to find their credit cards. Just stare blankly into the “in-store facial recognition machines” and you’re on your way. In addition to that small convenience it provides the consumer, it also has the added ‘advantage’ of making people spend more money, since the ‘frictionless’ transaction gives the illusion, and a potentially dangerous one at that considering the US consumer’s outstanding debt burden, that no dirty money has traded hands.

Still, something doesn’t feel right. Perhaps it has to do with the summary of the article, which says that the deployment of facial recognition will remove “the last physical barrier between our bodies and Corporate America.” I felt the urge to take a very hot shower after reading that line. And later in the same article, the creep factor went into overdrive with a similar quote by Aram Sinnreich, associate professor of communication studies at American University.

Every technological necessity exists in the real world and is used commercially,” Sinnreich said matter-of-factly. “It’s the neoliberal takeover of the human body.

Yet, another loaded comment, and one that screams ‘enslavement’ minus the unfashionable chains of yesteryear. The question is, who will exactly benefit from this so-called “technological necessity” and to what end? The only real benefits that I can see from facial recognition, at least from the consumers’ perspective, are that people no longer have to worry about losing their wallets, or wasting an extra 30 seconds using their credit cards.

But do those tiny advantages outweigh massive concerns over ‘identity theft,’ for example? After all, while it remains relatively easy to cancel a stolen credit card, how exactly does one cancel their facial features? Moreover, what if my own personal views clash with those of the “neoliberals” who, as the headline of the article openly admits, own everyone’s facial features? Will my ability to buy food, access my smart phone and book a flight be impeded by the Silicon Valley overlords? Who will stop them?

To get an idea where the future of facial recognition could be heading, one need only consider China, which is in the process of rolling out its so-called ‘Social Credit System,’ a fusion between ‘Big Data’ and ‘Big Brother’ that ranks its citizens on everything from their finances, to their social media behavior, to the books they are reading. Falling afoul of the system could have harsh consequences, like being denied the ability to purchase airline tickets or even getting a job. Facial recognition will play no small part in the development of this all-encompassing matrix that relies upon some 200 million surveillance cameras, and let’s face it, if the Chinese can find a way to electronically monitor their 1.3 billion people, then anyone can. After all, the same technology that identifies the lonely face in the crowd is the same one that allows users of Apple’s iPhone to access “Face ID” to unlock their phones.

Meanwhile, the Western world is gradually catching up to Chinese levels of mass surveillance. Of the top 10 cities in the world with the highest number of CCTV cameras, eight are located in China. However, the United States and the UK also ranked, with London taking sixth place, followed by Atlanta, Georgia grabbing the tenth spot.

Meanwhile, new facial recognition applications continue to expand exponentially. For example, computers are now able to measure the emotional state of motorists just by accessing their facial image. Will drivers be fined for ‘road rage’ even before an outburst occurs? Is this the sort of controlled world we want to inhabit where our identities and emotional states are tracked everywhere we go? Whatever the case may be, one thing is certain, IT companies have no intention of holding a referendum to determine how their users feel about this technology.

In a 2018 paper entitled, ‘The Data of You: Regulating Private Industry’s Collection of Biometric Information,’ attorney Hannah Zimmerman admits there is “no generally applicable federal law that regulates the private sector’s collection and use of biometric information in the US.” Given the upsurge in facial recognition implementation that is a worrying disclosure.

Zimmerman goes on to warn that businesses “already track consumers’ every move online for advertising and behavioral analysis purposes,” while the introduction of facial recognition would let them “track us in the real world.” Again, we are left to ponder the question: is this a desirable condition for human beings?

While the implications that arise from such technology are enormous, and not all necessarily negative, it stands to reason that safeguards must be established to ensure that people do not wake up one day to find themselves enslaved by the invisible chains of this new technology, which will only serve mankind’s best interests so long as its owners strive for that to happen. Thus far, their true intentions are not so obvious, and that unpredictability should be a source of concern to everyone.

Information Reference: https://www.rt.com/op-ed/468603-facial-recognition-shopping-mass-surveillance/

Comparte este contenido:

India: La vigilancia por CCTV en las escuelas gubernamentales de Delhi los está convirtiendo en una pesadilla orwelliana

Asia/India/Harshvardhan Tripathi

El gobierno de la AAP puede haber hecho un trabajo encomiable al levantar la cara de la educación pública en Delhi, pero su decisión de transmitir imágenes de CCTV en vivo desde las aulas es un movimiento regresivo.

 

La decisión del gobierno de la AAP de transmitir filmaciones de CCTV en vivo de las escuelas gubernamentales y hacerlas accesibles para los padres es un paso significativo hacia la creación de una sociedad orwelliana. Esta decisión, que se ha presentado bajo el atuendo de ‘responsabilidad’ en las escuelas gubernamentales, es en realidad una decisión política. Frente a los repetidos ataques del partido que gobierna en el Centro, esta decisión del gobierno de la AAP es de hecho una forma de «exhibir» e «impresionar» su trabajo en la población de Delhi, para llevar el «buen trabajo» del gobierno a Los ciudadanos de Delhi. Pero en el atuendo de ‘responsabilidad’, esta decisión solo normalizará, legitimará y fortalecerá el estado de vigilancia en nombre de la seguridad. Ya nos enfrentamos a una situación en la que la tecnología en forma de aplicaciones de internet y redes sociales ha convertido a una gran parte de la población en simples espectadores y receptores de información pasivos / no reflexivos. Nos hemos vuelto susceptibles a ser manipulados por grandes corporaciones y partidos políticos. Ningún aspecto de nuestras vidas es verdaderamente privado, la era de los datos ha seguido poniéndonos en mayor riesgo de vigilancia.

En este contexto, la decisión de transmitir clips desde el aula a los tutores es un paso mal dirigido, especialmente por un gobierno que ha realizado un trabajo encomiable en el sector educativo. Ahora en adelante, los niños en estas aulas vivirán con el miedo a la vigilancia de sus padres. Vivirán bajo esta posibilidad de que cada acto suyo sea observado / documentado y almacenado como evidencia en su contra. Esta decisión tendrá varias consecuencias no deseadas que tendrán implicaciones para el desarrollo de los niños.

¿Recuerdas el gran placer que obtuviste en tus aulas con pequeños actos de travesuras que causaste? ¿Recuerdas el caos y las peleas de tiza que se produjeron en el interregnum entre dos clases o toda la diversión de back-bencher y las ansiedades de la recepción? ¿Recuerdas todos los garabatos que tú y tus amigos hicieron en tus escritorios o esos castigos? Todos estos actos que se pueden resumir en una palabra, «indisciplina», son las cosas que a menudo definen una buena parte de nuestra vida escolar. La importancia de estos actos de ‘indisciplina’ para el crecimiento del individuo humano puede deducirse del hecho de que a menudo las amistades no se forman en medio de lecturas y estudios disciplinarios, sino que se forjan en medio del caos, las travesuras y las charlas.


La vigilancia propuesta solo trabajará para reducir esas actividades y solo conducirá a la privación de lo que también son los días escolares, excepto tomar clases y notas y prestar atención. Esta decisión del gobierno de Delhi de exportar las actividades de los niños en las aulas a sus hogares solo infundirá temor de repercusión en ellos. Estarán bajo la amenaza constante de ser interrogados sobre actos triviales que hacen en clase con sus amigos. Considere este hecho que en los tiempos contemporáneos; La creciente competencia y la disminución de las oportunidades, junto con una metodología educativa de camisa de fuerza, ya causa una gran ansiedad entre los padres sobre la perspectiva profesional de sus hijos. Esta ansiedad se transforma en presión sobre los niños, que se magnifica durante los exámenes. Ahora,

La vigilancia propuesta por CCTV solo funcionará para privar a los escolares de las pequeñas alegrías y aventuras del aula, sin proporcionar ninguna solución para la ‘violencia’. Cabe señalar que la violencia en los adolescentes rara vez se planifica y calcula previamente, sino que es el resultado de un estallido emocional repentino, que no puede ser detenido por la amenaza de la vigilancia. Es necesario comprender el equilibrio entre la disciplina total y la libertad total.

Si el gobierno y los responsables políticos están realmente preocupados por abordar los crecientes casos de violencia escolar, deben prestar atención al entorno socioeconómico y político que hace posible tal violencia. En gran medida, la fuente de la violencia adolescente radica en las ansiedades causadas por una industria cultural compuesta por medios, cine, series de televisión, juegos, política, etc. que elogian la «masculinidad» y denuncian la «feminidad» y celebran la violencia. La fuente de violencia juvenil y juvenil debe ubicarse en el alejamiento creado en ellos debido al consumo desenfrenado de los códigos morales y la cultura occidentales a través de medios cinematográficos y criados a través de los códigos morales indios tradicionales, lo que naturalmente pone un límite a las ‘libertades’ experimentadas en Oeste. El discurso en continuo crecimiento de ‘bhartiya sanskriti ‘ (cultura india) y el bombardeo continuo de los páramos culturales occidentales genera un grave conflicto psicológico en el consumidor, especialmente entre los jóvenes. Si el gobierno de Delhi y otros responsables políticos están seriamente preocupados por abordar los crecientes casos de violencia brutal, deben mirar más allá del enfoque tecnocrático.

Fuente: https://thenewleam.com/2019/08/cctv-surveillance-in-delhi-government-schools-is-turning-them-into-an-orwellian-nightmare/

Comparte este contenido:

Shutting Down American-Style Authoritarianism

By Henry A. Giroux

Editor’s note: A shorter version of this piece appeared in CounterPunch.

It is impossible to imagine the damage Trump and his white nationalists, economic fundamentalists, and white supremacists friends will do to civil liberties, the social contract, the planet, and life itself in the next few years.

Rather than address climate change, the threat of nuclear war, galloping inequality, the elimination of public goods, Trump and his vicious acolytes have accelerated the threats faced by these growing dangers. Moreover, the authoritarian steam roller just keeps bulldozing through every social protection and policy put in place, however insufficient, in the last few years in order to benefit the poor, vulnerable, and the environment.

A neo-fascist politics of emotional brutality, militant bigotry, and social abandonment has reached new heights in the United States. Think about the Republican Party call to eliminate essential health benefits such as mental health coverage, guaranteed health insurance for people with pre-existing conditions, and the elimination of Meals on Wheels program that benefit the poor and elderly.
As the Trump regime continues to hollow out the welfare state, it builds on Obama’s efforts to expand the surveillance state but with a new and deadly twist. This is particularly clear given the Congressional Republicans’ decision to advance a bill that would overturn privacy protections for Internet users, allow corporations to monitor, sell, and use everything that users put on the Internet, including their browsing history, app usage and financial and medical information.

This is the Orwellian side of Trump’s administration, which not only makes it easier for the surveillance state to access information, but also sells out the American public to corporate demagogues who view everything in terms of markets and the accumulation of capital.

On the other side of the authoritarian coin is the merging of the punishing society and permanent warfare state with a culture of fear and cruelty. Under these circumstances, everyone is viewed as either a potential terrorist or narcissistic consumer making it easier for the Trump machine to elevate the use of force to the most venerable national ideal while opening up lucrative markets for defense and security industries and the growing private prison behemoth.

At the level of everyday life, the merging of corporate and political brutalism into a war culture were on full display in the savage beating of a United Airlines passenger who refused to give up his seat because the airlines over booked. Couple this with the Star War spectacle of the United States dropping a 21,600 pound non-nuclear bomb on the Achin district in Afghanistan, which has a population of around 95,000 people. Nobody on the plane came to the aid of the passenger as he was being assaulted and dragged from his seat as if he were a dangerous criminal suggesting that brutality, fear, and powerlessness have become normalized in America.

Moreover, the relative silence of the American public in the face its government dropping the “Mother of All Bombs” in Afghanistan and unloading endless weapons of death and destruction in Syria testify to the amnesiac state of the country and the moral coma which has settled like a dense fog on so many of its inhabitants. As historical memory is erased, public spheres and cultural spaces are saturated with violence and the endless spectacles of civic illiteracy. Pedagogies of repression now enable the suffering produced by those most vulnerable, who disappear amidst the endless trivialization produced by the mainstream media, which anxiously awaits for Trump’s next tweet in order to increase their ratings and fuel the bottom line.

The government propaganda machine has turned into a comic version of a failed Reality TV series. Witness the daily spectacle produced by the hapless Sean Spicer. Spicer dreams about and longs for the trappings of Orwell’s dystopia in which he would be able to use his position as a second rate Joseph Goebbels to produce, legitimate, and dictate lies rather than be in the uncomfortable scenario, in which he now finds himself, of having to defend endlessly Trump’s fabrications. For Spicer, the dream of the safety of Orwell’s dystopia has given way to the nightmare of him being reduced to the leading character in the Gong Show. Actually, maybe he is the confused front man for our stand-in-president who increasingly resembles the psychopath on steroids, Patrick Bateman, from the film, American Psycho—truly a symbol for our times. Ignorance is a terrible wound, when it is the result of systemic constraints or self-inflicted, but it is a pathology and plague when it is willful—the active refusal to know- and translates into power. Trump and his mostly incompetent and ignorant government appointees are not just stupid and offensive in their ideological smugness, they are a threat to the very act of thinking and its crucial connection to memory, justice and truth.

Neo-fascist policies and practices now feed a war culture and demand more than a political and moral outrage. At the very least, it must be recognized that neo-fascism must be restored as Paul Gilroy has argued “to its proper place in the discussions of the moral and political limits of what is acceptable.” This would suggest making visible not only the elements of neo-fascism that animate the new policies and political formations being produced in the Trump administration, but also unveiling how power is reproduced through those architects, managers, and intellectuals and institutions for hire that legitimate this distinctively American neoliberal-military machine.

The supine response of the mainstream press and the general public to ongoing acts of state and corporate violence is a flagrant and horrifying indication of the extent to which the United States government has merged the corporate state with the military state to create a regime of brutality, sadism, aggression, and cruelty. State sovereignty has been replaced by corporate sovereignty. All the while, militarized ignorance expands a culture awash in public stupidity and views critical thought as both a liability and a threat making it all the more difficult to recognize how authoritarianism appears in new forms.

The established political parties and politicians are nothing more than crude lobbyists and shock troops for the financial elite who believe everything is for sale. The boundaries of humanity are now inscribed and defined exclusively through the metrics of the twin logic of commercial transactions and the politics of disposability. The horrors unfolding under the Trump administration are not only abetted by white supremacists, religious evangelicals, but also by liberals who still believe that capitalism and democracy are synonymous, and who appear to delight and rush to support any military intervention or act of aggression the United States wages against a foreign power. Liberals are affronted over alleged charges of Russian spying but say nothing about their own country which does far more than spy on other countries it disagrees with, it overthrows them through either illegal means or military force.

Trump’s brand of authoritarianism is a combination of the savagery of neoliberalism and civic illiteracy on steroids. This legacy of neo-fascism represents more than a crisis of civic literacy and courage, it is a crisis of civic culture, if not politics itself. As civic culture wanes, a market based ideology increases its grip on the American public. This militant ideology of sadism and cruelty is all too familiar and is marked by unbridled individualism, a disdain for the welfare state, the elevation of unchecked self-interest to an organizing principle of society, the glorification of militarism, and a systemic erosion of any viable notion of citizenship.

This ideology has produced over the last forty years an agency killing form of depoliticization that paved the way for the election of Donald Trump and an updated version of American authoritarianism. This homegrown and new edition of neo-fascism cannot be abstracted from the cultural spectacles that now dominate American society and extend from the trivializing influence of celebrity culture and the militarism of video game culture to the spectacles of violence that dominate Hollywood and the mainstream media.

The new technologies increasingly lock people into orbits of isolation and privatization while the wholesale deformation of the formative cultures and public spheres that make a democracy possible disappear at a terrifying pace. Neo-fascism feeds on the spectacle, a misplaced populism, and a “mood economy” that reduces all problems to matters of self-blame and defective character. Under such circumstances, the militarization of society expands more readily and reaches deeply into everyday life producing militarized subjects, exalting military-style discipline, criminalizing an increasing range of social behaviors, transforming local police into paramilitarized soldiers, and normalizing war and violence. Rather than viewing war and militarization as a source of alarm, they become sources of national pride. The curse of the theatrical performance so endemic to fascism has been updated with the Internet and new digital technologies and allows the legacies of fascism to live on in a distinctively American modality.

The war culture must be stopped and hopefully more and more efforts will be made in the name of collective struggle to think anew what an effective form of resistance might look like. Any struggle that matters must acknowledge “that eradicating racial oppression ultimately requires struggle against oppression in all of its forms… [especially] restructuring America’s economic system.”

There is no shortage of diverse movements operating in multiple spheres that extend from the local to national levels. Some aim at winning general elections, conduct sit-ins, or engage in direct action such as blocking the vehicles of immigration officers. Others provide support for sanctuary movements that include institutions that range from churches to institutions of higher education. Many of these movements do not call for a qualitative change in fundamental institutions of power, especially in the economic realm, and as such offer no long term solutions. But, no viable form of collective struggle will succeed if it fails to link resistance efforts among the local, state, federal, and international spheres.

There are a wealth of strategies available that contain the possibility of becoming more radical, capable of merging with other sites of resistance, all of which look beyond tactics as diverse as organizing massive protests, direct resistance, and rebuilding the labor movement.

Martin Luther King, Jr. in his speech at the Riverside Church spoke eloquently to what it meant to use non-violent, direct action as part of a broader struggle to connect racism, militarism, and war. His call to address a “society gone mad on war” and the need to “address the fierce urgency of now” was rooted in an intersectional politics, one that recognized a comprehensive view of oppression, struggle, and politics itself. Racism, poverty, and disposability could not be abstracted from the issue of militarism and how these modes of oppression informed each other.

This was particularly clear in a program put forth by The Black Panther Party, which called for “equality in education, housing, employment and civil rights” and produced a 10 Point Plan to achieve its political goals. A more recent example of a comprehensive notion of politics and can be found in the Black Lives Matter movement’s call to connect police violence to wider forms of state violence, allowing such a strategy to move from a single-issue protest movement into a full-fledged social movement.

Such struggles at best must be about both educating people and creating broad-based social movements dedicated not merely to reforms but transforming the ideological, economic, and political structures of the existing society. Social transformation has to be reconnected with institutional change. This means rejecting the notion that global capitalism cannot be challenged successfully at any of these levels alone, especially if such resistance, however crucial, is not connected to a comprehensive understanding of the reach of global power. Lacino Hamilton is right in arguing that “institutional patterns and practices will not change unless protesters go beyond rallying, marching, and what usually amounts to empty slogans. “The function of activists,” he writes, “is to translate protest into organized action, which has the chance to develop and to transcend immediate needs and aspirations toward a radical reconstruction of society.”

Clearly, resistance to this impending and ongoing reality of neo-fascism is more urgent than ever and necessitates challenging not only the commanding structures of economic power but also those powerful cultural apparatus that trade in the currency of ideas. A formidable resistance movement must work hard to create a formative culture that empowers and brings together the most vulnerable along with those who inhabit single issue movements.

The power of such a broad-based movement could draw inspiration from the historically relevant anti-war, anti-racist, and civil rights movements of the sixties and the ACT UP movement of the late eighties. At the same time, current social movements such as Podemos in Spain also offer the possibility of creating new political formations that are anti-fascist and fiercely determined to both challenge authoritarian regimes such as the Trump regime and dismantle the economic, ideological, and cultural structures that produce them. What all of these movements revealed was that diverse issues ranging from the war abroad to the racist and homophobic wars at home were symptomatic of a more profound illness and deeper malady that demanded a new understanding of theory, politics, and oppression.

There is certainly something to be learned from older proven tactics such as using education to create a revolution in consciousness and values along with broad-based alliances to create the conditions for mass disruptions such as the use of the general strike. Such tactics combine theory, consciousness and practice as part of a strategy to paralyze the working of this death dealing machinery of casino capitalism and its recent incarnation in the Trump administration.

One of the most powerful tools of oppression is convincing people that the conditions of oppression they experienced are both normal and cannot be changed. At the same time, this oppressive ideology of normalization prevents any understanding of the larger systemic forces of oppression by insisting that all problems are individually based and ultimately a matter of individual character and responsibility. Dominant ideology spread its message through a range of cultural apparatuses extending from the schools to the mainstream media. The message was generally the same in that it insisted that there are no structures of domination only flawed individuals solely responsible for the problems they experience and that the system of capitalism as a whole was organized for their own good. The sixties produced a range of critical thinkers who challenged this central element of oppression, and included Herbert Marcuse, Malcom X, W. E. B. Du Bois, James Baldwin, Robin Morgan, and Susan Willis to brilliant theorists such as Stanley Aronowitz, Mary Daly, Louis Althusser, Pierre Bourdieu, Zygmunt Bauman, and many others. For them structures of domination were rooted in both subjectivity itself as well as in larger economic apparatuses.

Those who believe in a radical democracy have got to find a way to make this regime ungovernable. Planting seeds and local actions are important, but there is a more urgent need to educate and mobilize through a comprehensive vision and politics that is capable of generating massive teach-ins all over the United States so as to enable a collective struggle aimed at producing powerful events such as a nation-wide boycott, sit-ins, and a general strike in order to bring the country to a halt.

The promise of such resistance must be rooted in the creation of a new political party of democratic socialists, one whose power is rooted in the organization of unions, educators, workers, young people, religious groups, and others who constitute a popular progressive base. There will be no resistance without a vision of a new society and new mechanisms of resistance. In this instance, resistance registers as a form of total paralysis for the financial elite, religious fundamentalists, and neo-conservative warmongers. In doing so, it gives birth to what we might term a politics of ungovernability.

America now chokes on its claim to innocence. Up until now, it has been successful in both evading that fact and covering up its lies—lies about its history, about social mobility, about freedom, about justice, about the end of racism, about the value of meritocracy, about spreading democracy abroad, and so it goes. The era of hiding behind this mythical innocence has passed. In the age of Trump, the raw brutality of casino capitalism, with its highly visible acts of violence against all aspects of ethical and political decency, is enacted without apology.

A moral political coma now drives an authoritarian society that embraces greed, racism, hatred, inequality, stupidity, disposability, and lawlessness, all of which are celebrated as national virtues. The dark present is now the endpoint of a history of violence and barbarism that can no longer be camouflaged, in part, because it is unapologetic about the viciousness of its practices and the savagery of its effects. I want to hope that this moment of unmitigated violence, this period of punitiveness, and era of unimaginable cruelty will provoke people to wake up from the nightmare that has befallen the American public. Hopefully, in that wakefulness, in a resurgent act of witnessing and moral outrage will grow and provide the basis for a new kind of politics, a fierce wind of resistance, and a struggle too powerful to be defeated.

 

Henry A. Giroux is a Contributing Editor for Tikkun magazine and the McMaster University Professor for Scholarship in the Public Interest and The Paulo Freire Distinguished Scholar in Critical Pedagogy. His most recent books include The Violence of Organized Forgetting (City Lights, 2014), Dangerous Thinking in the Age of the New Authoritarianism (Routledge, 2015), coauthored with Brad Evans, Disposable Futures: The Seduction of Violence in the Age of Spectacle (City Lights, 2015), and America at War with Itself (City Lights, 2016). His website is www.henryagiroux.com.
Comparte este contenido: