Surveillance capitalism advanced through corporate control, lawless space, and cultural fortification against scrutiny

Evidence

A third set of answers requires an appreciation of the political and cultural circumstances and strategies that advanced surveillance capitalism’s claims and protected them from fatal challenge. It is this third domain that we pursue in the sections that follow. No single element is likely to have done the job, but together a convergence of political circumstances and proactive strategies helped enrich the habitat in which this mutation could root and flourish. These include (1) the relentless pursuit and defense of the founders’ “freedom” through corporate control and an insistence on the right to lawless space; (2) the shelter of specific historical circumstances, including the policies and juridical orientation of the neoliberal paradigm and the state’s urgent interest in the emerging capabilities of behavioral surplus analysis and prediction in the aftermath of the September 2001 terror attacks; and (3) the intentional construction of fortifications in the worlds of politics and culture, designed to protect the kingdom and deflect any close scrutiny of its practices. — Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 321

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Indoor spaces resisted surveillance until businesses were made willing hosts — Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 479; Surveillance capitalism conquered through unilateral declarations, not permission seeking — Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 564; Surveillance capitalism grew through era-specific conditions plus deliberate political and cultural capture — Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 405 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Surveillance capitalism grew through era-specific conditions plus deliberate political and cultural capture #expands (0.85) — Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 405