Not just a few bad apples

   Enemy of the State
   1998 
   
   Review by MC17
   
   The movie Enemy of the State tells the story of a man who accidentally
   stumbled on evidence of corruption and murder by a congressman who was
   trying to get legislation passed to expand the surveillance powers of
   the government. He used the power of the Nationall Security Agency
   (NSA) to try to destroy all evidence of his actions. The movie
   actually paints a pretty realistic picture of the powers of the
   government to conduct surveillance and track individuals without their
   knowledge.
   
   Although MIM does not have access to details about the specific tools
   used by the NSA, FBI, CIA and cops, we know from the information that
   leaks out that these organizations keep close tabs on activists. They
   can easily monitor phone conversations, can scan the general phone
   lines for key words like revolution, can use voice recognition
   technology to pick up individual voices from any phone and they can
   plant listening devices in buildings, cars and even on people without
   their knowledge. It does not matter if all the details of Enemy of the
   State were precise, the general capability of the government to carry
   out operations like those described in the movie exists and they do
   use this technology illegally and against anyone who is considered a
   threat (which places anti-imperialists high on the list.)
   
   We don't just speculate about this, we have concrete evidence. The
   prosecution in the case against Leonard Peltier worked with the
   government to bug the defense team and listen to the lawyers'
   discussion of strategy to have a better shot at convicting an innocent
   man. And for those activists not convinced of the power of the state,
   anyone who has been an activist more than 10 years can request their
   FBI file through the Freedom of Information Act and will see details
   that could not be known without heavy surveillance.
   
   The biggest problem with the movie was its portrayal of the corrupt
   congressman and his flunkies as a few bad apples. And of course, its
   lack of solution to the problem of government powers and corruption.
   The wife of the main character, an ACLU lawyer, kept criticizing the
   legislation that would give the government greater surveillance powers
   but in the end when the legislation was defeated she just sounded like
   an anti-power nihilist. In response to a news report that the
   government would have to set up an oversight committee to get
   surveillance powers expanded she asked the rhetorical question "who
   will oversee the oversight committee." This underscores the real
   problem: The government can't be trusted to watch over itself. With
   the power in the hands of the imperialists, the less power they are
   given the better.
   
   Only with power in the hands of the people will the people be able to
   control the government. This is why MIM calls for a dictatorship of
   the proletariat. We want a society where the majority, the oppressed
   exploited people of the world, controls the government and forcibly
   keeps the minority from stealing power and wealth for themselves. Only
   with this power will the people be able to build a truly just society
   where the government does not need to spy on people who are
   politically active as enemies of the state. And with this power the
   people will be able to build a communist society where all people
   truly are equal.