Saying No To The Surveillance Society

Over the past decade, and especially over the past three years, our lives have become so inundated with security video, smart cards, photo IDs, electronic locks, GPS tracking, MetroCards and other devices-all of them keeping tabs on our public movements in the name of "security"-that it's almost surprising to hear someone say "no" to the idea of another one. Most people take it in stride and are more than willing to hand over their personal privacy.

Perhaps it's when the surveillance crosses the line into our homes-and when the landlord mandating it isn't the old man on the first floor anymore, but a megalithic insurance corporation-that people finally begin to recognize there's something wrong.

That's what's happening at Peter Cooper Village, where landlord MetLife plans to install electronic locks and require photo keycards by the end of the month. In the name of improved security, they will now be able to maintain a record of every one of their residents' comings and goings. Keeps the terrorists out, you see.

But hundreds of the people who've lived in the apartment complex for years are saying (in proper American fashion) that a landlord has no goddamn business keeping track of when they come home, what state they come home in, or who they bring home with them. Five hundred residents held a rally this past weekend to protest the plan, and there's talk of a rent strike.

On the other side, MetLife officials are insisting that the locks will be changed on March 30, and anyoe without a new keycard will be locked out.

Sad thing is, it's likely a noble but hopeless fight on the residents' part. Sadder still, we're sure MetLife will have no trouble at all finding plenty of new tenants who are more than happy to use the new cards, provide fingerprints and a DNA scraping, and have cameras installed in their bathrooms. It seems to be what most people want these days.