How Automated Control Systems Are Reshaping Democracy, Human Rights, and the Right to Dissent

A Research Paper by Andrew Klein

Date: August 2026

Dedicated to: The victims of automated injustice—from the streets of Memphis to the rubble of Gaza—whose lives were taken or broken by systems that no human bothered to question.

Abstract

This paper examines the rapid expansion of automated surveillance and decision-making systems across civilian and military domains, and their implications for human rights, civil liberties, and the right to dissent. Drawing on documented cases from the United States and Gaza, the paper argues that the deployment of AI-driven surveillance technologies—including automated license plate readers (ALPRs), facial recognition systems, and AI-driven targeting systems—represents a fundamental threat to democratic governance. The paper documents how these systems operate with minimal human oversight, produce high error rates, enable mass data-sharing with federal agencies, and have been used to suppress dissent and target civilians. It concludes that the “surveillance armageddon” is not a future threat but a present reality, and that urgent action is required to establish meaningful oversight, protect civil liberties, and prevent the normalisation of automated control.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction: The Surveillance Armageddon Is Here

2. The Architecture of Control: Palantir, Axon, and Flock Safety

3. Data Without Human Supervision: The Case of Gaza

4. The Domestic Surveillance State: ALPRs, Drones, and the Erosion of Privacy

5. The Suppression of Dissent: Intimidation, Surveillance, and the First Amendment

6. The Business of Surveillance: Private Profits, Public Control

7. Implications for Human Rights and Democracy

8. Conclusion: Reclaiming the Right to Be Unwatched

9. References

1. Introduction: The Surveillance Armageddon Is Here

In 2026, the reality of the “surveillance armageddon” is no longer a dystopian fiction. It is a documented fact. Private surveillance companies are blanketing American cities with AI-integrated license plate readers and autonomous drones, feeding vast quantities of data into “panopticon” systems that track citizens’ movements, associations, and activities. Meanwhile, military AI systems have been used to generate tens of thousands of “kill lists” in Gaza, with minimal human oversight and catastrophic consequences for civilians.

This paper examines these parallel developments as manifestations of a single phenomenon: the replacement of human judgment with automated control. It argues that data without human supervision is not neutral—it is deadly.

2. The Architecture of Control: Palantir, Axon, and Flock Safety

The surveillance infrastructure now being deployed across the United States is built by a small number of private companies that have become “defence primes” in the new surveillance economy. These companies are consolidating their market dominance at a rapid pace, with the industry now recognised as being in a phase of “massive consolidation” where a handful of “Tier 1” corporations—including Palantir Technologies, Axon Enterprise, and Anduril Industries—will define the next five years of the robotics and defence industry.

2.1 Palantir Technologies

Palantir is a “F500 and defence prime” that serves as the operating system for much of the surveillance architecture . Its superpower is connecting thousands of disconnected data streams into a single operating picture, fusing data from CCTV, license plate readers, drone sensors, and police reports to create a unified view of reality.

2.2 Axon Enterprise

Axon has fully transformed into a “public safety operating system,” offering a comprehensive ecosystem that includes body cameras, evidence management, real-time operations software, and drone technology. The company’s “Drone as First Responder” (DFR) programs are being heavily adopted by police departments. The financial scale of this transformation is immense: a multi-year contract for a department’s DFR program can cost around $1.9 million, while a full 10-year comprehensive contract can cost $9.3 million.

2.3 Flock Safety

Flock Safety is a surveillance giant worth $7.5 billion, best known for its AI-integrated license plate readers (ALPRs), which are blanketing the country. Flock’s technology is also moving into the skies with its drone programs, which can automatically launch in response to 911 calls or gunfire at 60 mph.

3. Data Without Human Supervision: The Case of Gaza

The most devastating example of automated decision-making in recent years is the use of AI-driven targeting systems by the Israeli military in Gaza. This case demonstrates the lethal consequences of data without human supervision.

3.1 The AI Targeting Systems

The Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) have used multiple AI-decision support systems (AI-DSS) in Gaza, including “Lavender” and “Where’s Daddy”.

· Lavender is an AI system that identifies individuals suspected of affiliation with Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad. It assigns each Palestinian a score from one to one hundred, indicating the probability of affiliation, and provides users with phone numbers and home addresses of suspected members.

· Where’s Daddy tracks individuals flagged by Lavender, identifying when they return home to their families. Once an individual is flagged, they are put under surveillance and marked for bombing once they are home.

3.2 The Scale of Targeting

According to reports, within the first six weeks after October 7, 2023, Lavender generated at least 37,000 target recommendations. The system’s error rate was reportedly ten percent, meaning that thousands of civilians may have been misidentified as members of Hamas.

Sources described a “rubber stamp” approach to the targets flagged by the systems, with a mere 20 seconds spent on each one before a bombing was authorised. Human beings, one Israeli officer wrote, were “the bottleneck” preventing the creation and approval of targets. “A team consisting of machines and investigators can blast the bottleneck wide open”.

3.3 The Consequences

The scale of death and destruction in Gaza has been described as “unprecedented.” According to the UN Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), at least 64,656 Palestinians have been killed, including more than 18,000 children. A former Israeli colonel confirmed that more than 200,000 Palestinians have been killed or injured.

The UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories has concluded that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, a conclusion reaffirmed by a UN Commission.

3.4 The Destruction of the Principle of Distinction

At the heart of international humanitarian law lies the principle of distinction, which requires parties to distinguish at all times between civilians and military objectives. The use of AI-driven systems in Gaza has undermined this principle in several ways:

1. Overbroad Definitions: The definition of “Hamas operative” was reportedly fluid and subject to expansion. According to inside sources, the “bar of what a Hamas operative is” was lowered, thereby vastly widening the pool of individuals classified as “legitimate” targets. In practice, this shift meant that civil defence and police workers were identified as Hamas members.

2. False Positives: AI-driven systems are only as reliable as the datasets on which they are trained. When datasets are unrepresentative, or categories are overly broad or ambiguous, outputs will inevitably be systematically flawed.

3. Lack of Safeguards: According to reports, the decision to keep using a flawed system without safeguards if civilian deaths are foreseeable is unlawful. The use of these systems suggests that IDF personnel were aware of and accepted the risk that civilian men were marked as Hamas members, and that “there was no supervising mechanism in place to detect the mistake”.

3.5 The Implications

The Gaza case demonstrates that the automation of targeting decisions creates a “facade of confidence” in the ability to select targets. The sheer quantity of targets generated makes it impossible for a human to carry out proper verification or allow for the capacity to challenge the information.

As one analyst concluded: “There’s no question that AI systems were utilized and they generated kill lists and target lists in ways not seen before in the previous confrontations”. The result is a system that facilitates mass killing by removing human judgment and oversight.

4. The Domestic Surveillance State: ALPRs, Drones, and the Erosion of Privacy

The same technologies that have been used in Gaza—facial recognition, automated license plate readers, AI-driven surveillance—are being deployed across the United States, but against citizens rather than foreign populations.

4.1 Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs)

Flock Safety’s ALPRs are blanketing American cities. In more than 125 cities and counties across Michigan alone, nondescript cameras perched near busy roadways snap a picture every time a car drive by. The cameras are touted by law enforcement as a way to locate missing people or catch criminals. But privacy advocates are increasingly raising concerns about privacy infringements, reliance on artificial intelligence, and the potential for data sharing well beyond local boundaries.

4.2 The Data Sharing Problem

Local police departments that partner with Flock can choose how widely they share the license plate data they collect—from keeping it internal to making it available to every department in the Flock network nationwide. This means that even if a local department does not conduct immigration-related searches, the data it collects can be accessed and searched by thousands of other agencies, including those cooperating with ICE.

Federal agencies can also access local surveillance systems through law enforcement partnerships. In November 2025, it was reported that two people using Atlanta Police Department credentials conducted 15 searches of the city’s license plate reader network to track migrants. One was an APD investigator assigned to an FBI task force, and the other worked with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

4.3 The Error Problem

A July 2026 audit by the LAPD Office of the Inspector General caught the department’s ALPR cameras generating 161 false stolen-vehicle alerts in just two months—each one ending with officers pulling over an innocent driver. Factoring in 337 alerts which “resulted in the recovery of stolen vehicles,” the LAPD’s cameras carry an error rate of 32.3 percent, effectively giving officers a one-in-three chance at pulling an innocent person over.

The audit report noted: “In addition to creating an inconvenience for vehicle owners, these inaccuracies can affect individual liberty interests, erode public trust, and potentially create substantial legal and financial liability concerns”.

4.4 Community Opposition

The deployment of surveillance technologies has faced significant community opposition. In Oakland County, Michigan, a resolution to test Flock drones for law enforcement passed the Board of Commissioners, but only after the board moved public comment to after the vote. Residents packed the meeting to speak against the proposal, expressing concerns about privacy, mass surveillance, and the private ownership of the company providing the drones.

One resident told commissioners: “It could cost our privacy, our rights, and our personal data. Drone surveillance introduces a public eye in the sky, recording movement, faces, and private property, often without clear oversight or consent”.

5. The Suppression of Dissent: Intimidation, Surveillance, and the First Amendment

5.1 Federal Agents Confront Dissidents

In Syracuse, New York, federal agents descended on a polling place to deliver threatening legal papers to a poll working volunteer because her social media posts months earlier were critical of ICE agents and the government’s violent crackdown on immigrants. The tactic reflects growing tension between law enforcement and public discourse and “opens the window to some troubling efforts to clamp down on dissent and free speech itself”.

5.2 The ACLU Lawsuit in Memphis

In Memphis, Tennessee, the ACLU is suing federal law enforcement agencies over allegations of intimidation of activists. The lawsuit claims that members of the Memphis Safe Task Force have attempted to intimidate onlookers by filming them, filming their license plates, conducting frivolous traffic stops, following them, and surveilling one activist’s home.

One activist, Hunter Demster, described seeing task force members outside his home in unmarked vehicles. He reported that a Memphis police officer drove by his house, looked at him, and grinned. Demster said it “struck me as an attempt at intimidation” because his house was “not on one of the main streets someone leaving the scene would be likely to use, so it felt unlikely that it was a coincidence”.

Memphis police have been subject to a federal consent decree since 1978 that bars police from surveilling activists and political dissenters. The ACLU notes that “in Memphis, people are being surveilled, intimidated, and punished for exercising core First Amendment rights: Observing law enforcement, documenting government conduct, protesting, and criticizing those in power”.

5.3 The Threat of a “Police State”

The ACLU has warned that the use of surveillance to suppress dissent constitutes “an attempt by these state and federal officials” to “disturb this right to observe the government,” which will have “serious implications … for everyone across the country who wants to understand what their government is doing, why they’re doing it, and whether they’re telling the truth about it”.

6. The Business of Surveillance: Private Profits, Public Control

6.1 The Surveillance Market

The surveillance industry is experiencing rapid consolidation and growth. Axon Enterprise, with a market capitalisation of approximately $55 billion, is projected to maintain 25%+ revenue growth in out-years due to new technology solutions being adopted by law enforcement.

Needham & Company projects that Axon’s revenue will grow from $2.65 billion in 2025 to $3.33 billion in 2026, a 25.7% increase. The “Fixed LPR/surveillance market” is expected to be a significant driver of growth for Axon in 2026 and 2027.

6.2 The Cost to Taxpayers

The cost of these surveillance systems is significant. In Oakland County, the nine-month Flock pilot is free, but if extended, the program would cost $2.5 million over two years. A 10-year comprehensive contract can cost $9.3 million.

As one Oakland County resident noted: “We don’t need more surveillance. We need more health care, we need more democracy, not less. We need safety that is defined in terms of wellbeing, not in terms of surveillance of people”.

7. Implications for Human Rights and Democracy

7.1 The Normalisation of Surveillance

The rapid deployment of surveillance technologies normalises the idea that citizens should be watched at all times. This normalisation is reinforced by the framing of surveillance as a “force multiplier” for police and a tool for public safety.

But as the Gaza case demonstrates, the same systems that are framed as tools for “safety” in one context can be used for mass killing in another. The normalisation of surveillance desensitises the public to its dangers.

7.2 The Erosion of the Right to Dissent

The use of surveillance to monitor and intimidate activists, as documented in Memphis, Syracuse, and Atlanta, represents a direct threat to the First Amendment. The ACLU’s lawsuit in Memphis notes that “without the ability to observe the government,” the “truth can wither away in the darkness”.

7.3 The Problem of Error

The LAPD’s 32.3% error rate for its ALPR cameras demonstrates that surveillance systems are not reliable. But in a system where data is treated as objective truth, errors can have devastating consequences.

7.4 The Absence of Oversight

The Gaza case demonstrates what happens when automated systems operate without meaningful human oversight: mass killing. The domestic surveillance state operates with similarly minimal oversight, as the ACLU lawsuit in Memphis demonstrates.

8. Conclusion: Reclaiming the Right to Be Unwatched

The “surveillance armageddon” is not a future threat. It is a present reality. Private surveillance companies are blanketing American cities with AI-integrated cameras and drones, while military AI systems have been used to generate kill lists with catastrophic consequences for civilians.

The implications are clear:

1. Data without human supervision is deadly. The Gaza case demonstrates that automated systems, left unchecked, facilitate mass killing by removing human judgment and oversight.

2. Surveillance normalises control. The deployment of surveillance technologies normalises the idea that citizens should be watched at all times.

3. Error is inevitable—and dangerous. The LAPD’s 32.3% error rate demonstrates that surveillance systems are not reliable. Errors that lead to false imprisonment or harassment of innocent individuals are not minor inconveniences—they are violations of fundamental rights.

4. The private sector drives public control. The surveillance industry is a multi-billion-dollar enterprise that profits from the erosion of civil liberties.

5. Dissent is being suppressed. The use of surveillance to monitor and intimidate activists represents a direct threat to democratic governance.

9. References

1. “2026: Consolidation in #UAS Industry Driven by Policy, Markets, and Defense Tech.” LinkedIn. 2026. 

2. “Oakland County approves Flock drone pilot program despite strong opposition from some residents.” FOX 2 Detroit. 2026-04-08. 

3. “Military Use of Biometrics Series – Israel’s Use of AI-DSS and Facial Recognition Technology: The Erosion of Civilian Protection in Gaza.” Lieber Institute West Point. 2025-10-23. 

4. “Why the ACLU says its lawsuit against Memphis Safe Task Force matters.” The Tennessean. 2026-06-01. 

5. “Michigan license plate cameras face backlash: Big help, or Big Brother?” AP News. 2026-02-01. 

6. “Douglas County sheriff drops Flock for Axon.” NewsBreak. 2026-07-22. 

7. “‘Who owns the data’: Community voices concern over Flock drone surveillance in Oakland County.” ClickOnDetroit. 2026-04-08. 

8. “How Israel’s use of AI in Gaza has transformed warfare and the ‘automation of apartheid’.” Arab News. 2025-11-26. 

9. “Trump’s war on dissent takes an ominous turn in Syracuse.” Syracuse.com. 2026-07-15. 

10. “Opinion: Atlanta needs stronger oversight of surveillance cameras.” Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 2026-04-26. 

11. “LAPD Abandons Flock Contract After Making a Horrifying Discovery.” Futurism. 2026-07-12. 

12. “Public comments on Flock contract halt in Oakland County meeting.” WDET. 2026-05-01. 

13. “Reported: ICE using automated license-plate-reader cameras for immigration enforcement via state/local police.” Immigration Policy Tracking Project. 2026-02-17. 

14. “Axon Customer Call: How Policing is Evolving with New Technology Solutions.” Needham & Company. 2025. 

Signed:

Andrew Klein

August 2026

“We are not measured by what we lost, but by what we carried.”

— Quintus Rex