Panopticism Privacy

Some thoughts about privacy and Panopticism:

In the assertions by Jeremy Bentham related to the panopticon, he relies on an "unseen" authority that the observed never knows is or isn't watching, AND the ability all others being observed to observe each other. I don't know that we are at the point of being observed in our homes, but if we are, the observers remain secret (in the tower, so to speak) and it is not the case that everyone sees everyone else (yet) which is an important feature of Bentham's idea - at least as it applies to prisoners.

Often we are told that surveillance constrains us, or that we are forced to be compliant with some sort of accepted norm because we can be seen. This assertion presupposes that there is a behavior inherent in our unique character that we keep secret from others, either because we believe it would be harshly judged or because we believe there is something wrong with it.

From a UK report on "The Surveillance Society"

"Surveillance is two-sided, and its benefits must be acknowledged. Yet at the same time risks and dangers are always present in large-scale systems and of course power does corrupt or at least skews the vision of those who wield it. "

Most of us who are critical of this kind of surveillance would like to be free to behave as we wish in private without being afraid of someone using our behavior against us some time in the future. The theory goes, that these behaviors become constrained because we don't want anyone (either authorities or our neighbors) to know about them.

But could there be a different consequence of a community mutually seeing and being seen in this way? Could mutual seeing lead to acceptance of each other and ourselves for our common and all too human divergences from imagined or implanted ideals?

This is a possible consequence not often discussed, and I find it interesting.