Little Brother

In this section, Doctorow shifts the power dynamic from the DHS to Xnetters. Although the DHS is a powerful government entity, they rely on a fragile technological infrastructure to maintain their power. Marcus, who in comparison has no power, has access to the same technology as the DHS and only needs to find a weak point to disrupt the status quo. He writes in his blog, “The important thing about security systems isn’t how they work, it’s how they fail” (127), an idea that harks back to his comment in Chapter 1 that overly relying on technological security created a sense of complacency in school officials. That complacency allows him and Darryl to skip school with impunity once they create systems that bypass surveillance. Using the same mindset, Marcus devises a secure network that works around the online and physical surveillance that the DHS uses; just like his school, the government’s weak spot is their trust in the infallibility of their technology. Subsequently, the Xnetter’s jamming causes DHS security systems to break down and creates economic repercussions that adversely affect the city. However, when the DHS changes the narrative, stating that the weakness in their surveillance system is due to saboteurs who are hoping to disguise terrorist attacks, the power balance again shifts away from the Xnetters as citizens become even more afraid.

The resulting complications create rising tension and escalate the pace of the novel. Marcus encounters a problem, such as Darryl’s disappearance, and creates a solution—inventing Xnet, which allows him to direct hundreds of gamers in anti-surveillance sabotage. When adults refuse to address the gradual erosion of their rights, he creates an army of arphid cloners who force those adults to understand that not just criminals are being targeted. However, his solutions create further complications: Xnet explodes into a movement, which draws intense governmental scrutiny and puts members at risk. Jamming, or swapping “normal” people’s codes, illuminates the weaknesses in DHS security but also results in the Department receiving a 300 percent budget raise and paints Xnetters as saboteurs against the United States. Inferred in the problem/solution cycle is how shielded Marcus is inside the Xnet network—although he doesn’t ask Xnetters to do anything that he isn’t also doing, he is a single piece within thousands of players; with so many others employing his tactics, his leadership is anonymous and his risk of detection minimal.

Meanwhile, Doctorow compares the government’s draconian tactics to discourage terrorism with the terrorist’s tactics themselves. Marcus understands that terrorists create fear to disrupt systems. The DHS is relying on fear to disrupt existing systems as well. Additionally, Marcus’s realization that the DHS never suspected him of terrorism but was simply exacting revenge for his initial defiance of their authority illuminates the motif that those in authority are just as likely to be petty bullies as criminals are, a dangerous situation when civil rights are suspended due to a catastrophic event. The DHS is consciously creating a culture of fear; they incite fear in the public to achieve political goals through emotional bias. When people are frightened, they are easier to control, and Doctorow’s focus on risk versus consequence—what rights citizens are willing to forfeit to feel safe—is a central question throughout the novel, forcing us to consider the dangers of giving up freedom to save freedom.

Doctorow’s characterization plays a key role in examining the diverse viewpoints on government overreach and provides insight into why characters have different thresholds of risk tolerance. For instance, Van’s reaction to the risks that Marcus is taking and the risks he is asking others to take is emotional, and she distances herself from the group once they begin to engage in illegal acts against the DHS. Jolu sticks with Marcus longer, but by the end of Chapter 9, he warns Marcus that he will no longer take part in the fight against DHS. Van’s backstory—she and her family fled governmental oppression in North Korea—provides motivation for why she distances herself from Marcus. Not only has she experienced what can happen when governments single out individuals for dissenting, but her race makes her more vulnerable to bias from law enforcement. Even the Turkish coffee shop owner, who also fled oppression in his home country, engages in only a mild form of civil disobedience. He recognizes the dangers of governmental surveillance on its citizens, but he limits his activism to not taking credit or debit cards.

On the other hand, Drew epitomizes the white, middle-class perspective, believing that the measures DHS has enforced are in his best interests, and declares that if pulled over, “I’d consider it my duty [...] I’d be proud. It would make me feel safer” (124). Having never experienced discrimination or bias from law enforcement, he doesn’t recognize the danger of giving up his rights of privacy and freedom of speech, and his viewpoint supports Van’s later observation that “they [DHS] only get away with it because the normals feel smug compared to the abnormals” (125). The dynamic between Drew and Marcus underlines the differences between the Xnetters and the more conservative, older populace of San Francisco. Drew needs to believe in the benevolence of the government to feel safe; the trauma from believing that Marcus was killed by terrorists drives Drew to state, “This isn’t the time to be playing lawyer about the Bill of Rights. This is the time to make some sacrifices to keep our city safe” (138). However, Marcus’s arguments with his father lack credibility because he refuses to reveal to his father that he was tortured by the same government that Drew is looking to for safety. Drew cannot see that the DHS is violating thousands of citizens’ rights to find a needle in the haystack, because he thinks that those people who are caught in the surveillance net deserve to be caught due to their immorality or criminality. Only when he is detained in two checkpoints does he begin to understand the government’s overreach, but that perspective is discarded when he finds another group to blame for his lingering feelings of fear—saboteurs seeking to hide another attack in “radio chaff” (137).

Doctorow uses motifs of secrecy and fear to create narrative tension but also to focus on Marcus’s Coming-of-Age: Becoming a Leader in Dire Circumstances. Before the bombing, Marcus is an arrogant teen whose leadership roles revolve around enticing his friends to ditch school and play a game. Self-centered, he doesn’t validate Darryl’s legitimate concerns about expulsion. Even after Darryl disappears, Marcus still doesn’t recognize that his own priorities, altruistic as they might be, are more dangerous to his friends than to himself. He doesn’t understand Van’s fears about the government, even though he is familiar with her family’s history, until Jolu explains that her family’s experiences in Korea have traumatized her. However, by the end of the section, Marcus has changed. He feels enormous guilt when a group of his followers are nearly arrested by DHS, stating “[...] they nearly went away forever because of something I’d started [...] I was no better than a terrorist” (141), and his feeling of accountability is a sign of his growing maturity. However, he still fears the DHS too much to risk exposing his online identity. Instead, he engineers another solution to a probable spy in their midst, the web-of-trust, an ironic title because Marcus doesn’t trust anyone besides Jolu and Van with his identity. Marcus is accountable for his own actions; he also now realizes that his actions influence others and put them in danger, which marks his journey towards maturity and becoming a leader.