EPISODE 6: SECURITY CULTURE 101: How Activists Resist State Repression

Overview: This episode is a deep dive into security culture: organizers' everyday practices to keep themselves and their communities safer from state surveillance, infiltration, and repression. We explore why security culture matters—not just in high-risk moments, but as a baseline for movement sustainability. From burner phones and Signal chats to resisting snitch logic and countering copaganda, this episode shows how care, trust, and caution go hand in hand in radical work.

I share personal stories, historic examples (like COINTELPRO and post-9/11 surveillance), and tools you can use right now to protect your crew. But this isn’t about fear-mongering. It’s about resilience. It's about building movements that can survive the state’s tactics and come out stronger.

Key Themes:

  • What is security culture, and why do we need it?

  • Digital vs. physical vs. interpersonal security

  • Common tactics of infiltration, surveillance, and repression

  • How state violence targets the most marginalized first

  • Snitching, rumor-spreading, and state co-optation

  • Trust, confidentiality, and community-based accountability

Discussion Questions:

  • What are the most common risks in the organizing work you’re part of?

  • How does your identity (race, class, gender, status) impact your exposure to surveillance or criminalization?

  • What kinds of behaviors or habits weaken security in our movements?

  • How do we balance transparency with protection?

  • How do we respond to people who violate security norms—intentionally or not?

Activities:

  • As a group, review a security culture zine and create your own top 10 safety practices.

  • Roleplay: One person plays an infiltrator or media person—practice how to set boundaries or refuse unsafe questions.

  • Do a digital hygiene audit: change passwords, review privacy settings, discuss encrypted tools.

  • Create a “security pod” of trusted people you can check in with about risk and safety.

  • Write out your personal red lines: what info you will and won’t share, and under what conditions.

Further Learning & Resources:

  • Zine: What is Security Culture? (CrimethInc.)

  • Zine: An Activist’s Guide to Basic First Steps in Digital Security (EFF)

  • Booklet: Feminist Digital Security (GenderIT)

  • Video: COINTELPRO 101 (Freedom Archives)

  • Toolkit: Security Culture for Activists (Training for Change)

What Is Security Culture? A History and Overview

Security culture is the set of shared habits, practices, and values that organizers and activists develop to protect themselves, their communities, and their movements from state repression, surveillance, and infiltration. It’s not just about paranoia or secrecy — it’s about care, trust, and strategic resilience.

Security culture teaches us how to keep our work safe from police spying, informants, digital hacking, and smear campaigns. It’s a practice rooted in the understanding that the state and its agents will always try to disrupt and destroy movements that challenge power.

Having a security culture in place saves everyone the trouble of having to work out safety measures over and over from scratch, and can help offset paranoia and panic in stressful situations—hell, it might keep you out of prison, too. The difference between protocol and culture is that culture becomes unconscious, instinctive, and thus effortless; once the safest possible behavior has become habitual for everyone in the circles in which you travel, you can spend less time and energy emphasizing the need for it, or suffering the consequences of not having it, or worrying about how much danger you’re in, as you’ll know you’re already doing everything you can to be careful. If you’re in the habit of not giving away anything sensitive about yourself, you can collaborate with strangers without having to agonize about whether or not they are informers; if everyone knows what not to talk about over the telephone, your enemies can tap the line all they want and it won’t get them anywhere (Zine: What is Security Culture?)

Why Do We Need Security Culture?

The brutal truth is that the state doesn’t just ignore radical organizing — it actively targets it. From COINTELPRO in the 1960s and ’70s, which used illegal surveillance, disinformation, and infiltration to dismantle Black liberation groups and the anti-war movement, to today’s digital spying and mass surveillance programs, activists have always been under watch.

Security culture is a collective response to this repression. It’s about developing commonsense habits that reduce risk without sacrificing connection or joy. When practiced well, it creates a foundation of trust and accountability that allows movements to grow, even under pressure.

The History and Evolution of Security Culture

Security culture is not a static concept but a dynamic, evolving practice forged through struggle, resistance, and survival. Its roots lie in the experiences of marginalized communities and radical movements that faced systemic repression and surveillance. Understanding its history requires acknowledging the specific movements, legislative actions, and state tactics that have shaped its development.

COINTELPRO and the Repression of the 1960s–70s

The FBI’s COINTELPRO (Counter Intelligence Program) was a covert operation initiated in 1956 and officially terminated in 1971. Its primary aim was to surveil, infiltrate, discredit, and disrupt domestic political organizations deemed subversive. The program targeted a range of groups, including civil rights organizations, feminist groups, socialist organizations, and anti-war activists. Notably, it focused on:

  • Black Panther Party (BPP): Founded in 1966, the BPP advocated for Black empowerment and armed self-defense against police brutality. The FBI considered the BPP a significant threat to national security. COINTELPRO tactics against the BPP included surveillance, infiltration, spreading misinformation, and inciting internal conflicts. High-profile cases include the assassination of Fred Hampton in 1969 and the wrongful imprisonment of Geronimo Pratt, who was incarcerated for 27 years before being exonerated.

  • American Indian Movement (AIM): AIM was established in 1968 to address systemic issues of poverty and police brutality against Native Americans. The FBI's COINTELPRO targeted AIM during events like the 1973 Wounded Knee occupation, aiming to undermine their efforts and leadership.

  • Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC): A major civil rights organization, SNCC was instrumental in organizing sit-ins and freedom rides. The FBI's surveillance and infiltration efforts sought to disrupt its activities and leadership.

These targeted attacks underscored the necessity for radical movements to develop internal security measures to protect against state-sponsored repression.

The 1990s: Digital Surveillance and the Expansion of Security Culture

The advent of the internet in the 1990s introduced new challenges for activists. The government's ability to monitor electronic communications expanded, leading to concerns over privacy and the potential for surveillance. Activists began adopting digital security practices, including:

  • Encryption: Tools like Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) were used to secure email communications.

  • Anonymity Software: Programs such as Tor allowed activists to browse the internet anonymously, reducing the risk of surveillance.

  • Secure Communication Platforms: The use of encrypted messaging services became a standard practice to protect sensitive discussions.

These measures were responses to the growing recognition that digital spaces could be as vulnerable to infiltration and surveillance as physical spaces.

Post-9/11 Era: Mass Surveillance and the Expansion of State Power

The September 11, 2001 attacks marked a significant turning point in U.S. domestic and foreign policy. In the aftermath, the U.S. government enacted several laws and programs that expanded surveillance capabilities and curtailed civil liberties:

  • USA PATRIOT Act (2001): This legislation significantly broadened the scope of government surveillance powers, including:

    • Expanding the definition of terrorism to include domestic activities.

    • Allowing for roving wiretaps and surveillance of individuals without specifying the target.

    • Permitting the seizure of records and property without immediate notification.

    • Lowering the standard for obtaining warrants for searches and surveillance.

    These provisions raised concerns among civil liberties organizations about the erosion of privacy rights.

  • PRISM Program: Revealed in 2013 by whistleblower Edward Snowden, PRISM was a National Security Agency (NSA) program that collected internet communications from various U.S. internet companies. The program's existence highlighted the extent of government surveillance and the need for robust security practices among activists.

  • Stingray Devices: These are mobile surveillance tools used by law enforcement to mimic cell towers, allowing them to track and intercept communications from nearby mobile phones. Their use raised significant privacy concerns.

Contemporary Security Culture: Intersectionality and Abolitionist Frameworks

In recent years, security culture has evolved to address the intersectional nature of state repression. Movements such as Black Lives Matter, Standing Rock, and NoDAPL have highlighted how marginalized communities are disproportionately targeted by state surveillance and repression. Contemporary security culture emphasizes:

  • Intersectionality: Recognizing how race, class, gender, and other identities intersect to affect individuals' experiences with state power.

  • Abolitionist Frameworks: Challenging the legitimacy of punitive systems and advocating for transformative justice and community-based safety.

  • Digital and Physical Security: Integrating digital security practices with community-based strategies to protect individuals and movements.

  • Collective Responsibility: Understanding that security is a shared responsibility, requiring ongoing education, vigilance, and mutual support.

These principles guide current efforts to build resilient movements capable of withstanding state repression while fostering inclusive and equitable communities.