“Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws,” wrote Plato, a Greek philosopher, 2,400 years ago. In 2025, Roatan municipality installed 400 CCTV cameras in an effort to identify the so-called “bad people.” These cameras are likely to become part of a much larger surveillance infrastructure. At the cost of losing personal privacy and spending millions of dollars in taxes, the island is on its way to building a 21st-century panopticon prison.
I guarantee there will be numerous unintended negative consequences of installing extensive CCTV cameras on the island. Here is a short list of possibilities: an increase in our taxes, a loss of our privacy, a shift from self-reliance to reliance on government assistance, the future selling of CCTV and other data to bad actors, the creation of a false sense of security, and the unleashing of a never-ending need for more surveillance.
Here is one more reason: Once a serious crime is committed by the Honduran national police —and sadly, that does happen— and it is recorded on a CCTV system, the municipality will be placed under pressure from the police and likely become a party to the cover-up.
The high-trust society that Roatan once was has gradually been replaced by technology and a false sense of trust in government institutions. Put simply, the island’s social capital is being replaced by technocracy. Once that capital is lost, it is extremely difficult to regain.
Security has two aspects: true security and the perception of security. While claiming to provide safety for citizens, security systems often serve to maintain state control and enforce conformity among the population. The carrot is not the goal, but an excuse to impose a surveillance system for the benefit of those in control. While we might argue about who those controllers are, we can all agree—the controllers are not us.
Systems often serve to maintain state control.
In other words Roatanians might be suffering from a case of collective illusion. They may be going along with the idea of creating a “smart city” that could erode the precious freedoms they may not realize can be taken away. The unfortunate truth is that by surrendering your privacy in hopes of gaining security, you could end up with neither freedom nor security. Freedom comes with risk. If you want 100% security, you would need to check yourself into a maximum-security prison with 24/7 camera surveillance—and you’d better hope your cellmate isn’t Jeffrey Epstein.
So let’s not make the mistake other already have. There are places all over the world that have already become surveillance zones ridden with nightmares. They are not in any way safer—in reality, they are unsafe for citizens. The state monitors those spaces and decides which actions it wants to prosecute. Not wearing masks in public, possibly praying near an abortion clinic, jaywalking —you name it— are all offenses that have recently been punished in Great Britain.
Great Britain has arrested tens-of-thousands of individuals for posting memes and criticizing government policies. Every day, around 30 people in Britain are arrested, tried and sent to jail for media posts deemed “offensive,” not even “hateful,” as well as for silent prayers near abortion clinics. The number of people arrested for simply making statements has grown to 12,000 a year.
This persecution of its own population is only possible thanks to media monitoring by thousands of state agencies and 6 million CCTV cameras—21 million surveillance cameras in total—monitoring 70 million British residents. Many of those cameras have one-way or two-way audio capability.
Freedom for individuals in China is even more restricted. China’s Skynet control system—a combination of the social credit system and a state-operated CCTV facial recognition network — has created an open-air prison. The 1.3 billion Chinese citizens and 70 million British citizens can no longer make that claim without the risk of being visited by police or having their lives affected. Let what took place in those so-called smart cities serve as a warning.
Roatan should be and can remain free from government aspirations to constantly surveil us and treat us as poetical criminals. The irony is that this island has a long history of people who chose to come here choosing freedom over security. Whether it was Roatan-based pirates or Puritan colony settlers, they came here in search of freedom, not security.
Also the Garifuna were brought here because they fought to keep their freedom in two Carib Wars they fought against the British on Saint Vincent. Settlers from the Cayman Islands who came here in the 1830s and 1840s were also seeking freedom and new opportunities. While security is a very important part of life on Roatan, freedom has always been more important.
Living next to the sea and living from its bounty, islanders have been accustomed to assume risk as a part of their lives. Many Roatanians died doing what they loved and supporting the families they loved. Living on a remote island in the path of hurricanes came with an understood risk — fishing on commercial boats, moving cargo, toiling in the bush.
Let’s not make the mistake others already have.
When I moved here in the early 2000s, the island was simple and still homogeneous. The vast majority of people were born on the island and knew one another, at least casually. The innocence that Roatan once had —maybe just 20 years ago— is gone.
Gone are the days when islanders were related by two degrees of separation: If you didn’t know someone, you knew someone who did. That connection brought a sense of security, trust and comfort. Today, the island is based on three degrees of separation and is a much less comforting place.
The island’s CCTV program is a large, complex and expensive and Roatan has an unfortunate history of poor government decisions. To mention just three of these white elephants: the abandoned Coxen Hole desalination plant; the José Santos Guardiola garbage dump, inaugurated by President Mel Zelaya in 2009 and still not operational; and the Roatan public hospital building, which was constructed for $3 million and will require $52 million to finish.
While those expensive failures don’t mean the municipality should stop trying, they should encourage skepticism toward new ideas. “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me,” the saying goes.
There are alternatives to CCTV government run surveillance. There are already plenty of private security camera systems that are used efficiently when needed. The other sad truth is that our computers, smartphones, and even smart devices like internet-connected cameras, refrigerators, and smart electric meters are already tools of surveillance used against us. These are employed by security agencies in the US, Israel and other bad actors. Let’s not allow the government to take control of our lives more than it has already.
