The imposing stone walls of Old Quebec City may not have repelled the British army in 1759, but the new wall of steel wire beginning to fence off several square kilometres of the Vieille Capitale is this time expected to hold back more than heathen invaders - it's also intended to keep out ideas.

It's a sign of how far we've come in the era of free trade, when the citizens of Quebec will be barred from visiting their own capital, all in the name of international capital. The security perimeter being erected for the Summit of the Americas in late April will cover much of Quebec City's upper town, including six hotels, the Centre des Congrès, the National Assembly and the familiar, postcard-friendly confines of the Terrasse Dufferin boardwalk, the Château Frontenac and the Plains of Abraham. Access will be controlled with military precision, with internal passports required to enter the security zone and individual photo-ID badges for each summit venue. Quebec City, along with our democracy, is being privatized.

"Turning Quebec City into Berlin, 1980, where you can't freely cross from one part of the city to another, is absolutely frightening," says constitutional lawyer Julius Grey, with his understated outrage. "I think that could be done in certain circumstances: if there were a massive plague, you could enforce a quarantine; in a situation of actual fighting, where there was a true danger to public order. But if you took the mere fact that something might happen as sufficient, then given the past history of Stanley Cup finals in Montreal you'd have to quarantine the city every time there's a major hockey event. That's crazy. You cannot do it on mere speculation that something might happen."

Grey, on behalf of the Anti-Capitalist Convergence (or the CLAC, its French acronym), is challenging the perimeter in court. Activists like CLAC organizer Jaggi Singh promise that, if the injunction bid is unsuccessful, the wall will be challenged in other ways as well.

"Let's put it in perspective: they are shutting down the city for four days," says Singh. "We don't have a national ID in Canada. We don't have internal passports. If that's what they need for the summit to happen, then it shouldn't happen there."

Even Singh admits the need for a certain level of security in order to protect the lives of leaders. "But not one activist group is threatening the leaders," he says. "If their goal is really to protect leaders, they should hold the summit on a cruise ship. They're having these types of summits in major cities as a way for the proponents of capitalist globalization and those with vested interests to show their power. To literally - in Quebec's case - take over the city."

"We're living in a political context in the province of Quebec that is not about bombs, is not about armed struggle," Singh adds. "We're not talking about FLQ days here. We're living in a political context that is about potentially using tactics that will shut down a summit because people are enraged by the effects of capitalist globalization, by the day-to-day effects of this exploitive world we live in. That is not the same as being a terrorist.

"Still, it's a little hard to talk about a shutdown when the summit is being effectively shut down for you by the police."

But the suspension of civil liberties within the perimeter during the summit (not to mention their permanent erosion outside the wall) will make it far easier for Canadian authorities to sanitize the space into a happy, shiny Canadaland theme park for our international visitors. That means the reminder of social blights, such as the homeless crowding our park benches and sidewalks, will be swept out, away, under the carpet. Installed in their place will be photo ops and PR spectacles featuring people who have absolutely no attachment to the ground they'll be occupying.

"It's all meant to prevent people from effectively organizing," Singh contends. "We can't do basic things like organize a teach-in at a community centre in the Old City of Quebec - I can't do that. There are an enormous number of spaces that are not available to us."

That's because the negotiations for a Free Trade Area of the Americas are not about people, but the free flow of goods and services. It's why we close down borders to economic migrants forced from their homes by the disruptive effects of globalization. As Singh says, pointing to the Mexican-U.S. border, "where people are hunted down and shot like dogs."

But somehow, some way, I suspect this wall - like Quebec's wall 240 years ago - may not stand. People will find a way to breach the walls of secrecy and creeping totalitarianism. And that's the spectacle I'll be looking for this April.