You can’t really. There are things you can do to reduce your personal risks, such as using VPNs, LEDs can obscure infrared cameras, ETC. But, stopping surveillance isn’t really what needs to be paid attention to. Rather, we need to take into account who’s watching.

In the west, monitoring is used (and for that matter, misused) for “stopping terrorists” and “preventing crime”, which it does have some limited success in. But, the west does little to nothing within communities to deal with those issues - and at times do the opposite. However, China uses monitoring for the same purposes, and sees actual success from it. Because they’re actually putting in the effort to eliminate the sources of crime and extremism.

It’s really easy to fall into the Orwellian trap. Surveillance isn’t, on its merits alone, bad. It’s not something to be scared of. In Fact, it’s something that should be welcomed and appreciated. But, the problem with it comes - almost entirely - from the people who use it. Don’t be afraid of the cameras, be afraid of the police state that’s using them to fill quotas and justify blasting people’s brains out for ‘existing while black.’. More moral countries, that don’t use the police as a club for battering the poor, use surveillance properly and that’s a good thing.

also, it should be said every time someone brings up “free speech”; That’s not what people want to believe it is. saying chickens are stupid isn’t “free speech”, it’s a statement of opinions and isn’t protected by any bodies of law. However, saying “Dick Cheney made money off the Iraq War” is a statement of fact and a valid critique of the United States government, and thus is protected under the right to free speech. No one should feel entitled to spew filth, especially against chickens. But everyone should be (and in many countries are already) entitled to critique their governments. In the context of what you’ve said;

i feel like a Leninist revolution would only increase this mass surveillance by technology is bad since it prevents free speech

Limiting how far a critique can go can be a valuable tool for revolutions, assuming this Communist revolution is successful, limiting critiques can help to alleviate the power of counter-revolutionaries, by limiting their reach. As well, it can encourage voices in the community to come forwards with their actually useful critiques to benefit the revolution. This isn’t a bad thing, you’re anchoring your view on this from living within the west.