1997-11-14 - Re: Tim May’s offensive racism (was: about RC4)

Header Data

From: Anonymous <nobody@REPLAY.COM>
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Message Hash: c844eecf3e7b3150c0a4fd4ec527d1064a2be6800eec72149c85c5310bf5e3ea
Message ID: <199711141755.SAA20812@basement.replay.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-11-14 18:22:33 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 02:22:33 +0800

Raw message

From: Anonymous <nobody@REPLAY.COM>
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 02:22:33 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: Tim May's offensive racism (was: about RC4)
Message-ID: <199711141755.SAA20812@basement.replay.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Monty Cantsin wrote:

> Anonymous <anon@anon.efga.org>
> >This illustrates what a liability the poster has become to the
> >cypherpunks.  The group is becoming just another militia front,
> >identified with racism and white supremacy, applauding violent murder
> >of government agents, one step from applauding the Oklahoma killings.
> >Its original purpose all but forgotten, the list has died, poisoned
> >by the hatred flowing from its leader.
> 
> What would be the most effective way of managing the problem you
> perceive?
> 
> Probably by writing the kinds of articles you would like to see on the
> list.

If you don't speak up when someone says something objectionable, you are
implicitly condoning it.  Silence gives consent.  How many people have
objected to Tim May's racist comments?  Only one or two.  How many objected
when William Geiger suggested that more nuclear bombs should have been
dropped on Japan?  None.  How many have objected to the notion that
residents of Washington, D.C. should be killed?  Hardly any.

At one time the cypherpunks stood for freedom of speech and protection of
privacy.  Today they stand for guns, violence, threats of terrorism and
murder, racism, homophobia, jingoism.

It's ironic to see that the kind of off-topic, flaming, irrelevant
posts which have caused such consternation in the past are now the norm.
Reasonable people have been largely driven off the list, leaving it to
supporters of violence and hate.

The sad thing is, this is all unnecessary.  The original conception was
that cryptography would allow people to protect the privacy of voluntary
interactions.  Laws forbidding voluntary transactions will be difficult
or impossible to enforce.  We will move into a world where there is far
more liberty and freedom for everyone.

There is no need to blast government agents' heads open.  There is no
need to nuke D.C., or Japan.  There is no need to disparage people of other
races and cultures.

Step back from this immersion in a culture of violence.  Draw the cloak
of privacy about your actions.  That is the true cypherpunk way.






Thread