From: attila <attila@primenet.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 11:13:26 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Detweiler and his theory of "Budding Nazism"
In-Reply-To: <199511202005.MAA25006@infinity.c2.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSD.3.91.951121015310.16797A-100000@usr2.primenet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



 It probably is not worth the aggravation, but ignorant, both poltically and 
as to the charter of cypherpunks, assholes like Detweiler need to be set 
straight.  Since I doubt Detweiler is open to discussion --small minds 
rarely are, we might _very_ politely suggest to the editors of Time, NYT, 
and a couple others that Detweiler is not only misinformed, but that he 
is not open to discussion.  Enough _polite_ letters to the editors can do 
wonders.
________________________________________________________________________
On Mon, 20 Nov 1995, Hroller Anonymous Remailer wrote:

> The other anonymous poster was referring to Detweiler's
> belief that cryptoanarchy was a budding Nazism as one
> of his apparent motivations. After a little bit of 
> amateur Detweiler study I can agree with this. 
> 
> His page at http://www.csn.net/~ldetweil/ has sections that
> emphasize his concern about cryptoanarchy as a kind of
> "neo-nazism". Thankfully the cryptoanarchist sentiments
> on this list are much different than nazism in the way
> it advocates complete disengagement from the political
> process, something that tended to make the Nazist agenda
> highly dangerous. Without that you just have a bunch of
> subversive guerillas. Like gnats, irritating but irrelevant.
> 
> So as long as we stick with the non-political advocation,
> and stay disorganized, and don't ever amount to anything
> significant as far as visible political clout, I think
> Detweiler is generally going to continue to leave us alone,
> thank God.
> 
>