From: Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu>
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 1996 03:50:25 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: "Gentlemen do not read each other's mail"
In-Reply-To: <199601260152.UAA16955@jekyll.piermont.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.ULT.3.91.960125181427.13398E-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Thu, 25 Jan 1996, Perry E. Metzger wrote:

> Rich Graves writes:
> > On Thu, 25 Jan 1996, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> > > I am a funny sort of person. I don't believe that governments should
> > > be able to do anything that individuals cannot. If it is bad for me to
> > > steal, it is also bad for a government official to steal. If it is bad
> > > for me to listen in on my neighbor's phone calls, it is bad for the
> > > government, too.
> > 
> > Er, I believe the above was clearly intended to mean "for one government
> > to read another government's mail." 
> 
> I'm funny in more ways than one. I don't believe in the existence of
> "Governments". 

I agree. This post was very funny, in the normal sense of the word.

...
> In any case, we are here expected to believe that it is okay if the
> Secular God of our land mass, our Government, spies on the Secular
> Gods of other land masses. However, viewed from my perspective, when
> "the Government" of our land listens in on "another Government's"
> communications, from what I can tell what is happening is that
> individual humans in the guise of High Priests converge at their
> temple in Fort Meade for the purpose of listening in on conversations
> between individuals humans elsewhere who are associated with other
> Government cults in some sort of ordained capacity. One might argue
> that this discourtesy between the followers of rival cults is not
> something for we, the arch-atheists, to care about, but I must note
> that in principle what is going on is the same -- people are listening
> in on other people's communications -- not the Divine Governmental
> Being itself listening in on the communications of other Divine
> Governmental Beings. These Divine Governmental Beings don't
> exist. Only the humans claiming the authority of the Divine
> Governmental Beings exist.

Therefore, to ordain myself Devil's Advocate Being, is it not wrong, in
principle, for us human beings to inquire into the affairs of the humans
claiming the authority of Divine Governmental Beings? Are not the actions
of the Fort Meade Beings a matter for their own personal conscience,
absent any immediate, *direct* impact on us that would justify an
appropriate reaction, be it fight, flight, or encryption? Please assume no
funny theological beliefs in the existence of other Non-Divine Beings, or
sympathy therewith. 

Of course, on individual principle, I quite agree with you, which is why I
do not believe I could ever become a cleric or even disciple of any odd
religion. I'd really suck as a soldier, too.

However, of Hobbes, Rousseau, Marx, Motesquieu, and Locke, I find Hobbes
the most logical. People just suck, and ethics aren't enough. Karl Marx 
and Jim Bell talk about the withering away of the government, but what 
they're really talking about looks like a new and more onerous form of 
government to me. There is a need for force, and I much prefer a balance 
of powers to either unified world government or unorganized individual 
force.

Clearly there is room for maneuver as to how to organize the threat and
use of force, and most people, myself included, do not like the current 
alignment of forces. We can choose multilateral disarmament, or 
deterrence. 

Any time you talk about the organized deterrence of "Bad" behavior,
whether it comes from the NSA or the Cypherpunk Cabal, you're talking
about a system of government. 

-rich
 Fucking Statist