From: Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 08:15:19 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: crypto anarchy vs AP
Message-ID: <199609221810.TAA00172@server.test.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Been reading the AP thread, and thought I'd donate some of my views.

To me, crypto anarchy is a means to achieve a more libertarian
government, it is a pivotal tool to reduce government power, and
enable freedom and privacy.  A libertarian government means a less
powerful government, less taxes, less onerous laws, more freedoms.  I
don't think AP as stated by Jim could escalate quickly enough as a
mechanism to introduce a libertarian government, because if it got to
the state that too many politicians were openly threatened, and
killed, the government would declare a state of war, and switch off
the Internet.  You'd just cause the government to panic, and this
would have negative effects, it would take ages for them to calm down,
and the laws they'd pass in the mean time would mean a near certainty
of mandatory GAK as a condition to switching the Internet back on.

(Before someone takes me to task for the impossibility of switching
the Internet off, it all depends on the level of government panic.
More specifically perhaps they would disconnect key backbones, and
ISPs briefly while they rushed into effect a few presidential decrees
outlawing non GAKed crypto, anonymous ecash, remailers, PGP, DC-nets,
etc.)

I think I understand what Jim is saying with AP, that it might be a
way to accelerate the arrival of libertarian government.  I'm not
saying I have any moral problems with a suitably restrained version of
AP, if it saved lives and resulted in a better life for many people.
(Some people might even view it as having a certain element of poetic
justice:-)

However I don't think it would survive the above hurdle.

(Also I have some thoughts on why AP might not achieve the desired
effects even if it could survive the hurdle which I will save for now,
in the interests of keeping this to a digestible length.)

Libertarian governments, if they come, I think will be more easily,
and more likely achieved via non-violent means.  I think it will be a
much more gradual process, and that government power will just be
gradually eroded as international businesses gain power, and borders
become more open, trade more free, as travel becomes cheaper, and
moving to another country becomes less of a hassle.  Telecommuting,
and remote education should help reduce the problems of moving
country.  If you telecommute, and your kids (if you have any) are
taught via the Net, and you can talk to your friends in photo
realistic real time VR chat rooms, it becomes much less important
where on the planet you live.

As information based work becomes more important, significant
proportions of government tax revenues may be siphoned off to
tele-workers from tax havens, and to those who just ignore local tax
laws in favor of anonymous ecash.  The ability to jurisdiction shop
for laws, and taxes in itself will reduce governments options.  It
will induce governments to try to provide incentives for international
businesses to use their jurisdictions, and to create the appearance of
as free a life style as they can for individuals.  The jurisdiction
shopping will start amongst the disenfranchised, and the adventurous,
but will spread as the advantages become clearer, and the hurdles are
reduced.  Tax collection will be restructured to tax tangibles, and
reduced to encourage customers (citizens).

Governments are currently flailing around trying to prolong the
inevitable.  The fall out from this is beginning to annoy some people.
If it annoys enough people soon enough that they vote in a Libertarian
candidate for president in the next 20 years, crypto anarchy, and
libertarian governments could be reached more quickly.  I'm not sure
it will ever get that far though, because the more votes the
libertarians get over the following years, the closer we get to
libertarian anyway, because the government has to start adopting their
policies to get the votes back.  (Much like the green movement, which
once it started getting significant votes, and media attention, was
pandered to by politicians of all parties.  They're all green now:-)
And so libertarian thinking starts to affect government thinking.
Crypto anarchy privacy preserving goodies such as anonymous ecash,
anonymous email, strongly free speech, right to encryption start to
fair better, and so start to undermine whats left of government.
Politicians, now posturing to try and look more libertarian might even
start to take on board the idea that there are simply too many
government employees, that may be the war on drugs causes more
problems than it solves, that sounding pro free speech is something
that might carry some votes, etc.

By the time governments get weak enough for AP to be feasible, they
will be so weak, and eager to entice you into their jurisdiction with
promised single digit tax rates, private dietary recommendation
services, friendly police forces, advertised local highlights: local
casinos, brothels, cuisine, favorable climate, reasonably priced
housing, etc, etc. that no one will care much about offing the fawning
officials (head salesmen, and brochure designer) anyway.

Well thats my theory :-)

It could all suffer a huge set-back if the government panics too soon,
and passes mandatory GAK by presidential decree or something.  One
hopes that whats left of the US first ammendment, and judicial system
would be enough to repeal such a move, but you never know.

Adam
--
#!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj
$/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1
lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/)