From: Jonathan Wienke <JonWienk@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 1997 23:07:16 +0800
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Subject: Re: A Reality Check & the Full Citizenship Campaign
In-Reply-To: <v03007800b04118f6f67d@[198.115.179.81]>
Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19970914080508.00718784@popd.netcruiser>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Boundary..3984.1071713731.multipart/signed"

--Boundary..3984.1071713731.multipart/signed
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

At 04:34 AM 9/14/97 -0500, Thomas Junker wrote:
>If you haven't noticed, we are well down on the slippery slope of
>acceptance of unconstitutional legislation and executive acts. 
>With the substitution of outrageously unconstutional language for 
>the original text of SAFE, the slope has just steepened dramatically 
>and the edge above is pretty well out of reach.  
>
>The problem is that no constitution has the power to enforce itself.
>It depends entirely on a wide, usually mostly unstated agreement
>that its principles are Very Important Things.  Liberia, you may
>recall, copied the U.S. Constitution almost to the word, and it did
>them no good whatsoever because the people were not imbued with the
>spirit of the document.  It's quite remarkable that any semblance of 
>our Constitution has lasted as long as it has, but it's pretty 
>obvious that the general understanding and agreement that holds such 
>things in place has passed below critical mass in the U.S.  The 
>government is now moving into "anything goes" mode.  That's when the 
>slope becomes nearly vertical.

If this is correct, expect some major anti-gun legislation in the next few
years. Even if government is totally evil, the people can still protect
themselves from jack-booted thugs if they are sufficiently well-armed. This
means owning assault weapons. Get them while you can, they're going
fast...and LOTS of ammunition.

>> 	Declan or someone who tracks Congressional voting trends should
>> double-check me, but I harbor doubt that the US Congress (or rather, the
>> House of Represenatives) is about to vote and approve such a bill.
>
>Some thought the same of the CDA. In a few years more some will be 
>saying the same of some death camp bill. It's all relative, and the 
>relative window in this step-wise game of incremental slavery is 
>quite narrow these days.

The process that brought Hitler is very similar to what is happening in the
US today.

1. All guns had to be registered. (much of this work was done by Hitler's
predecessors, but it made his job much easier.)

2. Abortion was made available on demand.

3. Euthanasia was made available for the terminally ill, then encouraged
for the elderly and feeble-minded.

4. Privately owned guns were confiscated. Freedom of speech and press was
curtailed.

5. Euthanasia gradually began to be applied to Communists, labor union
organizers, Jews, homosexuals, religious leaders, and anyone else who
opposed the government, eventually requiring the death camps to process all
those requiring euthanizatrion.

Most Germans didn't wake up to the situation until it was too late. Martin
Neimoller's quote "...and when they came for me, I couldn't say anything,
because there was nobody left to speak for me" (paraphrased) is one of the
most damning indictments of the sheeplike tendencies of most people. At
this time, we are working on steps 3 and 4 in the US.

>> This Nation, and the rights of citizenship the state conceeds,
>> were not defined and enumberated in terms of what will make police
>> oversight and investigation most cost-effective.
>
>Right, but it's illustrative of the problem that one writes, "and
>the rights of citizenship the state concedes," because this nation
>was founded on no such basis.  The state conceded nothing because the
>state was considered to have no natural powers, unlike the
>contemporary view in the rest of the world then, and for the most
>part, now.  Both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution
>make it pretty clear that the foundation for the U.S. government is
>the delegation of powers from individuals endowed with natural
>rights.  Most of the rest of the world still functions on the model
>of a soveriegn state which graciously grants rights to its
>citizen-units and can withdraw them by the same power.  It's a
>fundamental differenc that few people outside the U.S. even
>contemplate.

Of course, this fundamental truth is not taught in public schools anymore,
the better to condition the populace to embrace step 5. You have to be one
of those home-school nuts or be able to afford a good private school to
learn _real_ history.

>Also, as has been suggested in another post, this is about *money*,
>not national security. Or it's about *power*. Or *money* as the
>lifeblood of *state power*. I doubt there is a politician or 
>bureaucrat above the level of Mayberry who actually fears *any* of 
>the Horsemen. On the contrary, the Horsemen are the statists' best 
>friends. Without the hyped dangers there would be little excuse for 
>the stepwise evisceration of the Constitution and the construction of 
>the most technologically advanced police state in the history of 
>mankind.

Obviously, Big Brother cannot propagandize "We hate strong crypto, because
anonymous e-cash allows people to untraceably move funds anywhere in the
world without our knowledge, avoid paying taxes, and create anonymous dead
pools we can't trace or regulate." So the Horsemen are Big Brother's only
option.

>This latest assault on the Constitution was inevitable. Only the 
>timing may have been affected by pro-crypto legislative efforts. 
>
>Major grabs of power are almost always preceded by a period of 
>softening up by PR bombardment, exactly what we've been seeing for 
>the last couple of years. Any time you see a concerted PR campaign 
>to demonize something it's a lead pipe cinch that it will culminate 
>in a move to grab power. Trace things back to the beginning of the PR 
>campaign and that's the point in time when the ultimate objective was 
>already in the sights of the movers and shakers behind the campaign.
>
>TJ

Those who do not learn history are condemned to repeat it.

Jonathan Wienke

What part of "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
infringed" is too hard to understand? (From 2nd Amendment, U.S. Constitution)

PGP 2.6.2 RSA Key Fingerprint: 7484 2FB7 7588 ACD1  3A8F 778A 7407 2928
DSS/D-H Key Fingerprint: 3312 6597 8258 9A9E D9FA  4878 C245 D245 EAA7 0DCC
Public keys available at pgpkeys.mit.edu. PGP encrypted e-mail preferred.

Get your assault crypto before they ban it!

US/Canadian Windows 95/NT or Mac users:
Get Eudora Light + PGP 5.0 for free at http://www.eudora.com/eudoralight/
Get PGP 5.0 for free at http://bs.mit.edu:8001/pgp-form.html

Non-US PGP 5.0 sources:
http://www.ifi.uio.no/pgp/
http://www.heise.de/ct/pgpCA/download.shtml
ftp://ftp.pca.dfn.de/pub/pgp/V5.0/
ftp://ftp.fu-berlin.de/pub/pc/win95/pgp
ftp://ftp.fu-berlin.de/pub/mac/pgp
http://www.shopmiami.com/utopia.hacktic.nl/pub/replay/pub/pgp/pgp50/win/

RSA export-o-matic:
print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`

--Boundary..3984.1071713731.multipart/signed
Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="pgp00005.pgp"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="pgp00005.pgp"
Content-Description: "PGP signature"

LS0tLS1CRUdJTiBQR1AgU0lHTkFUVVJFLS0tLS0KVmVyc2lvbjogUEdQIGZv
ciBQZXJzb25hbCBQcml2YWN5IDUuMApNZXNzYWdlSUQ6IFYxSFNKNnZ4K0RT
WkREWlZrTE14ZTFqK2FQeVdMNzUyCgppUUEvQXdVQk5CdjlpTUpGMGtYcXB3
M01FUUlKRkFDZUoxblo1ZkVKZE53ek1kVkVoRm9pN3ZjNGdqNEFuUmNkCnF4
eHBKb0FpWXYvcVFxSlNGZjRWMXFLbgo9RmcrcgotLS0tLUVORCBQR1AgU0lH
TkFUVVJFLS0tLS0K
--Boundary..3984.1071713731.multipart/signed--