From: Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 09:11:26 +0800
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Subject: Re: The Policeman Inside
In-Reply-To: <v03102822b094c86ba119@[207.167.93.63]>
Message-ID: <19971125170054.55027@songbird.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Tue, Nov 25, 1997 at 06:15:56PM -0500, nospam-seesignature@ceddec.com wrote:
> I don't censor myself when I say that some things - especially violence -
> are evil, and perhaps even criminal, and don't support the use of
> technology to promote them.  I happen to believe this.  Saying that
> self-censorship is dishonorable presupposes a belief, even a hypocritical
> one, in honor.  When one advocates anarchy, it is hard to compose a
> meaningful insult.  When there are no rules, you cannot violate one.

However, the "anarchy" in cryptoanarchy is quite structured.  (I was
quite seriously criticized for using a dictionary definition of
anarchy, you may recall...) If there were *no* rules, then murder is
OK, and ownership means nothing.  Furthermore, cryptoanarchy requires
the sanctity of contracts, which implies a whole bunch. 

The whole notion of "the policeman inside" is stupid sloganeering.  Of
*course* we have a policeman inside -- we have something that tells us
(at least some of us) that murder, theft, and dishonesty are 
behaviors to be avoided.  We have something that tells us (some of us) 
it would be foolish to make a habit of running red lights.

> There also has been no attempt to prove that being "governed" by a bunch
> of unregulated militias would be better than what we have now.  If anyone
> wants to encourage the destruction of our society and culture, they can do
> so, but it will result in a new dark age whether it is desired or not -
> people aren't going to be designing computers when all the power plants
> and telecommunications are cut, and no raw materials can move.  All this
> crypto techonology requires an infrastructure - it doesn't work with slide
> rules and carrier pidgeons.
> 
> There are some very thoughtful people who are defending liberty, and there
> are some crazed people who I would fear in proportion to their firepower
> since they seem to lack self-control or even intelligence (McVeigh managed
> to miss those who I would assume to be his targets - the ATF and FBI
> agents).  I don't think it is wise to associate with people who like
> violence for the sake of violence with things like ideals being just an
> excuse to commit heinous crimes.  I say that I am not part of any such
> group, although many would like to lump anyone advocating the reduction of
> government power with the rabid-right.
> 
> I recognize that the FBI, etc. are becoming like the KGB - something which
> I consider to be an evil.  The last thing I want to do is imitiate them by
> wishing for the death and injury of innocents in furtherance of my causes
> - that is the method of our current government.  While I suggest that
> crimes are still crimes when committed by government, others seem to take
> government criminality as an excuse to advocate serious crimes on their
> part (or encourage other anonymous people to do).
> 
> If the response to Waco and Ruby Ridge is to descend to the level of those
> in the government who committed the crimes, then there is no moral
> difference between any such person and Horiuchi.  They simply aim at a
> different set of targets.  Maybe the Cypherpunk-militia can kill more
> innocent people than the FBI and ATF.  But would that be a victory?  Is it
> a gain to liberty to randomly kill people? 
> 
> I will tell anyone who says "I want to hurt and kill innocent people" that
> they are wrong.  If I am fighting for anything, it is for human rights.
> And I will challenge anyone who advocates the abridgement of those rights,
> even if they happen to agree with my views that cryptography enables the
> exercise of those rights.
> 
> I believe in the extensive use of crypto because I believe in human
> rights, not because it can be used to abridge those rights.  Those who use
> crypto to help commit acts of terrorism and those who use it to enslave
> citizens are on the same side.

Yep.  Actually,  I agree with every single thing you said, 
interestingly enough.

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent@songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html