From: nospam-seesignature@ceddec.com
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 07:25:27 +0800
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Subject: Re: The Policeman Inside
In-Reply-To: <v03102822b094c86ba119@[207.167.93.63]>
Message-ID: <97Nov25.181712est.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



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.

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.

--- reply to tzeruch - at - ceddec - dot - com ---