Stupid CypherPunks, Negative Reputation Capital & A Warm Place To Shit
(Was: Re: Sweden's Social Democrats Sterilize the Inferior / Was: DoJ
press release on Bernstein case / Was: lack of evolutionary pressures /
Was: Save the Children! / Was: Internet Content Coal. bars press from
"news rating" mtg on 8/28 / Was: Welcome to Cypherpunks!)
Declan McCullagh wrote:
> >From: David Boaz <dboaz(a)cato.org>
> >Subject: Social Democrats Sterilize the Inferior
> >
> >Surprisingly, the revelations about 40 years of forced sterilizations by the
> >Social Democratic governments in Sweden generated only small stories in the
> >New York Times and the Washington Post.
I forwarded a list of stupid CypherPunks to Swedish authorities today,
asking them to see that the list was brought to the attention of whoever
is currently in charge of resurrecting the concept of Eugenics.
{Which has never actually left us, but has only been transmutated into
a kindler, gentler, type of sterilization and euthenasia}.
I was prompted to do so, not only in order to personally profit from
having recently invested quite a sum of money in betting that my stock
on the Futures Reputation Capital Market would dive to a new low, but
also by the realization that the Great Threat To Freedom and Privacy
(TM) is not the "stupid sheeple" who blindly follow the False Shepherds
of Freedom (and cry out to the Pontius Pirates of Privacy to crucify the
Constitution), who are to be decried as the Great Threat to Liberty and
Human Rights.
Neither is it the Intellectual Elitists who have decided to take it
upon themself to decide "which" of our freedoms should be compromised
"for the greater good"; or to decide "what" is news and what is *not*
news; or to decide "who" has genetic traits which are a credit to the
human race, and who has genetic traits which are a *debit* to human
evolution; or to decide "why" one form of expression on the cypherpunks
list is an "obscene flame" and another is "acceptable criticism."
{ "They came for the flamers and I wasn't a flamer, so I didn't speak
up. Then they came for those who 'replied' to the flamers, and I
didn't 'reply' to the flamers, so I didn't speak up. Then they came
for the Last True CypherPunk, and even the lurkers remembered they
were cyphperpunks, and they spoke up.
- T.C.M in the year 1 BC/beyond censorship }
No, the Great Threat To The CypherFreedom and CypherLiberty is
CypherUs. (The 'u' in "us" is for 'you' and the 's' is for 'stupid')
What *really* prompted this post was my seeing a short news blurb,
at around 3 a.m. on the Swedish sterilization story above, and then
not seeing it again despite flipping back and forth between all the
major TV news programs, to get further details.
What *really* prompted this post was spending over an hour on
the InterNet, searching online news sources for details of the story,
only to find a single, brief reference to it. (But finding tens of
thousands of references to Nancy Lopez's progress in the Swedish
Women's Golf Tournament taking place.)
What *really* prompted this post was seeing the news on the Patel
ruling in the Bernstein case, and knowing that it would be the focus
of a great amount of press, and discussion, and analysis, and thought,
and hyperbole, and...etc., etc, despite the fact that the government
is laughing their butts off over a bunch of freedom-fighting dinosaurs
dancing in the streets over their victory in tearing a small piece of
concrete from a Wall that is being torn down slowly while plans are
being finalized for replacing it with an ElectroMagnetic Curtain that
can be built quickly under false pretexes while the netizen's are
having their attention diverted with false issues which are nothing
more than the decaying ruins of a previous civilization.
Those who are doomed to believe (forged) history are bound to repeat it.
> >By JIM (BELL-)HEINTZ (57)
> >.c The Associated (Bench) Press
> >Sweden had as many as 60,000 of its own citizens sterilized between
> >1935 and 1976 (the year that Hitler finally died).
> >Adults and children were singled out by doctors, school authorities
> >or other officials and were pressured to consent to the procedures.
> >(Keep in mind that these were Voluntary-Mandatory dehumanizations.)
...
> >Though Sweden's sterilization program was a matter of record, it
> >received little public attention, ignored in schoolbooks and hardly
> >mentioned in reference works.
> >(In other news, Nancy Lopez is kicking butt at the something-or-other
> >golf tournament in Sweden, as 5,782,386.4 URL pointers show in Yahoo,
> >Mountain Dew, and Alta Vista, the tangled web search engines.)
> > A recent series by the prestigious newspaper Dagens Nyheter,
> >however, has stirred national debate (but has managed to be covered
> >up in most of the rest of the world by Nancy Lopez and Judge Patel).
We all live within our own set of "parenthesis". We used to think of
them as 'principles,' but then we found out that others, sometimes very
good people, had a different set of parenthesis, which enclosed thoughts
and attitudes and beliefs which were different from our own, and which
might be just as valid from the perspective of their position in life.
Then we found out that our own personal parenthesis were not a whole
lot different from the walls being built by governements to keep people
apart; to keep people being enemies of one another.
How did we find out about parenthesis, and walls--their effect on
our lives, how they separated us from the good people on the other side
of them? We found this out via information and the technologies which
brought it to our attention. Word-of-mouth and sailing ships, newspapers
and the telegraph, the wireless and airplanes, television and jumbo
jets.
And finally, we found out about parenthesis and walls when we set sail
on a new technology and discovered a new world, with a new language;
a world and language where technology and communication were becoming
one and the same. We discovered a world of Communication Technology
in which the Medium *was* the Message, and the Message could be whatever
we decided it would be, because We could *control* the Medium.
_We_ could control the _Medium_.
We could *control* the Medium.
We (whatever we conceived ourself to be within the bounds of our own
personal parenthesis), could exercise...Free Speech...we could CONTROL
the Medium by which we Communicated.
We could "talk" to someone in Weber-Weber Land, using words, and when
words were no longer adequate (You know who you remind me of? ...uhh,
there's this woman, a poet...uhhh), then we could "talk" to them with
pictures (here's a GIF, from me to you, of what she looks like), and we
could "talk" to them with *complete* information (and I am attaching
the poem I quoted here, so that you can read it for yourself, and draw
your own conclusions from your own context, and hers, as well as mine).
We could _emphasize_ words, or we could SHOUT! Or we could emphasize
words in a way that made more sense to *us*, even though we could still
see understand the emphasis that _others_ were trying to commmunicate.
And when others said, "There's no need to SHOUT!"...
Well, WERE WE SHOUTING OR NOT? It was pretty obvious. The new method
of communicating changed what was _obvious_ and what was not; it changed
how we could lie and what we could lie about (I'm only twelve, AND I AM
*NOT* SHOUTING!!!); it changed what we could pretend to ourselves, and
what we couldn't (I am a computer expert, and I will prove it just as
soon as I manage to kick these hacker kids off my system and access my
resume); it changed the rules of engagement and the structure of power
(My congressman sent me and 10,000 others an email saying he would be
introducing legislation to criminalize spam. I sent him back anonymous
email telling him that if he did so, I would kill him.); it changed
what was possible and what was not, in our own minds and in our own
communications, if not in our immediate reality (Where am I writing
this from? From the compound in Waco! I can see the .jpegs of the
flames rising in front of my face. I can hear the .wav screams of
the children as they burn to death. I can merge them with the tape
loop of the government negotiator doublespeaking, "David, don't do
this to these people." as the *governement* was doing it to them.)
Most importantly of all, the new method of communication changed
our control over the information we received. It changed the level
of *access* we had to information. It *empowered* us to *seek* the
information we wanted, in order to build our own personal belief
systems and direct the encompassing scope of our perceptions.
It empowered us to search for the word "Nazi" in our New World
according to _our_own_ Order (using AND, OR, NOT, +, -, etc.)
It allowed us to read about the Holocaust ~and~ Revisionism. It
allowed us to read about the Death of Hitler ~and~ the Escape of
the Nazi's to the South Pole. It allowed us to read about the
liberation of the Death Camps ~and~ the Escape of Eugenics into
the bowels of Planned Parenthood. It allowed us to read all of
the things which were an accepted part of our normal reality ~and~
those things which ran totally contrary to our accepted reality
~-~AND~-~ everything in between, in a variety of combinations,
according to OUR search/wishes/beliefs/perceptions.
The new technology allowed us to "seek out" new communities where the
netizens who passed through could share our sameness or learn from our
differences. We could move from community to community, and yet always
remain our own, separate, Community of One.
To: Major Domo @ Dumbo_Homo_Rambo_MauMau . NET
subscribe community(a)other.org <me(a)mine.com>
end (<---a command. *my* command. *my choice. *my decision)
We could join, we could unjoin. We could "subscribe," not to a belief
system, but to a community with an individual mix of belief systems
which
were similar/disimilar to our own. If we had nothing to learn, and
nothing
to teach, we could "unsubscribe."
We didn't have to be consistent. We could subscribe to the Holocaust
Remembrance mailing list, the Holocaust Denial mailing list, ~and~ to
the Holocaust Revival mailing list and Holocaust Prevention mailing
list.
{Or, if we had the extreme good fortune to be handsome, beautiful, witty
and intelligent, as well as between the ages of <=zero and >=infinity,
we could subscribe to the cypherpunks mailing list, get our ultrasecret
magic decoder ring, an invisible Toad tattored on our over-imaginative
forearm, and support the Remembrance/Denial/Revival/Prevention of the
Holocaust, the Hallowed Cause, the Halloween Costume and, last but not
least--Howard Cossell.}
In short, the New World Communication Union allowed us not only the
Freedom of Speech, but also the "Freedom of Communication."
"FREEDOM OF COMMUNICATION!!!"
Freedom to <whisper>. Freedom to SHOUT!
FREEDOM TO SHOUT REALLY, REALLY LOUDLY!!!!!
FREEDOM TO SHOUT F#!U$!C%!K^!(!I)!N-!G OBSCENELY!
(Freedom to <quietly> object to the previous freedom being abused.)
The New World Communication Constitution was a "we the people" to whom
"Anything not standardized, is permitted."
Freedom to Subscribe, Freedom to Unsubscribe
Freedom to 'scribive', freedom to "Take me off this damn list NOW!"
(freedom to do the above 200 times and wonder why it wasn't working)
Freedom to write your own majordomo code so that it supports all
of the standardized majordomo commands, plus adding support for
those with agraphia to 'srivibe', 'scrumbive', and 'scumdive'.
Freedom to remain on the mailing lists where good-natured humorists
made light fun of disabilities such as agraphia, and to leave the
mailing lists where jackbooted, intolerant rednecks make fun of
*serious* disabilities, such as Tourette FUCK!COCKSUCKER! Syndrome.
Freedom to start a private mailing list where you can control the
issues discussed, the way they are discussed, and to ask people to
refrain from certain discussions on the list because they are
off-topic, or BECAUSE I SAY SO, AND I'M THE MODERATOR!
Freedom to start a public mailing list aimed at supporting crypto-
anarchy, and leave it up to those who choose to join as to how
best to address, discuss, contend, manipulate, piss, threaten,
shout, insult, debate, and personally decide both what issues
are relevant to the list and which issues are irreverent to
the list, ~and~ which 'issues' may be leaving those nasty stains
in your shorts/panties/(both).
Freedom to divide your time between mailing lists where you know
exactly what to expect because the list deals with specific issues
and the list members stay on-topic, and mailing lists where mad
hatters/dogs&englishment/scientists ramble on endlessly about a
variety of issues, non-issues, re-issues, forgotten issues, and
the like, often losing track of what the hell it was they were
even talking about, if they were talking about anything at all.
Which reminds me...
The point that I may be trying to make, might have something to
do with the fact that, in attempting to find further details about
a 10-second sound-byte/news-blurb which had piqued my interest, I
was suddenly struck by the realization that the difference between
sheeple and people might be defined as whether they are passively
processing input supplied by the Great Machine, or whether they are
actively seeking and organizing their own information/input.
Passive Information is not Knowledge.
Passive Perception is not Attention.
Passive Acceptance is not Decision.
Passive acceptance of perceived information is not Wisdom.
Robots are not human. Sheeple are not people.
Humans are not robots. People are not sheeple.
In attempting to seek out further details about the news blurb which
concerned tens of thousands of my fellow humans being declared by others
*not* to be human--to *not* have the right to pass their genes on to
a succeeding generation--I realized that the mainstream media had no
interest in "providing" me with those details. I realized that it *was*
very important for the mainstream media to provide me with the details
of how well Nancy Lopez was managing to get the small, round sphere to
drop into a hole officially designated as a "cup."
When I found a single, short (English) newstory on the sterilization
of a mountain of my fellow humans, and a pointer to a Swedish magazine
series on the issue/evert, which I couldn't read, I realized that my
knowledge of further details would come from a combination of my own
efforts and those of other netizens whose brains and domains and
interests encompassed English, Swedish, the InterNet, and Humanity.
My mundane mind recognized that life and human nature are such that
others interests lie mainly in providing *their* information, which
is of interest to *them*, and that it is up to *me* to position myself
to encounter and/or seek that portion of the available information
that I need to satisfy my own personal interests.
My paranoid mind noted that I had seen the original news blurb only
once, after which this newsworthy event mysteriously disappeared and
had to thereafter be 'sought' by myself, and I realized that someone,
somewhere, had made a decision as to what information would be made
available to me througt *their* media. (After which I consulted,
*my* media--the InterNet.)
My depressed mind noted that I had managed to find only a single
piece of usable information on the issue/event I had searched for
on *my* media, and realized that the reason for this was a combination
of censorship, tragedy of the commons, comfort, and stupidity.
of censorship, tragedy of the commons, comfort, convenience, laziness
and stupidity.
Comfort - I like to sit on my fat ass and watch TV.
Convenience - It is easy to just turn on the Tube and take whatever
it is that the mainstream wants to provide for me. ("Watch me
and I'll bleed you, cause you eat the shit I feed you." -Zappa)
Tragedy of the Commons - 25,000,000 Lakers fans named Bubba would
much rather hear about one putt than about 60,000 forced
sterilizations.
Laziness - I didn't post or make available to others the single piece
of information I found. Why should I expect that others will
automatically share the information they found?
Censorship - The Great Battle taking place on the InterNet is the
battle over *ACCESS* to information. Who will provide it? Who
will be allowed to access it? What will be provided? What will
access be denied to?
The Great War on the InterNet is over *CONTROL* of information.
Control of perception and attention. Control of virtual reality.
Stupidity - I think I'm human. I think I'm people. I think I'm *me*.
I think I'm a CypherPunk.
I'm not human, I'm a robot who turns on the TV to get news about what
is taking place in my world. I'm not people. I'm a sheeple who laughs
along with the canned laugh-track on the sitcom. I'm a sheeple who taps
his foot to the "Hollywood Strings Play the Rolling Stones" muzak in the
supermarket. I'm a sheeple who waits for more news about my fellow
humans being sterilized against their will, and then sit through three
replays of Nancy Lopez's twenty foot putt, becoming comfortably numb,
and forgetting about the problems of 'others'.
I'm not a CypherPunk. I didn't take the information source I had
found and share it with the list. I didn't write code--I didn't take
this information and past information, and use my knowledge to create
a post which others on the list could debug and add their own ideas
to expand and diversify my creation.
I'm the 'nigger' in the joke that got the presidential campaign press
plane jokester fired.
I just want loose shoes, tight pussy, and a warm place to shit.
(The Politically Correct way to tell that joke is to replace 'nigger'
with 'citizen'.)
I'm a 'stupid' CypherPunk who hopes that someday the InterNet will
match the high ideals of Television in providing me with all the
information that is fit to byte.
Well, the foregoing may not quite be true, just yet, but it *will*
be after the Great Bandwidth Crisis--or the Great InterNet Terrorism
Crisis--or the Great InterNet [Your Crisis Here] Crisis--when the
government is "forced" to step in and "protect" us from ourself.
I will settle for the 'official' internet news from the 'official'
internet news sources, because I know I will not find further details
on the Swedish Sterilization issue.
There won't be enough 'Bandwidth' to provide the details. The
details will be censored, in the interests of preventing 'Net
Terrorism.' The [Your Crisis Here] problem will make it necessary to
censor the details, make them top-secret, change them, deny them,
reconstruct them.
The foregoing *will* be true after the bumper-sticker which says,
"TV is REAL!" is changed to "WebTV is REAL!"
10th CypherPunk
