From: Blanc Weber <blancw@microsoft.com> Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 20:17:28 PDT
included "Life, liberty, Pursuit of Happiness", and what do you suppose George thought about that?
Some questions I would ask in regard to this warfare business: What sort of a win would you be aiming for, which served the purposes of rational discussion poorly? For how long would you be expecting to live in the company of those whom you drove to irrationality? And how would you go about the business of returning everything back to a
Psychological Warfare is the only way to compete with the NSA on this issue. This is how they are manipulating the Clinton Administration, and the population with propagandic undue infuluence. Power is only aquired by the fact that the population gives the NSA power via credibility. They are the NSA, ergo, they must know what they are talking about. The Clinton Administration has been similarly duped.
The assertion that the NSA is manipulating the executive borders on the indefensible. The NSA make educated suggestions in their field of expertise. The President worries about the policy implementations from the executive. If the NSA is really in control, why the hell are they doing public relations instead of remaining the super secret agency they would much prefer? This is simply a re-hash of the old arguement I had with tmp@netcom.com. I expected more.
Second question. Of the consensual normalities of society, Fredrich Perls said, "You can choose to participate in the collective psychosis, or dare to be yourself, and possibly be crucified." I'm in the business of raising the population's awareness, as is EFF. Perls also said, "Awareness of itself, is curative."
The problem with your potential crucifiction is that no body gains for your death. You are not Jesus. We do not profit if you are imprisioned.
Provisions for the survival of tribal anarchy- a pure democracy- were written into the Constitution by Thomas Jefferson, if one is to give weight to progressive theory. An aware, informed, and actively participating population is my aim, not "driven to irrationality" as Blanc state above.
An aware, informed, and actively participating population being your target, you will want to reach as many people as possible. I think most will agree that you tend to the fringe right now and thus your audience will be limited.
The internet, in its present state is a belevolent anarchy, with guidlines of courtesy extended to the new participants by the older experienced participants. Some of us are experienced and quite comfortable functioning in an anarchic environment. As the hordes come, we are already preparing the way for them.
An anarchy with local lords controlling individual participation. (System admins) An anarchy with regional economic powers that charge for inclusion. (Service providers) An anarchy with an organized watchdog group. (CERT) An anarchy subject to the laws of the participants residency. (MIT bust) An anarchy with export regulations. Some anarchy. It seems to me you're talking about goals, not reality.
Kapor talked about the public outcry that would be percipitated by shutting down the internet. We've talked about strength in numbers. We can trust the innate herd instinct of humankind to self regulate and organize itself with in this new paradigm of confluence.
Have to have a real anarchy first.
Psychological Warfare is duofold. It harrases the enemy, and hopefully wins the hearts and minds of the population. I suggest Blanc not throw the baby out with the bath water.
Harass the NSA. Win the press and the people in the process? If that's what your proposing, I really can't follow you, and I think the majority of the population will tend to think along the same lines.
-- PGP PUBLIC KEY via finger! JAFEFFM Speaking & Thinking For Myself!
* eagle@deeptht.armory.com email info@eff.org * *** O U T L A W S On The E L E C T R O N I C F R O N T I E R **** ***** Committed to Free Public Internet Access for World Peace *****
Look, I really don't object to your goals. I'd like less regualtion too. Unfortunately distributing restricted documents at will and declairing psy-warfare on the NSA probably won't get you there. I hope I'm wrong, and I hope you do it all by yourself, but I have to ask the question, had the document been top secret, or even just confidential, would you still have spread it around so easily? To me that reflects a lack of judgement and recklessness. I tend to think of actively subverting an intelligence agency the same way. Better in my mind to learn and act in a guided way, not throwing every stick and spear and gernade that comes to hand at the target. What you seem to be looking for is change, NOW. THIS SECOND. If this is your timetable, I hope you like bloodshed. -uni- (Dark)