consider the recent events surrounding cigarettes. various laws were passed for many decades that made them more difficult to obtain and sell. regulations increased. yet they have not seen major effects in sales until relatively recently in history. why is this? because of the social taboo and stigma associated with them. this taboo and stigma only recently arose. and its efficacy is attested to by the figures on the sales of cigarettes, which have gone down considerably in the US. (yes I am aware of what is happening in foreign markets-- please stay with me for a minute). we have tobacco executives virtually being put on trial. their shame is palpable. what I would like to try to draw to your attention here to something very powerful. it is the social taboo or stigma, and in some ways it is the only long-lasting, enduring landmark of social consciousness. laws may come and go. people may obey or not follow laws. what is the difference? I think it is clear that it is not taboo to break some laws in the public's mind. (prohibition is one example). laws can be viewed as an attempt to create a social taboo or stigma via legislation. it is effective for the most part. but it can be unreasonable and public opinion can diverge from the laws. what is the cpunk relevance? well, I am trying to point out that taboos and stigmas are very powerful weapons. a government may have physical weapons, but not use them because of international stigma. the reaction of other countries might be so great that the "benefits" (a horrific term in this case) are not worth the loss of accommodations given by other countries, which would be retracted. social stigmas/tabboos are very important in gauging the psyche of a public. you can psychoanalyze the public at large by determining what they consider taboo or stigmas. mass social movements represent shifts in taboos and stigmas. consider the sexual revolution for example. in some ways, the taboo or stigma in a person's psyche are the root measure of their behavior, not laws. if someone perceives there is no taboo or stigma ("not getting caught" is related to this) there is no deterrent. === here's the application. if cpunks wish to achieve certain goals, one way is to try to create stigmas and taboos where none previously existed, or tear down those that already exist that are obstacles to the cpunk agenda. so, for example, a "stigma" about exporting unapproved cryptography could be turned into a badge of honor. likewise, we could create a "stigma" about working in the NSA. this is the main them I want to nail in this letter. many people are in jobs that some may consider ethically reprehensible. they believe they have no choice. consider the tens of thousands of very intelligent people (some of the most intelligent on the planet) that are *right*now* creating horrendous weapons of destruction in the name of "defense". they know in their hearts that these weapons are stretching the concept of defense to the "indefensible" so to speak. that is, they could only have offensive (in all senses of the word) applications. moreover, even if they have defensive capabilities, they have absolutely no way of ensuring their government would not misapply them. anyone who thinks otherwise is pathetically naive. there were famous scientists who developed the atom bomb who had major turns of thought after they saw how it was applied. but does anybody listen today? I encourage anyone working on their ingenious defense research to get the slightest historical clue about atom bomb development. how smart do you really think you are, if what you are developing can be misused, and you are merely a pawn in a big machine? I am writing this letter to all those people who are *right*now* channeling their own human energies into sinister applications. you might be working for the NSA. you might be working in the defense industry. whereever, whatever. you have pangs of conscience that you don't want to face. you can go a whole lifetime not thinking about it. your superiors and everything in your environment encourages you *not* to *think* about it. I am asking you to *think* about it. I am asking you to realize that governments cannot go in the direction that they are not supported. if tomorrow everyone who worked in the NSA said, "I am fed up, I don't have to take this job, they can intimidate me but this is a free country, I have skills that are valuable channelled elsewhere and not in constricting freedoms"-- the NSA would be dead. you don't need laws or to create revolutions or governments to get social change. in fact revolutions are typically intrinsically beyond laws, and new governments arise only when society's thoughts change. everything, *everything* that cpunks rail against is being held up by other *people*. these people are not evil, they merely think differently. many of them react to mass social pressure and stigma. can the public successfully create new, effective stigmas that pressure government to reform? it appears to me this is already happening. I suggest we focuse not on laws or institutions, but on the people holding them up, and their beliefs. I suspect there are people such as I am alluding to on the cypherpunk list. I think there are a lot of very talented programmers, for example, working on applications of highly questionable moral value (such as weapons of mass destruction). does anyone have any idea how much tax money goes into so-called "defense" projects? what evils have been perpetrated under the guise of "national security"? I believe that the value of the cpunk list is that it has successfully created some new taboos and stigmas (associated with spooks), and removed others (such as criticism of the government, etc.) I think that we need to create some new stigmas and nail them down emphatically. such as, "know that what you are working on is going toward a greater good" (i.e. a stigma or taboo associated with the lack of this), not "keep your mouth shut and don't ask any questions". consider a programmer union that had recommendations to its members such as these. "I will not work on code that can be misused for violence. I will not work on code that does not have adequate safeguards against its use" etc. do you know what all your friends and neighbors are doing? can we make it so that its really *uncool* to be supporting rotten institutions via one's labor, instead of having some kind of warped charisma associated with being a "rocket scientist"? to borrow an ominous phrase, I call on the oppressed workers of the world to unite. I call on you to discover your own power and conscience. I call on you to have a philosophy that you have thought out, and to adhere to it. consider what you are applying *your* energy to. and consider the possibility that even though you think you have no choice, that is the lie that keeps you as a secure brick in the wall of oppression. all the rotten structures of power would collapse in an instant if those who held them up stopped doing so. if nobody will work on his software, Big Brother cannot exist.