Thomas Leavitt writes:
I'm tired of hearing my fellow Americans referred to as cowards, weaklings, sheep, ignorant, easily mislead - this is a profoundly undemocratic sentiment, the same kind of crap spewed by totalitarian and authoritarian types from the far left and the far right as justification for abandonment of the democratic process and the use of force to impose their ideology on the rest of us.
Well said. There was an article the other day about the terrorists, which made the point that capitalism and fundamentalism were much alike, in that both share a distrust of democracy. The same can be said for the cypherpunks. No wonder that so many here have expressed vitriolic criticism of the U.S. government response (which has been almost zero), while there has been little mention of the horrific evil of the terrorist acts themselves. Putting it starkly, who is more evil: John Ashcroft or Mohammed Atta? Is it possible that certain cypherpunks find themselves on the same side as bin Laden and his fundamentalist killers? Do they secretly support this murderous attacks on innocent civilians? We now face biological and chemical attacks, which are supposed to be even more "cruel and shocking" than the WTC attacks. Are these cypherpunks in favor of seeing more Americans killed by terrorist actions? The philosophical connection becomes even clearer with the frequent statements by cypherpunks that those who disagree "need killing", that blood must be shed by those of different political views. In effect this is a call for a Cypherpunk Jihad (the word is often translated as "holy war", but "justified struggle" is as valid a translation). It is no different for Tim May to call for the extinction of his enemies than for Usama bin Laden to do so. Cypherpunks need to take a hard look at themselves. Anyone who feels horror and disgust at the terrorist acts should recognize that the same sentiments are found here, just below the surface. The thinly veiled threats of bloodshed are based on the same philosophy of violent hatred and contempt for others which motivates the terrorists. Tim May and Usama bin Laden are now revealed as philosophical cousins. It is becoming harder and harder to tell them apart.
Anonymous wrote:
There was an article the other day about the terrorists, which made the point that capitalism and fundamentalism were much alike, in that both share a distrust of democracy. The same can be said for the cypherpunks. No wonder that so many here have expressed vitriolic criticism of the U.S. government response (which has been almost zero), while there has been little mention of the horrific evil of the terrorist acts themselves.
Simple reason: the terrorist acts were despicable. The terrorists, their funders, their sponsors, their hosts, and probably their fellow travellers should be hunted down and killed. There is no debate on this point among civilized human beings. The only real question on this is how many civilian deaths are acceptable in killing the terrorists. By contrast, there is plenty of room for debate on the measures being taken and proposed by the Western nations, and on the motivations of the politicians behind these measures.
Tim May and Usama bin Laden are now revealed as philosophical cousins. It is becoming harder and harder to tell them apart.
Bull. Annoying though Tim sometimes is, there's a big difference between denigrating someone because you dislike his views or actions, and killing thousands just to make a point that you don't like some other people. And Tim's put his effort where his mouth is, writing articles and code to further his agenda, while Osama Bitch Laden sent others to die to further his agenda. No comparison at all. -- Steve Furlong Computer Condottiere Have GNU, Will Travel 617-670-3793 "Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly while bad people will find a way around the laws." -- Plato
on Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 03:22:34AM -0000, Anonymous (nobody@hyperreal.pl) wrote:
Thomas Leavitt writes:
There was an article the other day about the terrorists, which made the point that capitalism and fundamentalism were much alike, in that both share a distrust of democracy.
I can think of a number of differences as well.
The same can be said for the cypherpunks. No wonder that so many here have expressed vitriolic criticism of the U.S. government response (which has been almost zero), while there has been little mention of the horrific evil of the terrorist acts themselves.
As trolls go, about a 6.5. Terrorists are not in a direct position to deprive us of rights to privacy, free speech, encryption, and computing platforms. Should their cause prevail I've no doubt access to such freedoms would be far starker than under any regime pledged to the US Constitution, with little recourse for appeal. There is little on-charter discussion possible of the terrorists. There may be speculation of methods they did (or didn't) use. Outcomes of their actions are going to generally be abhorred. The response of the US and other govnerments worldwide is a different issue. These are largely institutions of or answerable to their peoples. There's also a long tradition in democratic (both proper democracies and republican governments) political experience of making rash decisions, often curtailing the freedoms of democracy. I see no problem with focussing discussion on these matters.
The philosophical connection becomes even clearer with the frequent statements by cypherpunks that those who disagree "need killing",
IMVAO we're cut from manifold different weaves of cloth. None of us speaks for all, self included. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature]
On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 03:22:34AM -0000, Anonymous wrote:
There was an article the other day about the terrorists, which made the point that capitalism and fundamentalism were much alike, in that both share a distrust of democracy. The same can be said for the cypherpunks.
Difference: Cypherpunks distrust democracy, at least unfettered from its democratic republic roots in the U.S., because it has proven an uncertain safeguard of liberty. Bin Laden & co distrust democracy because it permits too much liberty. -Declan
At 01:49 AM 9/25/01 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote:
Difference: Cypherpunks distrust democracy, at least unfettered from its democratic republic roots in the U.S., because it has proven an uncertain safeguard of liberty. Bin Laden & co distrust democracy because it permits too much liberty.
-Declan
More compactly: Democracy is mob rule. Bin Laden & The Holding Company want to be that mob, and for it to be ruled by sharia.
participants (5)
-
Anonymous
-
David Honig
-
Declan McCullagh
-
Karsten M. Self
-
Steve Furlong