Cypherpunks: There seems to be a debate floating through here on how an individual's political beliefs may influence their usage of cryptography. When I was first formulating my personal beliefs regarding politics, it seemed that Western democratic nations had created an artificial dichotomy for themselves. The political Left had the belief that while you, an individual, should have the right to do what you want with your body (free choice, free speech, substance use, etc.), they wanted to control what you did with your money (social programs, playing field leveling, etc.). The political Right had the belief that you should have the right to do what you want with your money (free markets, minimal taxation, etc.), but not with your body (right to life, war on drugs, etc.). The 'lunatic fringe' opinion, that there was no dichotomy, and that you should be able to do what you want with your money/body because they are the same thing, was the Libertarian position. Personally, I feel that a perfect world should be Libertarian. In reality, I believe that political systems evolve, and that the supporting infrastructure of the region in question will dictate the most efficient form of government for it (I'm sorry, but regions in South and Central America do not have the supporting economy to actually afford the luxury of democracy). Politics are a tool for control, but as a system, they are subject to the same evolutionary pressures as organic systems. Just as lower life forms in simple ecological niches evolve into higher life forms in more complex niches, political systems evolve as well. There is a good reason why revolutionaries in very poor nations tend to espouse socialist or communist rhetoric--those are political systems that can raise the quality of life considerably and immediately, a necessity for partisan support. Only once there is a strong enough foundation in place can a Nation (not Empire) support the freedoms and inefficiencies of a democracy; when the time is right, it will happen on its own (witness the collapse of the Soviet Union--the well educated population in central, controlling regions decided they wanted a better lifestyle). Sadly, this is why many American attempts to foster democratic tendencies in satellite nations or in countries in turmoil have failed. It would be like trying to build a self-sustaining aircraft manufacturing plant in primitive Africa. In such a case, it is easy to understand how anomalous this is--there is no infrastructure to support the plant, and there is no point in having the planes that it would produce. Thus the lack of a political doctrine here--it would be inappropriate. Who can tell the proper order of things? Who can say that it wasn't a natural occurrence that the USSR brought the region from a backward agrarian economy into the industrial age and could go no farther? Who can say if the 'top of the food chain' is really a representative democracy? Not I. Note that this does not reflect the need, at all levels, for basic human rights (Maslow's hierarchy). Cypherpunks need to view political beliefs as orthogonal to what they doing. For propaganda purposes (read 'psychological warfare'), arguments do need to be structured along lines that the target audience can understand. When talking to the Western Left, push examples that stress the emotional human rights; arguments for the Right should be reasoned on an economic basis. Libertarians will understand either. Anarchists will appreciate the 'sand in the gearworks' appeal of strong crypto. As a side note, the Clinton Administration seems to be veering off into dangerous territory for citizens of America. They seem to want centralized control of both aspects, a person's body *and* money; programs such as healthcare, Clipper, national ID cards, national information infrastructures, and so forth are all direct yet subtle attacks on such basic freedoms. It creates both the motive *and* mechanism for tyrrany. Michael Wilson Managing Director, The Nemesis Group An old hand at political engineering...