EMC writes:

Loudly renouncing ones citizenship is a lot less effective in destroying the infrastructure of oppression, than anonymously telling everyone in the world how they can make a 20 megaton thermonuclear explosion working for a few years in their basement using only non-radioactive materials that can never be made illegal to own.

That would certainly be conducive to destruction, but I imagine we'd see a lot more than just "the infrastructure of oppression" being destroyed in such a world. The problem, vs your dolphins, is that nukes can be delivered anonymously, hence used without fear of retribution.

There are two types of societies in the world. Those in which everyone has a deadly weapon that can never be take away, and against which there is no defense. And those in which everyone has an inpenetrable shield that can never be taken away, and against which no weapon is effective.

No, I don't think every society in the world falls into one of these two categories. Don't you recognize that we live in a world where there are neither perfect shields nor perfect weapons?

Dolphins are an example of the former. Usenet is an example of the latter. Dolphins are polite, friendly, and respectful of eachother, and no group of dolphins can ever form a government to oppress the rest of them.

We should try to be more like dolphins in cypherspace, while attracting as little attention to ourselves in other places.

Unfortunately, cypherspace even more than cyberspace tends towards the perfect-shield side of the equation. You can't harm a person if your only interactions are anonymous communications. About the worst you can give him is a stern talking-to. If your social analysis is correct, then cypherpunk technologies are going to make online interactions even less polite, friendly and respectful. Still, if we could achieve mutual respect and freedom in the physical world, we would happily pay the price of increased rudeness online.