== random ==
1. if prohibition of alcohol = control of speech, as a side-effect, via behavioral influence, that is, sobriety;
coderman
i never considered prohibition as constraint on state of mind in public, mainly thinking along monetary and covert economic activity angles.
but considering the public, and the multitudes of social scenes no longer "lubricated" or under shadow of persecution, this would have a direct and personal impact on many.
certainly a world removed from the producers and distribution activity, which tends to monopolize the zeitgeist of the prohibition era.
this observation arose from a recent conversation about influence of alcohol on behavior and mood. where someone who drinks can say things that they otherwise may not, and in this way a given viewpoint may have a deeper grounding in the emotions that are not being accounted for, and could be realized or accessed when decompressing or reaching equilibrium in another phase or state of awareness, via inebriation. the role of legal & illegal substances in relation to edge of insight and cultural development likewise. thus the aberrant statement or communication that may occur via this communication is not necessarily less truth, only that it may not be acknowledged or accounted for in the given view or modeling. thus, a kind of equilibrium or balancing of forces, or equalization across parameters known and unknown, those documented and hidden, via inebriation. for instance, anger if it arises when drinking and hidden rage. or following ideology and then when inebriated a person letting down their guard & speaking their mind, etc. in this way, truth and ideas that may not fit in the given model. and how this could be an influence upon culture and conformity if removed and this unwitting or known feedback does not occur, and a rigid view is upheld as the cultural standard, instead. where this balancing of forces may not take place due to its prohibition, even, as this could advantage those managing skewed modeling and using it to enforce a given approach, and limit any alternatives because it does not fit inside the mindset or belief system, and cannot be questioned beyond this. in this way, sobriety is equated with a higher knowing or state of being, potentially, seeing more clearly, when if in its position it is bounded or limited, these areas of previous feedback would essentially be outlawed and not addressed, or set up a schizoid state of relation by denying other dimensions or relations or dynamics, as if everything is contained with a rationalization even, versus breaking-through that boundary into chaos and- or the unknown, or challenging beliefs about what truth is and where control originates in the cosmic context. in that there is a limit to what can be determined via reductionism, though no limit to the belief of this, which can stand uncorrected, opposed to truth and greater evidence than what is allowed or sanctioned. leading to this...
what is prohibition of crypto? control of controversial thoughts and connections, an indirect form of secondary censorship. Fahrenheit 451 tactics- actual crypto the fire.
i understand the different interpretation, and did not adequately define the analogy, well enough to be make the correlation clear enough. in the book by Ray Bradbury it is the truth and ideas in the medium of the book that are at issue, not just books but their use as a transmission of beliefs, of alternative (non-sober) principles that challenge the ruling order that seeks to extinguish this otherness that is essentially culture itself, knowledge, reality. that is the basis for control over people and the civilization. what this extends into further in a cryptography context is that 'crypto' itself may be outlawed like books, not for technical means to communicate, but because what is communicated could be _secret and not controllable by those who seek total control over what occurs in society. thus truth, another viewpoint shared by people, especially if counter to corrupt government, could be this fire held in the container of crypto, and if it is broken by default and-or corrupted by design, this other viewpoint could never develop beyond a given set of parameters because those who think differently are seen as and believed to be 'the enemy' within a state that has become rogue and functions against its own people, in order to forever secure its power over them. in other words: ideas, truth, shared reasoning is the danger, and if it cannot be safely exchanged without consequence, losing your job or career or having ideas disallowed and thus trading in bad thoughts, as if drunken ramblings even, then through this prohibition of ideas and thinking, as it relates to grand inquisitor like auditing of any private domains and whatever "secrets" people may be sharing, then could be equivalent to peering into the war plans of the enemy and all of this could be mapped out into a strategy that seeks to eliminate this risk of unknowns, to uphold empowered and extending rationalization within a particular system of belief that aligns with private politics and corruption, state of hidden dictatorship, and engineering failure so to sustain the corrupt works as enterprise planning. in other words, no crypto, no protected boundary for freedom of expression or freedom of thought/speech, communication, or practice of religion even, without hidden judge, jury, potentially executioner via NSA and others who are like the monster under the bed, though inside computers, minds, communications. where did they get the right to enforce and defend mediocrity, to pursue and extinguish truth that does not fit into or is opposed to the ruling political ideology, and to not have any oversight and be given carte blanche to pursue a political agenda against citizens, a lawless agenda that is actively oppressing people in civilization, and seeks to uphold and enforce an unreal, antihuman viewpoint that is based on subjugation and exploitation. i mean if the NSA was going around abusing children and connected with pedophile networks and seeking to blacklist and exploit people based on porn habits or enforcing a no-masturbation rule by "government", that would be a pretty important insider story, no? those are the politics also involved in these questions, the kind of substitute culture that can at once uphold an unrealistic worldview only to use this for exploitation. that is what happens in situations of corruption, and in situations of total corruption, it is institutionalized and made mainstream yet cannot be communicated about. so if the crypto is non-existent, so too is such reality. anyone who starts to think can be persecuted by the criminals and taken down in isolation, and framed as if just another sinner via the inside-subversion. that is how books with another viewpoint can offer perspective otherwise outlawed, so too working cryptography that cannot be decrypted. without it, shooting fish in a barrel. i vote those who work at NSA should be made to wear helmets and uniforms, and wear big 'key' medallions around their necks, so we know we are totally owned. (not sure which way the rubber hose prop should go, if firehose or perhaps each wearing condom bandoleer) NSA is watching you masturbate! (the new WPA posters for the sterilized asexual set)