On Monday, August 6, 2018, 7:26:56 PM PDT, Douglas Lucas <dal@riseup.net> wrote:
>Hi,
On 08/06/18 13:06, jim bell wrote:
>> I've long believed that AP will "work" if only a few thousand
>> well-targeted government employees are killed.
>> It's basically a race: If the public is shown good evidence that
>> government can be taken down, they will decide that government SHOULD be
>> taken down.
>Would not the public also need to be shown evidence that there exists an
alternate system they can switch to which is better?
There really isn't anything I could do to "direct" an AP-type system. It's what it is: It's like mathematics, there are debates about whether mathematics was "discovered" or "invented"? Did anybody have a choice in the matter?
From the beginning, I knew I could tell people what I would do if I ran an AP-type organization, but that doesn't mean I could stop anybody else who wanted to run a different system. So it was almost entirely out of my hands.
And one of the things which was very clear to me, before I released AP Part 1, was this: Ordinary 'politics' works by letting 51% of the population decide how things will run, or letting 51% of the legislature make such a decision. To accomplish something, that 51% have to be convinced to do that. That's often very hard. AP, on the other hand, works if only a tiny fraction of society (say, 1%, or even less) decides to employ it. It will work even if most people don't LIKE it, or are even scared of it. Sorry, I couldn't have designed it any other way.
>Commoners I know
backpedal slowly when anyone unusual mentions overthrowing GovCorp. They
quickly realize it would interfere with their scheduled playdates with
their television sets. They are not friends of anyone who is highly
different. I think the millions of masses will only go along with
replacing the government when there exists an alternative that is
already providing benefits they can receive. Otherwise, inertia.
>Doug
Neither I, nor they, really have a choice in the matter. Once I realized what AP truly was, weeks before I wrote Part 1 of the AP essay, I knew that I really only had two choices: Do I reveal it? And when do I reveal it? I decided the first question, then wrote the first part of the 10-part essay. Then I considered whether releasing that essay would allow the government (any government) to stop it. After a few weeks of consideration, I concluded that no, it was inevitable. So, I then released it, onto the Digitaliberty email list, run by Bill Frezza. Bill was interested in using computer technology to allow the public to achieve freedom, but I think he took one look at AP, Part 1, and was probably terrified at what it represented.
Fortunately, somebody saw it, and copied it onto the Cypherpunks list, which I hadn't even heard of at the time.