Why is cryptoanarchy irreversible?

[Douglas B. Renner]

[snip]
> The key here is that in these cases the practice has become widely
> accepted.  By widely accepted, I mean that very significant numbers of
> people believe that there is nothing all that wrong with the practice.
> Those who disagree do not feel it is worth the trouble to put a stop
> to it.
[snip]

While this might be the case, I don't believe it is "key".

Also, I'm not sure why you used this as a counterpoint.  Are you saying 
that there are not a significant number of people who think there is 
nothing wrong with sending truly private messages?  I would disagree 
with such an assertion based on my own converastions with crypto-ignorant 
aquaintances.  Most people either trust the gov't implicitly or haven't 
thought about it or (erroneously) consider it irrelevant - but deep down 
they definitely value their privacy.

Take the flip side for example:  Quite a few people think it "wrong" to 
receive radio signals in the 800-900 Mhz band; and laws have been passed 
regulating scanners with the intention of inhibiting this practice.  
However the practice continues to proliferate.  This genie is also out of 
the bottle, and it has the effect of creating demand for crypto.

(This is actually yet another method in which the battle for crypto can 
be fought.)

Doug