Adobe's Teeth. (Was: Re: [free-sklyarov] Re: Rallies on Monday)

[Steve Schear]

At 01:43 PM 7/21/2001 -0700, Black Unicorn wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Subcommander Bob" <bob at black.org>
>To: <cypherpunks at cyberpass.net>
>Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 11:20 AM
>Subject: Re: [free-sklyarov] Re: Rallies on Monday
> > >What exactly peaceful banner-carrying demonstrators on the public
> > >grounds should be afraid of ?
>
>Quite a lot actually.
>
>This is why I like most cypherpunks.  They have the most charming naiveti
>about the real world.  It's quaint.  I see it most often in their
>propensity to argue to most obscure technical-legal points with the full
>expectation that a judge isn't just going to say "that's specious
>counselor, have any real arguments?"  I love hearing things like: "Well if
>I just have the micromint transfer all its money to itself first then
>that's legally a transaction, right?" or "I'm not transferring the e-gold
>to the user, I'm transferring it to his key, so there are no taxes!" or
>"Sorry your honor, I used key splitting to put the key in 4 jurisdictions
>so I can't recover the critical financial data under subpoena.  Now you
>have to send me home.  Hee hee!"
>
>The second most frequent expression of this kind of sheltered thinking is
>in the political-societal belief that there is no such thing as "street
>justice" in the United States and that officers aren't prone to poke the
>odd protestor with a nightstick in any country except Mexico or India or
>the Middle East or some other far away and out of sight place.  "But this
>is AMERICA!" or "But I'm an AMERICAN!"  Good morning.  How was your sleep?
>
>I would be amused to see one of these cloistered techies in a real
>encounter with police, who recognize that the best legal argument they have
>on the street is a good whack to opposing counsel's head and that about the
>most serious ramifications of this might be that the protestor gets off
>scott free after 48 hours in holding with the gang bangers.
>
>It's pretty easy to get arrested in a protest situation.  Life is
>manifestly unfair to arrestees.  You decide what you want to do about it.

A lesson not lost of The Founders, many who paid with their lives and their 
fortunes even if they did keep their sacred honor.  Even if you are 
non-violently demonstrating BU is correct that you still may pay a heavy 
price.  You need to decide before you demonstrate: how important this issue 
you're protesting is, how far you're willing to take your protests and what 
you may be risking in doing so.  Then make preparations accordingly.

All Western countries fear losing the support of their middle class, tax 
paying, citizens. To the extent that the Vietnam demonstrations succeeded 
it was because they were able to elicit "police riots" in response to what 
many felt were mostly non-violent (if not legal) demonstrations and swing 
public opinion.  Of course, the release of the Pentagon Papers, which 
credibly confirmed \what many of the demonstrators had been saying of U.S. 
goals and involvement in S.E. Asia, didn't hurt either.

steve