Is the revolution over?

[juan]

On Sun, 5 Mar 2017 13:44:55 -0500
Steve Kinney <admin at pilobilus.net> wrote:

> It's a piss poor
> pitiful Anarchist, who refuses to use an adversary's infrastructure to
> harm that adversary's interests.


	Of course. But I hope you don't believe that using facebook
	harms the establishment?


> 
> Those who insist on trying to conceal their identities and/or
> activities from hostile actors at all times take themselves out of the
> influence game.  If you have a protocol for broadcasting a persistent,
> responsive, influential political message without being identified by
> well funded surveillance actors, do please share it: 


	well, obviously crypto is supposed to be used for stuff you
	want to keep private, not for broadcasting...



> 
> > Are there any revolutionaries?  Is the soul for real change dead?
> > Is everyone medicated, over-eaten, touch-screen hyper-media and
> > everyone is PERFECTLY CONTENT?
> 
> Judging by the "social media" channels, practically no one is content;


	Right. They want more fascism. Just look at people like quinn
	and his advocacy of fascist 'progressive' 'health care'.



> nearly everyone seems to believe that their ideological adversaries
> are presently in power and need to be stomped down.  I see more people
> who either call themselves "revolutionaries" or publicly bemoan the
> fact that there "are no revolutionaries" all the time lately.  Of
> course, they don't know what the word means - they accept self
> defeating definitions provided to them by a lifetime of exposure to
> counter-
> revolutionary propaganda.
> 
> As expected, the Internet does amplify human intelligence 
 

	If by intelligence you mean stupidity, yes it does.



> and
> mobilizes distributed "smart mobs" in response to perceived problems
> and challenges.  But the Internet also amplifies human stupidity,

	=)


> and
> some factions among our rulers have learned how to raise armies of
> morons in cyberspace.  The result is a hotly contested information
> battle space where multiple factions compete to influence both
> ephemeral swarms and more durable herd movements.  I have never seen
> anything like the intensity and variety of influence and
> disinformation projects in progress right now in U.S. broadcast and
> online media.

	Whereas the sane voices are virtually non-existent. 

> 
> As expected, the future arrives sooner every day as the rate of change
> continues to accelerate.  I see signs of panic and/or desperation
> everywhere I look at any well established economic power block's
> publicly visible activities. 


	I think that's called wishful thinking. 


> What if there was a revolution and
> nobody noticed?  The answer to that question is all around us right
> now.
> 
> > I still have a complete revolution in my pocket, but I guess I'll
> > have to chuck it, if there's no one here...
> 
> You say you want a revolution?  Congratulations!  Radical changes in
> the physical world - economic, technological and geophysical - are now
> rendering previously stable political systems obsolete and
> unmaintainable.  


	any evidence for that claim? 



> New institutional templates adapted to new conditions
> emerge because people adapt their social and economic behavior to new
> conditions; not because Great Visionary Leaders issue a call to arms.
>  The political agitation and violence we call a "revolution" is only
> the last stage of the actual revolutionary process, terminating it and
> establishing a new institutional stability for the benefit of a new
> set of power players.
> 
> We all want to change the world.  But if you have a real solution, we
> all need to see the plan.  Restricting its distribution to "secure and
> anonymous" channels only guarantees it won't reach an audience that
> can implement it.  Where and as surprise actions provide strategic
> advantage, do use cryptographic technology - IF your co-conspirators
> are also up to it, which almost never happens in real life.  When
> physical meetings where all electronics are banned are practical, they
> can facilitate useful goal setting, coordination and planning.  The
> surveillance networks will follow most of your group to and from the
> meeting place, but otherwise moles and unwitting informants will be
> the only security risks affecting the meeting itself.
> 
> A proposed revolution in communications security that would have
> blinded State and Corporate actors to "private" network comms never
> got off the ground and so could be said to have failed.  


	Yep. 


> But a real,
> naturally occurring revolution is in progress anyway:  Come back in 50
> years and you will hardly know the place.


	Yep. Well, actually, it will look a lot like Brave New World or
	worse. So it would be pretty easy to recognize or know the
	practical implementation of Huxley's musings. With a good
	deal of outright brutalism a la Orwell mixed in, probably.
 



> 
> :o)
> 
> 
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJYvFymAAoJEECU6c5Xzmuq9bgH/R2CijTqoezRjynaGCJTnM9G
> phF4jkv+9s7tT9lqrdzmsLap61F1R/flmhNgy1QQEiuR+Y+BjYSNZdQLE7HCb/i/
> 2tbDLazjadWqLJCUfoJv0qAlrXW4N9lmAg4UxS8Tb8HxbAhzoNpgy17JPFalFoDG
> ONZy1xq8D6S1zQsjE38kI67iV9wNFM20MZiMR6ciEE+OZ3HD4RArf9L5iRp9c/nm
> 6jOAfg6+CUXCtiFRFmSYr86OEJjNqw/zdMlQNfbp03/KMB1RddOkg+8bCEjHiqRX
> aVh5R4U/6GwKGEBq8tE2Bmp6VSELVezATWkrXPDKGwHj/M/dBX4m9LvxbzXJXyA=
> =SdE3
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----