Re: Reasons in support of crypto-anarchy WAS Re: Why am I (fwd)

[jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 02:17 AM 2/11/96 -0600, Alex Strasheim wrote:
>> If Perry is REALLY sincere about objecting to the NON-crypto part of AsPol,
>> he should demonstrate this by writing notes which are focussing on the
>> crypto aspects, rather than just complaining.
>
>What's the proper procedure for complaining about the assasination part 
>of "AsPol"?

You could start out by saying something like, 

"I don't believe in the idea of self-defense:  People shouldn't defend 
themselves when they are attacked."


Is this what you really believe?

>In general, it doesn't bother me when the list goes "off topic" -- I don't
>read the stuff that doesn't interest me.  But when you start talking about
>violence, you have to expect that people are going to react negatively. 

Except that most of the people who would complain seem to make a convenient 
distinction about violence done by individuals in self-defense, and the 
threat of violence by government agencies.  In other words, statists don't 
want us to defend ourselves against government action.


>We have to say, "that's nuts" -- otherwise people will think that we're
>unbalanced sociopaths. 

Is it "nuts" to want to defend our own property?!?

>
>How much weight is Lotus going to give the opinions of a bunch of
>unbalanced sociopaths when they're thinking about making deal to gak those
>extra 24 bits?  Not much, I'll bet. 

If "AsPol" actually WORKS, Lotus won't have to "deal" to get "those extra 24 
bits."

Lotus should announce that they have heard of this new idea on CP, called 
"Assassination Politics," and have assigned a couple dozen programmers to 
implement it by July 1996.  They'd back (guarantee) the prizes for the first 
such organization, and they'd sell the software to others.  At that point, I 
think the resignations from government office would skyrocket.  


>I apologize in advance for not getting the joke if "AsPol", like Blacknet,
>is tongue in cheek.  I haven't been following the topic closely.
>I hope you're not serious.


You're obviously not very perceptive.  First, it's DEADLY SERIOUS.  But, 
moreover, I believe it's INEVITABLE.  It didn't even matter that a person 
named "Jim Bell" happened to write the essay; the system was coming no 
matter what happens.  Depending on how you look at it, I didn't "invent" 
anything; I merely "discovered" a reality that was on the way. I need do 
nothing to see the system implemented; it'll happen somewhere, sometime, and 
it'll spread inexorably throughout the world.  

Jim Bell

Klaatu Burada Nikto


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMR71pfqHVDBboB2dAQGu0AP+KPFdgwOBRbovQNMji2XSEEPabAIVwFPs
mBtGNK3f+PEdVHQAWYwoFw+o9Wjd3nqWW1KZcN4/BHRa5X5s4EOe56tTmpHVbh4G
2a4V3zJrSOm5ocs9fNkYUOxc8ekwxCS9LeJ2dUke0QkfQ5s1GELW4zxB3I0eBVnC
GXV/Gv6b6kE=
=0HHg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----