Re: [rant] Re: Censorship on cypherpunks

[Sean Roach <roach_s@alph.swosu.edu>]

At 09:11 PM 11/6/96 -0800, Dale Thorn wrote:
>What both of these arguments (moreso the first) fail to mention is an
individual's
>investment in time and possibly a lot of money in various memberships, with
expec-
>tations that they will have the opportunity to develop and express
themselves to
>their utmost capability.  When I have a problem with some of the dirty
things my
>representatives in Washington DC do on my behalf, people say "like the U.S. or
>leave it", etc., as though my father, his father, his father, etc. clear
back to
>the 1600's in the colonies here, wasted their blood on the battlefields
defending
>these assholes who like to say "you can just leave if you don't like it".
>
>The squashing of people's dreams begins at birth with selfish and shortsighted
>parents, and since that and other oppressions permeates our brains at every
level, 
>it's a wonder that some people are as accomplished and expressive as they
are.  This
>topic as it's been handled so far by most of the subscribers is prima facie
evidence
>that most of the people in the industrialized countries are just good
little suck-up
>fascists.

Actually, I was comparing some people on the list, who were saying someone
could always start thier own list, with those who advocate telling someone
to start a new country as opposed to making their vote count.  This is a
free country where we, fortunately, don't have to hang around, and, this is
a free list, where we don't have to post or remain subscribers.  I was
saying that telling someone to start their own list was equivalent to
telling them to dig in on an uninhabited island.  I was never advocating
either action.  If you read the previous posts, you can see the one I
responded to and see what I mean.  I know that this may not be possible as
you probably tossed them, but ask me if you would like, I have that post
somewhere in backup.