[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Laws Outside the U.S.


Carl Ellison <[email protected]> writes

> To me, it's obvious that this isn't a real LE problem.  That leaves open
> the question of why the US and others want to limit crypto.

> ...

> My answer: because the Agency advancing it (with cypherpunks as unwitting
> accomplices) wants to create the perception of a threat of loss of power
> in those who have power (Congress, President) so that they'll give 
> state-of-emergency powers to the appropriate Agency to fight back.

> Net result:  no real threat; real increase in power for one Agency.

Don't attribute to a sinister, power-hungry elite that which is a
natural consequence of democratic political society.  Execution of the
voters' orders can be thwarted by strong crypto.  This is affirmed by
voices as diverse as Donn Parker, who says that a democracy can't
operate if people have absolute privacy, and Tim May, who seeks to use
crypto as a way to bypass democracy.  As long as a large proportion of
the people think it's somehow decent or civilized to democratically
supplant personal choice with collective dictate in everything from
health care arrangements to the elementary school curriculum, there will
be a large constituency for limiting crypto to prevent this interference
with their tyranny of the majority.

The danger of focusing on the intrigues of the power elite is that it
diverts attention from the real culprit: democracy itself.

	John E. Kreznar		| Relations among people to be by
	[email protected]	| mutual consent, or not at all.

Version: 2.3a