At 12:39 PM -0400 8/18/00, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
>At 9:42 PM -0700 on 8/17/00, Tim May trolled:
>
>
>> Bob Hettinga, who used to practice this same kind of "why can't you
>> write the kind of articles I _like_!" pressuring
>
>Oh. Pressuring. *That's* what it was...
>
>I stand corrected.
>
>;-).
>
To elaborate a bit on my point, I often get comments in personal
e-mail and sometimes here on the list along these lines: (this is
from memory, though I could spend a few hours digging up several
actual examples if I cared to)
"Tim, I like a lot of your stuff, but I really wish you'd write more
about cryptography and less about politics."
""Hey, guns kill people! Why can't you advocate using crypto for
helping people?"
"In recent months your words have become racist and hateful."
"I wish you would write more of the stuff I like."
It's natural that people will take issue with one or more points of
view from anyone who has strong opinions and the willingness (and
economic freedom) to express them.
I cherish the First Amendment. This means the government may not act
in any way to restrict my words, whether they are sexist, racist,
speciesist, ageist, or revelatory of supposed government secrets. In
very limited cases they may act to suppress speech--so the theory
goes--involving very direct threats against certain specific persons.
Supporting McVeigh's actions, or Oswald's removal of a simp-wimp,
does not fall into this category. Calling for the death of
burrowcrats in general does not either. "First, kill all the lawyers"
and "Hang them all" is quite clearly political speech. And much more
common in America in the past that the PC Police would like to
believe.
What _might_ fall into this category? Besides words spoken about the
sitting President and specific other senior officials, naming the
specific names of judges, FBI officials, etc., and calling for action
against them _might_ trigger legal action. Under the umbrella of
"threatening" and "inciting" and suchlike general terms. This is, as
I've said before, one reason I make it a point not to even know the
names of judges and their kind; the U.S. Marshals Service and the DOJ
released a report that I was planning to kill a federal judge
somewhere up in Washington state. A ludicrous attempt to trigger me
into some action, I believe. I had never heard of this judge, and
make it a point not to track individual fascist-units. About the only
judge I know the name of, aside from the Supremes, is Judge Bader,
because of Napster, the crypto speech case, and because I attended
one of her sessions a few years ago. No, I have no plans to kill her.
It's gotten bizarre in the last few years as more and more political
groups and liberals (and conservatives, too) have called for
limitations on speech. And as people have increasingly claimed that
_words_ constitute violations of someone's freedom. And then there's
the paranoid atmosphere. (A lawyer who reads this list has offered to
serve in some capacity as my defense lawyer during the "show trial"
which he says he thinks is coming.)
OK, what about action by my employer against my speech? What about
action by my ISP? What about action by the list owner?
First, no employer. I can say what I wish without getting a call from
the Director of Human Relations inviting me to attend a voluntary
mandatory Sensitivity Training Workship. Second, my ISP doesn't care
what I say. Unlike AOL, they understand that screening words for
"hate speech" is a losing proposition, and one counter to the
_spirit_ of free and open debate which once made this nation great.
Third, the Cypherpunks list cannot do anything about my speech
because of its present organization. Speech controls were tried a few
years back, as most of you know.
In summary, I write what moves me. I don't write to recruit nattering
nabobs who need a sugar-coated version of libertarianism and crypto
anarchy because they are in favor of gun control, or laws against
hate speech, or even because they think the focus of the list should
be on geodesic global fractional clearing or whatever the buzzword du
jour is.
I write to express what I think, as an outlet. Don't like my words?
Don't read them.
To paraphrase Scoop Nisker, "If you don't like the words, go out and
write some of your own."
(This is a general comment, not directed at Bob Hettinga, who
certainly writes enough of his own words.)
--Tim May
--
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
"Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments.
