[twice in the last couple of hours I sent this, both times getting a quick
confirmation as was programmed weeks, yet NOT actually getting a return from
from the list itself. I will shorten the quote below to ensure that this isn't
the problem.]
On Thursday, January 9, 2020, 01:19:46 PM PST, jim bell
<[email protected]> wrote:
[I am resending this, because while I received a confirmation from the CP
list a few seconds after I sent it, nevertheless after nearly 40 minutes after
this, I have not yet received the posting as would have been sent by the list.]
On Thursday, January 9, 2020, 12:40:40 PM PST, jim bell
<[email protected]> wrote:
My Assassination Politics https://cryptome.org/ap.htm proposal has been
extensively mistreated and unfairly opposed by people, even early on the
Cypherpunks list, based on very false and especially incomplete analyses.
Specifically, people write as if you can consider AP 'good' based only on it,
rather than in comparison with what it will certainly replace. And yes, many
people have had the opportunity, for about 25 years now, to do these
comparisons. They have utterly failed to do that. Economists have a term
called "opportunity cost", the costs of NOT choosing a particular course of
action. Making a decision requires an analysis of not merely choosing, but
also choosing NOT, to do something.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost
I just read the following, from Reddit. It is a seemingly small, but virtually
perfect, example of what happens when you DON'T choose to implement my
Assassination Politics system.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Libertarian/comments/em8clw/brooklyn_public_defender_scott_hechinger_lays_out/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
I will quote all of this below, the relevant message, in case it disappears.
But I will say that in an AP world this kind of event could not occur. Why do
I say that? In an AP world, this crooked detective wouldn't expect to be
protected by an equally-crooked judge. In an AP world, this crooked detective
would be 'donated to death', very quickly, and there would be nothing at all
that anybody could do to stop this. And if a crooked judge tried to help him
get away with this amazing perjury, that judge too would be 'donated to death',
just as quickly. And anyone who supported him, or them. Mostly, the deterrent
value of AP would make such actions unthinkable, and impossible in practice.
One reason that my AP idea should be considered so good is that it must be
judged in comparison with the existing world, all the bad things like this.
Anybody who criticizes AP needs to explain why it would somehow be worse than
today's amazing world.
When I do a Google-search for things like ' "Assassination Politics" "bell" '
I occasionally read comments about how 'Bell has not recanted', or 'Bell still
believes in his AP idea'. As if, they are somehow shocked to discover that I
really still support my AP idea. Why should I recant? Why should I abandon
my discovery/invention? Does our world still have injustice, in the way this
current Reddit item describes? Does our world still have militaries, taxation
to fund them, wars, and nuclear weapons? Does anybody (else) have a credible
idea to solve these problems?
I will recant AP when, and only when, the world figures out a way to solve ALL
of its problems that AP would otherwise solve. Which will NEVER occur.
Jim Bell
----------------------------- From that cite shown above:
-----------------------------
"I represented the man who this ex-NYPD detective lied into a violent felony
indictment. Michael Bergman completely fabricated a fake crime out of spite. If
convicted, would’ve faced minimum 3.5 years in prison. Max 15. Today, the liar
only got probation.
"I remember first meeting Mr. Barbosa. In interview cells attached to the cage
behind the arraignment courtroom in Brooklyn criminal court. Like everyone I
represent I don’t get to choose. I just happened to be working that day, & a
file with his name & charges was handed to me.
"The charges were serious. Detective Bergman claimed that after stopping Mr.
Barbosa’s car, he accelerated backwards at a high rate of speed, then turned
the car toward the Detective. Was right in between headlines. And slammed on
gas. Bergman dove out of the way to save his life.
"Mr. Barbosa was in a world of trouble. Charged w/ attempted assault in first
degree. A Class C violent felony. A brazen act of violence. I wondered what he
was thinking. What motivated this? I walked thru the door into the jail
directly behind the “In God We Trust” sign in court.
I called his name & he walked in. Tired. Not feeling well. Shaking his head. I
told him his charges. And he forcefully denied it. “Didn’t happen. These cops
have been harassing me for months. I was parked. They pulled up. I drove off.
That was it.” I pressed him more.
“Why on earth would they make something like this up?” I asked. Cops lie all
the time. To justify bad stops & frisks, excessive use of force. Sometimes they
plant evidence. Big lies. Small lies. Here: there was no motivation. He wasn’t
injured. They didn’t find anything on him.
“I honesty don’t know. They don’t like me, but saying I did this?” He trailed
off. Put head down. He was really upset. I was having a hard time still
believing him. “So you just pulled out? Didn’t accidentally almost hit him?” He
shook his head no. “I’ll look for video,” I said.
A reaction to the idea of video surveillance can sometimes be a tell. If not so
enthusiastic, it’s likely the video won’t be helpful. But he jumped up:
“There’s video?!”
“I don’t know. I’ll definitely be looking for it.”
[snip]
[end of long quote from Reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Libertarian/comments/em8clw/brooklyn_public_defender_scott_hechinger_lays_out/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
]
