Dailydave mailing list archives
Re: Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site"
From: "Marcus J. Ranum" <mjr () ranum com>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 12:00:24 -0400
Jonathan Karon wrote:
It seems when you say tyranny, you're really saying "physically coercive governmental entity".
Well, yeah, that's what "tyranny" is: a government with absolute power.
What about societal / economic systems that are implicitly tyrannic, and engineered to both support a governmental status quo and be self sustaining? To refer back to a previous thread, if you don't have the language or genetics for dissent, are you not living under a tyranny by default?
I'd hesitate to use the word "tyranny" for economic or social dominance, but I don't want to split semantic hairs, either. The real question, I suppose, is whether that cultural, economic, or social dominance was maintained or acquired through use or threat of force. It's always a matter of degree, of course, and that's one of the most interesting things about the history of revolutions. Locke's argument (which greatly influenced the American and French revolutionaries) is that political power is granted by the consent of the governed, and that revolutions are not entered into lightly or because of small errors on the part of leadership. Indeed, The Preamble of The Declaration of Independence is basically an argument in response to Locke's writings on when revolution is justified. The question is whether cultural, economic, or technological dominance is enforced or granted. To make it worse, they're all intertwined and it's hard to separate them out. For example let's look at a case in point: "Does the US control the internet?" There are so many factors involved in answering that, we could argue all day (so let's not) but I think we can agree that the underlying technologies are well-enough known outside the US that our control of the Internet (if there is any) has largely been granted - it would be expensive and painful for the rest of the world to decide to split off a new Internet. So, one of us might feel that it's a US hegemony whereas another of us might feel that it's something the US has been allowed to maintain because it's cheaper and easier to allow it than to fight. Another example of this is: "Does the US control the GPS?" Again, the technology is well-enough understood that any country that wanted to build its own need "merely" to invest the billions to do it. US hegemony over GPS has been largely granted because it's cheaper to leave it that way and because we haven't made a fuss about it. Where things would get interesting would be if we threatened to shoot down any alternate GPS constellations that someone (say China or the EU) wanted to put up. Or if we threatened economic consequences. Where all this stuff gets interesting is at the point where nation-states (or maybe WAL-MART or Microsoft) have so much leverage that they can apply dominance in subtle ways. I know this has been a long and apparently rambling answer, but it's all relevant - "tyranny by default" does not exist. Tyranny, I believe, is active abuse of power (economic, political, technological, social) - the question is whether you object to the existence of power whether it's being abused or not!
In terms specific to this discussion, what if your struggle is not against a government, but rather against the "free market" corporations that hold sway over that government? In that context, where consumer credit is the gold standard of business, personal information is currency, and crucial systems are only crucial for ongoing profit, any compromise that disrupts the norms of business is a strike for freedom.
The question I think that needs to be answered is whether a revolution is appropriate, at this time. By adopting the rhetoric of a revolutionary, are you implying that it's time to dissolve the US Government because it has broken its compact with The People? The People judge when it's time for a revolution by either supporting the rebels or by supporting the state. In its most basic form, this becomes "voting with your blood" - what the democratic process tries to avoid. (Democracy is just a sexy U/I atop warfare designed to avoid it by indicating who would win if it came to armed conflict) and rebels that call for rebellion too soon are considered "crazies," basically. Consider, if you will, Timothy McVeigh as a rebel. Most of The People consider him a crazy, a terrorist, someone who committed a horrible act. Apparently he did feel he was striking a blow for freedom. The People weighed his actions and effectively concluded that he did not have standing to declare that The State should be dissolved. Succintly: the vast majority of The People agreed that he was wrong. McVeigh was wrong for another reason: unlike the founding fathers, who wrote a beautiful Declaration of Independence, stated their case clearly, and then grabbed their guns - McVeigh struck without first asking for redress. McVeigh launched a military first strike, with no attempt at diplomacy. Locke's "Right of Revolution" depends on the notion that you have a duty to first attempt to remedy the situation from within, before you can step outside the system and call for its destruction. The reason for that is simple: in a democratic society, if your attempts to change the system from within are met with disinterest or skepticism, it may be the case that you do NOT have a mandate from The People. In which case, in a democracy, you're the minority and, if you're playing by the rules, you shouldn't be a sore loser.
Any compromise that shows an individual how vulnerable they are to the whims of business is a strike for freedom.
No, it is not. In fact, it is an attempt to bypass the political process through unilateral action. Like terrorism, such attempts to bypass the political process are an implicit admission of a LACK of mandate from The People. Terrorism and ad hoc strikes for freedom are the acts of people who have looked at the democratic process, decided that they didn't like the way the vote went, and decided they knew better than the majority, anyhow. So - I challenge you: If you REALLY believe what you claim, that the US is suborned by commercial interests which need to be fought - if you REALLY believe that The Constitution is threatened by enemies from within, or without - run for office. Go to Washington. Speak out. Organize. Lobby. Speak to Congressmen. Talk to the media. But don't be like Tim McViegh and arrogate upon yourself the standing to launch a unliateral first strike. And, if you lose in your attempt to change the system from within, don't just assume that you were right and The People were wrong. Put differently: Microsoft did not gain 99.99% market share because everyone hates their products. If you hate Microsoft's products, that's fine, but consider that the operating system election was run and Microsoft won by a landslide. Further, bear in mind that, when you take upon yourself the mantle of a revolutionary you are saying you've stood forward on behalf of The People. In that sense, you are acting, as well, on my behalf. So, let me speak for myself: if I catch you "hacking" on my behalf, I will do my best to see you face a jury.
And a reminder - political history is written by the victors, and only sums up the obvious. That failed, fallen, and disfavored dictatorships always went down in history as physically coercive merely means that is what they were remembered for. And yes, violence is a very effective means of coercion. But so is societal suppression, newspeak and, my favorite, the American Dream.
You, clearly, do not understand The American Dream. It is The American Dream that, among other things, lets you post pseudo-revolutionary self-justifying immature blather on Internet mailing lists. mjr.
Current thread:
- Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site", (continued)
- Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site" Drsolly (Sep 11)
- Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site" Pedram Amini (Sep 21)
- Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site" Theo Winter (Sep 19)
- RE: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site" Dave Korn (Sep 19)
- Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site" Bas Alberts (Sep 19)
- RE: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site" Dave "I do not speak for AT&T!" Korn (Sep 19)
- Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site" Marcus J. Ranum (Sep 20)
- Re: Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site" sinan . eren (Sep 20)
- Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site" Jonathan Karon (Sep 20)
- Re: Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site" Drsolly (Sep 21)
- Re: Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site" Marcus J. Ranum (Sep 21)
- Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site" haroon meer (Sep 21)
- Re: Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site" Barrie Dempster (Sep 21)
- RE: Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking iscool, so that Marcus changes his web site" Paul Melson (Sep 21)
- RE: Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking iscool, so that Marcus changes his web site" Drsolly (Sep 21)
- RE: Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking iscool, so that Marcus changes his web site" Barrie Dempster (Sep 21)
- Message not available
- Re: Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking iscool, so that Marcus changes his web site" Marcus J. Ranum (Sep 21)
- Message not available
- Re: Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking iscool, so that Marcus changes his web site" Barrie Dempster (Sep 21)
- Re: Re: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site" Marcus J. Ranum (Sep 21)
- Life, the Universe, and Everything (was: Exactly 500 word essay on "Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site") I)ruid (Sep 23)
- RE: Life, the Universe, and Everything (was: Exactly 500 word essay on"Why hacking is cool, so that Marcus changes his web site") Jos Pols (Sep 23)