16.3.1. "The revolution will not be televised. The revolution *will*,
however, be digitized." Welcome to the New Underworld Order!
(a term I have borrowed from writer Claire Sterling.)
16.3.2. "Do the views here express the views of the Cypherpunks as a
whole?"
- This section is controversial. Hence, even more warnings
than usual about being careful not to confuse these
comments with the beliefs of all or even most Cypherpunks.
- In fairness, libertarianism is undeniably the most
represented ideology on the list, as it is in so much of
the Net. The reasons for this have been extensively debated
over the years, but it's a fact. If other major ideologies
exists, they are fairly hidden on the Cypherpunks list.
- Yes, some quasi-socialist views are occasionally presented.
My friend Dave Mandl, for example, has at times argued for
a less-anarchocapitalist view (but I think our views are
actually fairly similar...he just has a different language
and thinks there's more of a difference than their actually
is--insert smiley here).
- And several Cypherpunks who've thought about the issues of
crypto anarchy have been disturbed by the conclusions that
seem inevitable (markets for corporate information,
assassianation made more liquid, data havens, espionage
made much easier, and other such implications to be
explored later in this section).
- So, take this section with these caveats.
- And some of the things I thing are inevitable, and in many
cases positive, will be repugnant to some. The end of
welfare, the end of subsidies of inner city breeders, for
example. The smashing of the national security state
through digital espionage, information markets, and
selective assassinations are not things that everyone will
take comfort in. Some may even call it illegal, seditious,
and dangerous. So be it.
16.3.3. "What are the Ideologies of Cyperpunks?"
+ I mentioned this in an earlier section, but now that I'm
discussing "crypto anarchy" in detail it's good to recap
some points about the ideology of Cypherpunks.
- an area fraught with dangers, as many Cypherpunks have
differing views of what's important
+ Two main foci for Cypherpunks:
- Personal privacy in an increasingly watchful society
- Undermining of states and governments
- Of those who speak up, most seem to lean toward the
libertarian position, often explicitly so (libertarians
often are to be found on the Internet, so this correlation
is not surprising)
+ Socialists and Communitarians
- Should speak up more than they have. Dave Mandl is the
only one I can recall who's given a coherent summary of
his views.
+ My Personal Outlook on Laws and Ideology:
- (Obviously also scattered thoughout this document.)
+ Non-coercion Principle
- avoid initiation of physical aggression
- "to each his own" (a "neo-Calvinist" perspective of
letting each person pick his path, and not interfering)
- I support no law which can easily be circumvented.
(Traffic laws are a counterexample...I generally agree
with basic traffic laws....)
- And I support no law I would not personally be willing to
enforce and punish. Murder, rape, theft, etc, but not
"victimless crimes, " not drug laws, and not 99.9998% of
the laws on the books.
- Crypto anarchy is in a sense a throwback to the pre-state
days of individual choice about which laws to follow. The
community exerted a strong force.
- With strong crypto ("fortress crypto," in law enforcement
terms), only an intrusive police state can stop people
from accessing "illegal" sites, from communicating with
others, from using "unapproved" services, and so on. To
pick one example, the "credit data haven" that keeps any
and all financial records--rent problems from 1975,
bankruptcy proceedings from 1983, divorce settlements,
results from private investigators, etc. In the U.S.,
many such records are "unusable": can't use credit data
older than 7 years (under the "Fair Credit Reporting
Act"), PI data, etc. But if I am thinking about lending
Joe Blow some money, how the hell can I be told I can't
"consider" the fact that he declared bankruptcy in 1980,
ran out on his debts in Haiti in 1989, and is being sued
for all his assets by two ex-wives? The answer is simple:
any law which says I am not allowed to take into account
information which comes my way is _flawed_ and should be
bypassed. Dialing in to a credit haven in Belize is one
approach--except wiretaps might still get me caught.
Cyberspace allows much more convenient and secure
bypasses of these laws.
- (For those of you who think such bypasses of laws are
immoral, tough. Strong crypto allows this. Get used to it.)
16.3.4. Early history of crypto anarchy
+ 1987-8, AMIX, Salin, Manifesto
- discussed crypto implications with Phil Salin and Gayle
Pergamit, in December of 1987
- with a larger group, including Marc Stiegler, Dave Ross,
Jim Bennett, Phil Salin, etc., in June 1988.
- released "The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto" in August 1988.
- Fen LaBalme had "Guerillan Information Net" (GIN), which he
and I discussed in 1988 at the Hackers Conference
+ "From Crossbows to Cryptography," 1987?
- made similar points, but some important differences
- TAZ also being written at this time
By Tim May, see README
HTML by Jonathan Rochkind