(Fwd) Re: TCM: mafia as a paradigm for cyberspace

Sorry Vlad Z. Nuri, but this message was intended for Cypherpunks,
to be cc'd to you.

Unfortunately, I wrongly addressed it.

To CPunks: the reply that should have hit CPunks:
============================================================

To:               jf_avon@citenet.net
Subject:          Re: TCM: mafia as a paradigm for cyberspace 
Date sent:        Sun, 19 May 96 19:52:45 -0700
From:             "Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com>

there is no ethical basis for killing.
please kindly keep your trash out of my mailbox

I've evaluated all sides of the story, and am
not influenced by corrupt machiavellianism

=============================================================



-------Original Message Follows -------
From:          Self <Single-user mode>
To:            "Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com>
Subject:       Re: TCM: mafia as a paradigm for cyberspace
Reply-to:      jf_avon@citenet.net
Date:          Sun, 19 May 1996 01:59:00

On 18 May 96 at 12:43, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:

> maybe talk to Jim Bell some more. perhaps
> eventually you will perfect the method of perpetrating the perfect
> killing!! I really do admire you, because killing people without
> getting caught is surely a great unrecognized art, and one of the
> most unappreciated and misunderstood. something that has only been a
> dream to the blighted wretches prior to our glorious new phases of
> cyberspatial technology, which makes human morality completely
> obsolete.

I think that you are writing way out of context.  

First, wether or not the AP scheme is used for the control of 
government, as Jim Bell pushes it, does not mean that it will not be
implemented for other purposes, such as killing successful businessman
or your neighboor's son who is screwing your wife (noticed that she
smiles all the time since a while? ) .

Second, everybody like Jim Bell who is pushing the AP scheme is doing
so on ethical basis: that the coercion the government imposes on to
the individuals by regulations, and guns backed taxation justifies the
killings.  I have to see yet any cypherpunks who seems to agree with
AP that envision another use than govt control.

Third, you will notice that even Jim Bell discusses issues of 
anonymous transactions and businesses that, if conducted properly,
makes the AP scheme irrelevant.  So, it seems that AP is only a tool
instead of being an end in itself.

Fourth, you lack some basic psychological insight: intrinsic 
murderers do enjoy the knowledge of the details of their actions and
the derived perception of power.  AP prevents that by anonymising
everything: a donator cannot know if he caused the death of somebody
(unless he spends several tens of grands himself, but then, there are
other, more satisfying ways for a power seeker to fullfill his
passions...) .

You seems to oppose the proposed violence entailed by AP but you
positively blank out what everybody who reflected on AP put in the
opposite pan of the balance, i.e. the ethical standards of
contemporary govt actions.

And you'll also note that the anonymity issue generate more interest
from more CPunks because it (hopefully) will acheive the same goal
without any killing.

Until you accept to evaluate both side of the story, your 
recriminations opinions are as evident as the magnetic monopole...

jfa

 DePompadour, Societe d'Importation Ltee; Limoges porcelain, silverware and crystal
 JFA Technologies, R&D consultants;  physists, technologists and engineers.

 PGP keys at: http://w3.citenet.net/users/jf_avon
 ID# C58ADD0D : 529645E8205A8A5E F87CC86FAEFEF891 
 Unsollicited commercial e-mail will be proofread at US165 $/h
 Any sender of such material will be considered as to have ac-
 cepted the above mentionned terms.

Jean-Francois Avon appears to be a new vocal proponent for Jim Bell's
"assassination politics". he quotes my private mail in his
latest sniveling defense.

>Second, everybody like Jim Bell who is pushing the AP scheme is doing
>so on ethical basis: that the coercion the government imposes on to
>the individuals by regulations, and guns backed taxation justifies the
>killings.  I have to see yet any cypherpunks who seems to agree with
>AP that envision another use than govt control.

right, and Hitler didn't have any other use for his government other
than to bring utopia to the masses, and used all the ovens for cooking
pizzas (after all, what else could an oven be used for?!?!?).

the above sentence I find absolutely abhorrent: it justifies killing,
not merely because of the effect (the sort of "ends-justifies-the-means"
argument used by most here), but that in addition it is 
supposedly "ethical". ethical?!?!? for g*d's sakes, promote your
depraved scheme under any other heading, but do not claim it is
"ethical" unless you want to further demonstrate how far from
morality you have twisted your brain.

the assassination politics is quite Hitleresque at its root.
"kill our enemies, and everything will be better. it is our enemies
that are the root of all evil in the world. extinguish them, and
you solve all problems automatically"

such is the total moral perversion of the thinking behind 
"assassination politics". most of the adherents work from the 
following argument, nicely summarized by JFA above:

1. the government is corrupt

2. therefore, it is okay to kill people who further that corruption.

wow, what brilliant logic. I must admit it proves to be superior to
that embodied by any second grader, a high accomplishment for its
proponents.

there is a trite saying, "two wrongs do not make a right" (trite
because most have mastered the simple truth of it in their pre-teen
years). a concept not grasped by some second-graders. some 
require a lifetime of lessons to comprehend it in the end..

I'm very disappointed that others have not chased Assassination
Politics proponents to take their trash somewhere else. of course
the real situation is that those that started this list have
sympathies for this kind of thinking, so no such thing will happen.

to Jim Bell and Avon: please read Machiavelli. read about ancient
assassination clubs and the history of bloody politics. if you want
to seriously further your ideas, start a web site with ample 
historical research. your ideas are not new whatsoever. if you
really wish to become masters of assassination abilities, study
carefully the errors of those who have come before you. write
a long treatise with lots of footnotes to past assassination
difficulties and how you would advance past them. I tell
you flat out that any respectable assassin would be quite embarrassed
to be associated with you at the moment because of your arrogance
and ignorance.

I wish you the best of luck <g>

On Mon, 20 May 1996, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:

> the assassination politics is quite Hitleresque at its root.
> "kill our enemies, and everything will be better. it is our enemies
> that are the root of all evil in the world. extinguish them, and
> you solve all problems automatically"
	
	It is more the MAD theory brought down to the personal level. The
government has the power and authority to kill anyone of us, AP brings out
into the open the fact that WE ALL HAVE THAT POWER. KIlling people is
(physically) very easy, AP turns the THREAT back on those who hold the
power. Note: I don't necessarily think that AP is a good idea. I think
that people should do their own dirty work.

> such is the total moral perversion of the thinking behind 
> "assassination politics". most of the adherents work from the 
> following argument, nicely summarized by JFA above:
> 
> 1. the government is corrupt
> 
> 2. therefore, it is okay to kill people who further that corruption.
> 
> wow, what brilliant logic. I must admit it proves to be superior to
> that embodied by any second grader, a high accomplishment for its
> proponents.

	How about this:

	Goverments, and the people in them are corrupt. This corruption,
caused by acts of these people, lead to oppression and death. By THEIR
MORALITY oppression and killing are ok, so it is ok to use their tools
agaisnt them.

> there is a trite saying, "two wrongs do not make a right" (trite
> because most have mastered the simple truth of it in their pre-teen
> years). a concept not grasped by some second-graders. some 
> require a lifetime of lessons to comprehend it in the end..

	Putting people in cages is wrong.
	Stealing is wrong.
	Is putting people in cages for stealing wrong?

> carefully the errors of those who have come before you. write
> a long treatise with lots of footnotes to past assassination
> difficulties and how you would advance past them. I tell
> you flat out that any respectable assassin would be quite embarrassed
> to be associated with you at the moment because of your arrogance
> and ignorance.

	I might be wrong here, but I don't think that Mr. Bell actually
wants anyone actually shot, well, maybe he does, but what he wants is to
have the same power over members of governments than they have over him.

Petro, Christopher C.
petro@suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow@crash.suba.com

>	I might be wrong here, but I don't think that Mr. Bell actually
>wants anyone actually shot, well, maybe he does, but what he wants is to
>have the same power over members of governments than they have over him.

the way to exercise power of the government is to organize and
wield that power. JB and others are people who have never tried
this process and in fact are dysfunctional human specimens whose
sheer irritability cause them to be incapable of successfully
interacting in a society. so, like Ted Kaczinsky, they come
up with their own novel solution.

JB reminds me of people who start to play a game, but then find
that they are losing by the rules of the game, and then throw
up the game and hit their opponent.

the rules of the game of our government are mostly fair. there
are legitimate ways to revolutionize the system, working from
the inside. those working on overthrowing it have no qualifications.
have they personally tried to organize? of course they claim
it is fruitless. but I think it is only fruitless because everyone
claims it is. if everyone acted as if it wasn't fruitless, it wouldn't
be.

the recent actions in congress regarding clipper are STRONG EVIDENCE
that our political system will respond to our demands, and more
so the more pressure we put on it. it would have been unthinkable
even say 6 months ago to imagine senators publicly opposing
Clipper. we not only have Burns outright opposing Clipper and the
Clinton administrations' stand, we also have Dole up there as
well. they have made it a MAJOR ISSUE. we have very 
strong pro-crypto bills in the works. the whole
idea of the senators even taking an INTEREST in this case was
unthinkable only a short time ago. yet the system has changed
DRAMATICALLY.

you expect the tax code to be abolished TOMORROW?? sorry, it
won't happen. but the amazing resonance of the flat tax with
Forbes this year, which again would have been unthinkable only
a few years ago, shows that strong currents are coming to bear
on the system.

do you hear any cpunks rejoicing about these new dramatic
victories and motions? no, because they are mostly a bunch of
whining nihilists, anarchists, and cynics. no matter what happens,
they will tell you that the sky is falling and Big Brother is
still hiding in your closet, that the world is hopeless so we
might as well just go out and shoot our enemies. 
they want instant gratification.
they don't want to work to have a better system, they would
much rather kill a few people in government this weekend and get the 
satisfaction from it. "ah, a job well done" they would conclude.
perhaps so, by their standards.

why am I so incensed at all the APers? because they don't realize
they will devastate our society far more than it is already 
devastated. we don't have a great system now, but what they are
proposing is an apocalypse of sanity. our system can be pressured
to change. are we acknowledging how pathetic our skills are in
manipulating politicians? how can it be that a government that
is so corrupt can have such power over you? are you saying that
you are powerless against it? 

it takes two to tango. a corrupt government is the perfect match
for a corrupt populace.

"Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com> writes:
>
> it takes two to tango. a corrupt government is the perfect match
> for a corrupt populace.

So why are you here? Go back to Sovok and improve the government there.
(I know, you like American welfare :-)

---

Dr. Dimitri Vulis
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

Dr. Dimitri Vulis wrote:
> So why are you here? Go back to Sovok and improve the government there.
> (I know, you like American welfare :-)

I wonder how long it will take them to create a 
cypherpunks-robomoderated list. :)

	- Igor.

ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes:

> Dr. Dimitri Vulis wrote:
> > So why are you here? Go back to Sovok and improve the government there.
> > (I know, you like American welfare :-)
>
> I wonder how long it will take them to create a
> cypherpunks-robomoderated list. :)

You mean to filter out Sovoks like the nuriweiller?

---

Dr. Dimitri Vulis
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps