Re: Technology and loss of freedom

At 8:20 PM -0600 3/17/97, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:

>First of all, 200 years ago it was very hard for lone people to endanger
>lives of themselves and many others. For example, the only weapons that
>were available were single shot and double shot rifles that were very
>slow to reload. Similarly, people did not have fast moving vehicles and
>any traffic did not present serious danger for innocent bystanders.

Counterexample: 200, or even 2000, years ago, it was trivially easy for
someone in a village to essentially kill the entire village by doing any
one of several things. For example, one could open the dam gates at night,
thus leaving the village with no water for crops or drinking. Or one could
open the pens holding the village's sheep and goats, thus casusing many of
them to be irretrievably lost. Or, most obviously, one could play the
Trojan Horse role and let the enemy into the village at night. (Examples of
all of these actions may be found in the usual places.)

And 200 years ago it was of course quite possible for a "traitor" to signal
the enemy, let the enemy in, etc. This happened in our own Revolutionary
War, and probably has happened in all wars.


>With the advent of technology, the balance of perceived social needs and
>government capabilities shifted radically, and it shifted away from the
>great freedoms of the past. The public perception of freedom now is that
>freedom is inherently dangerous and is a threat to the public itself.

What are these "great freedoms of the past"? Look to history.

--Tim May

Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside"
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

Timothy C. May wrote:
> At 8:20 PM -0600 3/17/97, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
> >With the advent of technology, the balance of perceived social needs and
> >government capabilities shifted radically, and it shifted away from the
> >great freedoms of the past. The public perception of freedom now is that
> >freedom is inherently dangerous and is a threat to the public itself.
 
> What are these "great freedoms of the past"? Look to history.

  'Freedom' has always been buggered by the 'Great Exception'. The GE
generally rests on a foundation related to denying individuals the right
to 'abuse' that freedom.
  Of course, the definition of abuse has always followed a course that
might be compared to a mathematical relationship between the position of 
ladies hemlines and the number of denominations in the 'current' One
True Religion.

  Freedom exists not so much in terms of the current/individual
definition of freedom, but in the caliber of the weapon with which
one defends their own definition of freedom.
-- 
Toto
"The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre"
http://bureau42.base.org/public/xenix/xenbody.html