From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Mon Aug 12 2002 - 15:17:00 MDT
Mike Lorrey wrote:
> --- Brian D Williams <talon57@well.com> wrote:
>
>>>From: Samantha Atkins <samantha@objectent.com>
>>
>>>But in a republic the rights of minorities (even and especially
>>>the lone individual) cannot be voted away by any majority in
>>>whole or in part. The forgetting of that distinction (or never
>>>quite understanding it) is in large part what "went wrong" with
>>>America regarding individual rights.
>>
>
>
>>Next, peoples rights get voted away all the time here, in fact
>>if they happen to be white heterosexual males that's considered
>>just fine. That is how a group of like minded sportsman stopped
>>being a casual group of gun enthusiasts and became the NRA we know
>>today.
>
>
> Brian is quite right here. We see Samantha deriding the influence that
> corporations have over the political system, yet she doesn't say boo
> about the most influential industrial group in Washington: Hollywood
> and the media, which are demonstrably the worst culprit in the erosion
> of our republican protections while being predominantly liberal/left
> wing oriented. I for one would like to see her comment some on this.
>
>
I don't see what Brian's comment or your own has to do with the
above paragraph attempting to point out the important difference
between a republic and a democracy and the danger of forgetting
that difference. The difference was forgotten BEFORE the rights
of anyone were voted away.
Why would saying something about Hollywood and the media have
added anything to my central point? Why does the fact I did not
say anything about them detract from that point?
It is obvious that some types of businesses ( record and motion
picture industries but especially the former very much among
them) have tremendous political clout for ramming through
legislation that is seriously counter individual rights and even
(Berman proposal) seriously and obviously unconstitutional. As
both an Extropian and a cyber-utopian of many years it utterly
disgusts me that those who are supposedly protecting our rights
and looking out for our future would sell us out for a handful
of campaign contributions. When some congressperson actually
proposes that some citizens be given legal leeway to attack the
property and tools of other citizens on mere suspicion with no
recourse to law, that person should be immediately expelled from
Congress as violating their oath to support the Constitution.
They should certainly not be given a serious hearing. And this
is simply the latest and most egregious insult delivered. If
this becomes law it will amount to nothing less than a
declaration of war on computer literate citizens by our own
government. That such an idea would even be considered for a
moment by Congress sickens me.
Does that give you some idea of what I think about such influences?
>>We live in an age in this country of majoritarian tyranny.
>>
>>
>>
>>>A republic is better. It is obvious and was obvious hundreds of
>>>years ago that democracy is not an ideal form of government or
>>>even the "best possible".
>>
>
> Samantha is entirely right here (more shock waves resound across the
> list). The problem is that majoritarian tyranny is jim dandy fine with
> most people so long as their own ox isn't being gored. We 2nd Amendment
> proponents have been getting gored for well on 68 years to little avail
> from the so-called civil rights and civil libertarians movement.
There is certainly support from Libertarians generally.
> Instead they seem happy that its not them getting Gored, and take part
> in the Goering, with dismissals and epithets like 'gun nut', 'red
> neck', 'crazed militiaman', while buying into the false associations
> and generalizations of gun owners with racists and white supremacists
> that call to mind the false associations and generalizations of Jews
> with communists and nihilists 60 years ago in europe.
Yes. The ignoring of 2nd ammendment rights was one of the
earliest and most accepted of the instances of our Congress and
Judicial utterly failing to uphold their sworn principles.
What is generally most frightening to me is that higher levels
of technology in the hands of these tyrants who are supposted to
be "our representatives" make it very difficult indeed to have
"the meat" be safe while we work on transcending its
limitations. There does not seem to be enough general
understanding of individual rights or the true principles this
country was founded on (like sovereignity of the indvidual) to
depend on any reasonable rule by law or equality before the law.
There is not enough public understanding to expect effective
opposition to be understood or supported. Even sacrifice of
one's life for the principles at stake is likely to be barely a
blip about some "extremist" put away or killed on some pretext
without the real issues even seeing the light of day. In that
kind of environment with the addition of near universal
surveillance it is very difficult to effectively fight these
trends and expect to survive the process. Even the American
Revolution could not have occurred with pin-point tracking of
all those involved by the existing government and legalized
spying on every movement, meeting and communication. These are
very dangerous times.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:02 MST