Path: news.cac.psu.edu!news.math.psu.edu!hudson.lm.com!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!unix.sri.com!jetson.sri.com!user
From: [email protected] (technical boy)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
Subject: Re: Dystopia, at last...
Followup-To: alt.cyberpunk
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 1995 16:32:01 -0800
Organization: SRI International
Lines: 150
Message-ID:
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jetson.sri.com

In article ,
Sourcerer wrote:

> On Wed, 6 Sep 1995, techical boy wrote:



> > In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
> > (Sourcerer) wrote:

> > > Continuing my point, the dystopiacs carry dystopia around
> > > with them and make it possible. It's to their adavantage to propagate it.

> > and its a good thing we have courageous, self-sacrificing altruistic souls
> > unafraid to expose the mean-spirited selfishness of neurotic activists for
> > social change!

>

> Someday you will have to explain to us what dystopic emotional rants have
> to do with effecting social change or revolution.

in all seriousness, they have a *lot* to do with it.

if you want to know how it comes to be the case, that expressions of strong
feelings (sometimes including "dystopic emotional rants") are therefore
essential tools--*the* essential tools--of the activist for social change,
and why, conversely, the methods of calm and reasoned debate convey
essential advantages to the status quo, then i regret that the theory is
somewhat boring but here goes:

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

THE BORING THEORY OF WHY ACTIVISTS ARE LOUDMOUTHS

if morals had reasons, they wouldn't be morals but economics, engineering,
etc. so ethics, if there is such a thing, relies on the irrational.

simple appeals to irrational empathy by means of expression of strong
feelings (``Onlookers trembled with fear as they watched soldiers shoot
nurses from the Red Cross who came to help the wounded demonstrators.'')
frequently fail because the strong often have no sense of empathy except
for those of a certain class of individuals, typically including one's
family and often extending to one's race, but generally excluding broad
ranges of indiduals from their concerns.

consequently, another form of persuasion you take before activists go to
the expense of boycotts, strikes, riots, etc., are various rhetorical
devices including sarcasm, satire, irony, and the like. the aim is for the
weak party to make a direct appeal to those irrational elements in the
personality of the strong that are likely to be present--on one level,
their sense of humor. on another level, ther sense of not wanting to be
disliked/humiliated, of not wanting to feel shame.



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

> I mean, is it necessary to convince yourself that the world is utterly
> corrupt before you'll get off your ass and do anything?

no. opportunities for honest, open, and high-quality sexual liasons with
other activists is sufficient for many.

> Is there no other motivation but the grim conviction that if you don't
> act *now* we're fucked?

of course there is, but grim convictions can be an effective recruiting
tool-- especially when its some grim hacker who they convicted.

> > > I fully believe a reactionary movement has odds of dominating the United
> > > States.

> > if you believe that, and even if you believe that there's nothing you or
> > anybody else can do to prevent it, that is still no reason to criticize
> > those who work against it.

> I have not criticized anyone's "work". Ever. Unless their "work" is
> spreading discontent and despair...those who elbow a place at the
> revolutionary table on the basis of the correctness of their
> sensibilities, the incisive critique of their intellects, and their
> ability to shout louder than anyone else in the faculty lounge or the
> student union.

look, i happen to share your disdain for the faculty lounge and the student
union, and i must say that for me, even the church basement is starting to
suck too. honest.

so for netizen activists, the question is how should we engineer
appropriate interfaces between cyberspace and real life? a good number of
talented and in some cases non-overbearing people are working on solutions.

> There's a reason why the intellectuals go up against the wall first.

har! good one. took me a minute.

my hunch is, a lotta readers just assume that's your own brutality talking
without a trace of irony. what i think you're saying is that dictators
assuage their consciences for killing their intellectuals by telling
themselves they're fighting noise pollution.

but that said, while `cyber' is often a lowlife phenomenon, as it has been
for me, lo all my life, it depends on signalling protocols and intellectual
horsepower that the unreconstructed `punk' cannot apprehend.

> Yet I could criticize those who work against it, if for no other reason
> than their poor timing and lack of strategic skills.

yes. lameness. a chronic problem, yes, but not exclusively that of
activists working against the forces of reactionary politics.

> Revolutionary action
> is *not* a ceremony of committment. It is not an opportunity to gain a
> nice rush from your biochemistry for being so good, kind and helpful. Jack
> off instead...

i tend to agree. but you don't say what it *is*. i think that it's
something you do for your long-term self interest.



> > > The young will have to deal with that, and so will I, in my dotage -- a
> > > situation I am not thrilled about.

> > i'm inclined to believe that relatively calm voices will prevail; for most
> > people, it will be clear by February 2000 that

> But, after 02/00, will come the inevitable depression. The repressed, no
> longer able to make reparation for their acts, real and imagined, are
> gonna make Ivan Karamazov look like a saint. That's our opportunity...

listening, motley? as the religious fanatics prepare for the Rapture, we
can loot their businesses with their blessings and a clear conscience.

> Calm voices rarely prevail. Prepare not only to get your hands dirty,
> but bloody.

> > the Jubilee won't have
> > arrived;

> Don't be so sure...technology is a wonderful thing in the cybergothic
> dystopic future

have you decided for sure that a self-fulfilling prophecy of a millenial
catastrophe is in your self-interest? its not clear to me if it's
inevitable or not, not clear if its in my best interest to try to defuse
it, take advantage of the inevitable, ignore it and it'll go away, or what.
new thread time?

neither SRI nor its sponsors endorse this message.

[Next appendix] | [Return to index for Appendix A4] | [Return to index for Appendix A]