OFF: THEM

[M Holmes]

Chris Warburton writes:

> Paul, I didn't actually intend to come over quite so melodramatically
> with all of that stuff, I'm not a demented conspiracy theorist and as
> a systems programmer working with large corporate databases, I too am
> in the middle of the business world, but the actions of many
> governments and multi-nationals are aimed at maintaining the status
> quo that gives them their power base.  It's also possible to make a
> fairly strong case (I've seen it done by someone a lot smarter than
> me) for the rise in all forms of electronic communication being a
> significant factor in the collapse of the former Soviet bloc.

True to a small extent. The rise of the photocopier was a more
significant factor but in essence it was information which helped bring
down the SU. When people realised that the West wasn't as depicted in
"Oliver" then some difficult questions were raised.

I do remember Reagan and Thatcher crowing about the "Photocopier Effect"
and thinking "Just wait, just you wait" because sooner or later the Net
will do the same damage to State Democracy. Prof Ian Angells at the
London School of Economics has pointed out that tax rates on the rich
have fallen globally by 15% in the last decade due to the fact that it's
easy to move jurisdiction and use the Net to get work done. He expects
that digital encryption and the advent of anonymous digital banking will
further reduce the ability of the State to levy tax on the richer
segment of the population and that the poorest segment has its own way
of avoiding paying tax. Without the ability to enforce taxation, State
power is dramatically reduced. *That* IMHO is the reason that the Net is
being demonised as a haven of pornography - it's the opening shots of
the revolution. They'll try to control it, but it's King Canute and the
Radio Waves. Inthe end, tax will be levied on tangible stuff like cars
and houses which can't easily be hidden and movement between
jurisdictions (the UK just started an "Airport Tax" last year).

> Also,
> some of the current public order laws in Britain are tantamount to
> "2's a conspiracy, 3's a riot".  Sorry to rant on like this, but I'm
> sure that a lot of British Hawkwind fans would back me up on that
> statement.

Similarly the tightening of the gun laws aids in State projection of
power - William Rees Mogg ahs written some very interesting stuff on how
the ability of a State to get it's own way depends a lot on the balance
of power in personal weapons technology. Small alterations in that
balance of power have led to the collapse of empires due to the
inability of States to project power at the periphery (American
Revolution and the decline of the British and Roman empires for example)
and even the complete replacement of political systems (feudalism
collapsed because people could protect themselves rather than offer
fealty to a Lord in exchenge for same - and initially crossbows were
banned in the UK in order to support the Feudal system because crossbow
bolts could penetrate the armour of tax collecting knights).

Just how much the adage "Information is power" is true will be shown in
how much it affects the current system of centralised State power and
the whole edifice of representative (rather than participatory)
democracy. Technology *could* swing the pendulum towards more
individualist rather than state power and towards participatory rather
than majoritarianist democracy. However the growth of surveilance
technology and the capability to use the same technology to monitor
movement of people and cars, spending patterns, interests, and
communications could produce powerful weapons for those who wish to
defend centralised power.

ObOntopic: Choose the side that you'll be on.

Interestingly, from the things that Brock is interested in, I suspect he
has some kind of anarcho-syndacilist political views.

FoFP

"The number of your car's fed into a box".