Freedomain Radio

"we see these huge businesses flourish, in some cases within a year, because people were unshakled and allowed to just try things"

So apparently society has no problem rising up in unison to protest an attack on freedom, but only if it's against the IT sector. What about unshakling and allowing people to try things in education, medicine, or justice? No no, you see we need guys with guns and ancient political theories to run society where it matters, but don't you dare touch our social media!

People tend to be indifferent to State aggression until they are personally threatened by it.

This SOPA crap might be a good thing, because now they've started mucking with something people reeeeally care about and not in some abstract way.  They made the mistake of fucking around with people's bread and circuses.  You might not give a shit about the stock market or public schools or wars in foreign lands, but fuck with my internet…RELEASE THE KRAKEN!!!  So there's at least a big lever the anarchist can grab and hopefully try to expose the doublethink going on.

I was at the NYC protest today.  The protest was against censorship and the huge burden that compliance would place on web companies.  Most of the protesters work in IT and are very knowledgeable about the issues surrounding SOPA/PIPA; it is obvious to them how bad the laws are.  The internet is used to bring about changes in the areas mentioned here, which is why people spoke up to protect it. It is the most powerful mechanism of free speech in history.  Many internet technologies have been developed for the purpose of spreading liberty.

I've recently read numerous news stories and reader comments, and watched several YouTube videos about SOPA/PIPA.

It's quite infuriating to see all of this outrage from people who support the State, but who act as though their support for the State played no role, whatsoever.

It's like watching kids play with flammables and then react with astonishment when something catches fire and burns down.

The reason this affects me more than your average statist hypocracy, is because for some reason I thought pro-internet minded people were a little bit more on the enlightened side, given as how its next big step in communication and all. However, this SOPA stuff just throws into sharp relief that they are no different than the rest: freedom doesnt matter as a principle, it only matters when its taken from your own personal sphere, and even then the solution is always more political action. 

It just feels like the connection is so easy to make, and yet they are miles away: If freedom works online, why wouldnt it work everywhere? The people behind the websites don't live inside your computer, they're out there in the real world. Why is it that only they should get to work with the fruits of freedom, but almost every other sector shouldnt?

What happened on Wednesday was a historical first; the US used the internet for a massive organized protest.  It took one stunt to wake up millions and millions of people, contact their government, and support a cause.. in 24 hours.

SOPA Protests Sway Congress: 31 Opponents Yesterday, 122 Now
http://techcrunch.com/2012/01/19/sopa-opponents-supporters/

From NY Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/19/technology/web-protests-piracy-bill-and-2-key-senators-change-course.html

In Fight Over Piracy Bills, New Economy Rises Against Old

WASHINGTON — When the powerful world of old media mobilized to win passage of an online antipiracy bill, it marshaled the reliable giants of K Street — the United States Chamber of Commerce, the Recording Industry Association of America and, of course, the motion picture lobby, with its new chairman, former Senator Christopher J. Dodd, the Connecticut Democrat and an insider’s insider.

Yet on Wednesday this formidable old guard was forced to make way for the new as Web powerhouses backed by Internet activists rallied opposition to the legislation through Internet blackouts and cascading criticism, sending an unmistakable message to lawmakers grappling with new media issues: Don’t mess with the Internet.

As a result, the legislative battle over two once-obscure bills to combat the piracy of American movies, music, books and writing on the World Wide Web may prove to be a turning point for the way business is done in Washington. It represented a moment when the new economy rose up against the old.

The great irony of the SOPA protest is its success so close on the heels of the passage of NDAA. What no one seems to talk about is that Americans successfully protected Due Process for WEBSITES, but gave up Due Process for CITIZENS.

That's the real insanity of government: a bunch of ones and zeros are protected by the burden of proof, but living, breathing humans can be abducted and locked in rape cages for the rest of their lives at the arbitrary whim of "Mr. President."

Alan Chapman:

People tend to be indifferent to State aggression until they are personally threatened by it.

This.

Nathan T. Freeman:

The great irony of the SOPA protest is its success so close on the heels of the passage of NDAA. What no one seems to talk about is that Americans successfully protected Due Process for WEBSITES, but gave up Due Process for CITIZENS.

That's the real insanity of government: a bunch of ones and zeros are protected by the burden of proof, but living, breathing humans can be abducted and locked in rape cages for the rest of their lives at the arbitrary whim of "Mr. President."

And this.

Nathan T. Freeman:

The great irony of the SOPA protest is its success so close on the heels of the passage of NDAA. What no one seems to talk about is that Americans successfully protected Due Process for WEBSITES, but gave up Due Process for CITIZENS.

So, you would prefer that people be ideologically consistent, and there be no due process at all?  Better to be 100% wrong than partially right?  

Most of the anti SOPS activists are against the NDAA as well.

NumberSix:

Nathan T. Freeman:

The great irony of the SOPA protest is its success so close on the heels of the passage of NDAA. What no one seems to talk about is that Americans successfully protected Due Process for WEBSITES, but gave up Due Process for CITIZENS.

So, you would prefer that people be ideologically consistent, and there be no due process at all?  Better to be 100% wrong than partially right?  

Most of the anti SOPS activists are against the NDAA as well.

I would prefer that the Google, Twitter, Wikipedia and Oatmeal protests all happen when the truly important due process law was at stake, rather than when the comparitively trivial due process law was at stake.

I think the claim of "most" implies empirical evidence that is not provided. But it saddens me that the major players on the 'net only took a stand when it was their business model, rather than their employees lives, at stake. I'm not saying I'm surprised -- just disappointed.

As a side note: love the avatar. From one free man to another, The Prisoner was one of the best pieces of motion picture art in the history of man.

Nathan T. Freeman:

I would prefer that the Google, Twitter, Wikipedia and Oatmeal protests all happen when the truly important due process law was at stake, rather than when the comparitively trivial due process law was at stake.

I think the claim of "most" implies empirical evidence that is not provided. But it saddens me that the major players on the 'net only took a stand when it was their business model, rather than their employees lives, at stake. I'm not saying I'm surprised -- just disappointed.

As a side note: love the avatar. From one free man to another, The Prisoner was one of the best pieces of motion picture art in the history of man.

I work in the internet industry and most of techies I know (or have read or heard speak) are either Libertarians or Anarcho-socialists. Both groups are against NDAA. 

These bills are important.  We are in the middle of an information revolution that will transform society and destroy the old power structures.  The old elites are starting to realize this and are taking steps to control the internet so they can keep power.  The law would have given Orwellian power to erase information from the internet. 

I chose my avatar because I feel like the character, trapped in an insane world, but unbreakable.

I think as public sources of information the websites need to remain impartial for the most part. They have however, done a lot to promote the free flow of ideas.  It is like if you went to court you would want a judge to be fair and impartial, not act like Judge Judy.

Alan Chapman:

I've recently read numerous news stories and reader comments, and watched several YouTube videos about SOPA/PIPA.

It's quite infuriating to see all of this outrage from people who support the State, but who act as though their support for the State played no role, whatsoever.

It's like watching kids play with flammables and then react with astonishment when something catches fire and burns down.

  Don't you realise that hypocrisy is your friend?  As long as these people keep undermining the state's ability to do what it wants they make it harder for the state to make it's case. Basically the state runs on propaganda and the central message is "You really need us.".  Whenever they stop the state doing something two things happen.  Firstly people realise that, in this particular case, the state was incapable of doing what it wanted.   Secondly they realise that the state was not doing something that we needed anyway.  This chips away at the territory the state claims in their mind where it's necessary.  It also makes it more likely that they will see the non-necessity of other state activities, further chipping away until finally they say "We really don't need this thing at all.".  If you tried to say to them "Look, if you support the state you have to support SOPA, so since you don't support SOPA you have to disown the state." they'd be scared into supporting SOPA.  Baby steps. 

Livemike:

Alan Chapman:

I've recently read numerous news stories and reader comments, and watched several YouTube videos about SOPA/PIPA.

It's quite infuriating to see all of this outrage from people who support the State, but who act as though their support for the State played no role, whatsoever.

It's like watching kids play with flammables and then react with astonishment when something catches fire and burns down.

 

  Don't you realise that hypocrisy is your friend?  As long as these people keep undermining the state's ability to do what it wants they make it harder for the state to make it's case. Basically the state runs on propaganda and the central message is "You really need us.".  Whenever they stop the state doing something two things happen.  Firstly people realise that, in this particular case, the state was incapable of doing what it wanted.   Secondly they realise that the state was not doing something that we needed anyway.  This chips away at the territory the state claims in their mind where it's necessary.  It also makes it more likely that they will see the non-necessity of other state activities, further chipping away until finally they say "We really don't need this thing at all.".  If you tried to say to them "Look, if you support the state you have to support SOPA, so since you don't support SOPA you have to disown the state." they'd be scared into supporting SOPA.  Baby steps. 

"Hypocrisy is your friend," is a brilliant point, though I would like to point out that SOPA doesn't change what the government is capable of as they came down on megauploads the day after the SOPA blackout.  The Amazing Atheist (among others) noticed this:

I think that chipping away at legitimacy only really addresses the current instance of the state, not necessarily the theory of the state... this is a great opportunity to point out to people that the problem is violence.

Talk to your friends and family, make videos, write, do whatever you can, especially if you can use your strengths to that end.

For example, if you're a twitterphile, you can start using the hash-tag #BoycottViolence.  I came up with one that I liked: "The fences around us will continue to shrink until we #BoycottViolence".  I don't have a huge reach, so feel free to use that one if you like it, or come up with your own—I'm sure that the creativity of the community can do even better!

To NumberSix:

I get what you're saying, they were successful and I agree they had a powerful victory. The problem im bringing up is that success or failure in the legal microcosm of Internet freedom is irrelevent when the broader principle that "state control is ultimately the right answer" isnt addressed. They aren't doing much, if anything, for the cause of freedom by stopping this version of the bill, this time. They would be doing a whole lot more if they blacked out the internet and said "you can't use these websites anymore until you can ethically justify the existance of a state, please think before you support statism", or something in that vein. By stopping a bill, and not working to stop the state, they are actually serving the state by legitimizing it as a means of social change. Legitimizing the state is identical to legitimizing violence as a means to social change, and that's one of the worst things a person can do in the cause of freedom, and that's what i'm saying they did.

By stopping SOPA this time, what they have done is galvanized those who created SOPA into being more underhanded and more sophisticated in their approach to passing this type of measure, and worst of all they have shown people that sometimes standing up to the state on their terms works. You dont want people to rise up against the state on the state's terms, thats how people end up dead. You can only stop statism by spreading rationality as an abstract; that way the pyramid loses its base, because everyone will simply outgrow the government.

Oh and the SOPA blackouts didnt raise awareness for rational principles, any more than Ron Paul's campaign does. They may kinda sorta do that on accident, but it was by no means the intent, and it would have been prevented if possible.