>From: "Michael S. Lorrey" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Zero Powers wrote:
> > For the record, I am not anxiously looking forward to *that* level of
> > surveillance. It may or may not become ubiquitous. But if it does, me
> > thinks the best defense will be to live a life that you would not be
> > to have broadcast to the world.
>Ah, the call for uniformity and conformance to 'accepted' society.
Not at all. If it is a call to anything, it is a call to integrity, to
living the same life in private as you live in public. This is certainly
not a call to conformance to anything except your own professed world view.
It is not even (necessarily) a call to legality. If you are opposed to the
law of the land, you are free to engage in civil disobedience, so long as
(like the civil rights activists of the '60's) you are willing to "lay it on
the line" for your convictions. But, on the other hand, if you want to wear
the mask of Johnny Civic-Law-Abiding-Citizen in public and yet do whatever
deviant thing you want in private, you need to vote a vociferous "no" for
"I like dreams of the future better than the history of the past"
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:12:11 MDT