This is a cross-post of something I thought up in the COINTELPRO thread "Jake Sully, Anonymous and "WhatIsThePlan" - PsyOps?," which Anart suggested I post somewhere else to keep the thread focused on the more pertinent issues the thread's frequenters were discussing.
(Aside: if I received responses to the comments I raised, I would have asked the mods to transplant it elsewhere - I just didn't know how to get Guardian's attention (the person to whom I was responding) to another thread altogether short of PM'ing (which the forum discourages).)
Context:
As effective as cyber protests are compared to civil disobedience, that really is dependent on what the objective is, and what the opposition is. If it is Dow Chemical, then great: their profits are hurt. But if the opponent is the PTB and the political, economic, sociocultural pathologies they promote, it probably is counterproductive. As mentioned previously by Laura (in the COINTELPRO thread) and the recent SOTT Focus article (http://www.sott.net/articles/show/234259-The-New-COINTELPRO-Cyberwarfare-hacktivists-and-the-Subversion-of-Anonymous), it may just give the PTB an excuse to up internet surveillance and exert further control and free speech and online access privileges (like the proposed three strike rule in France).
The reasons for this, I think, lie in moral polarity. STS vs STO.
In any conflict or disharmonious interaction, it is the more polarized of the two sides that proves the most decisive to the outcome. I feel this is self-evident for a number of reasons, but I'll drum up some examples.
My worry is that using tactics that are, I think, in themselves more service-to-self oriented (such as trolling, hacking websites, disclosing private emails and other information, et cetera) will backfire, because the opposition, full of authoritarians and the like, are exceptionally better at it. The most reliable way to deal with conflicts with such people (to the extent that we are forced to deal with such people) is to become more STO-oriented than they are STS-oriented.
[wiseacring alert]
What makes this cool is that, since according to the C's the benchmark for expedited graduation to 4D is either 51% STO or 99% STS, it almost seems like taking one step closer to STO requires an opponent to take 2 or 3 steps closer to STS in order to level the playing field again. Essentially, any small but willed effort we take toward altruism/objectivity and away from egotism/subjectivity has the control system working harder to maintain control. It's like STO-candiates are gluten and the matrix is like the gut of a celiac candidate: not food conducive to the health of the matrix at large. :P [/wiseacring alert]
(Aside: if I received responses to the comments I raised, I would have asked the mods to transplant it elsewhere - I just didn't know how to get Guardian's attention (the person to whom I was responding) to another thread altogether short of PM'ing (which the forum discourages).)
Context:
Guardian said:go2 said:
It's taken Protest to an entirely new level. "Passive Resistance" sounds like a great idea 'til you sit down in front of Dow Chemical's gate, then the cops come and drag your passive resistant butt down the driveway by your hair. The waistband of your Levi's acts like a little scoop right at the small of your back, and you wind up spending the next 48 hours in an ovedrcrowded, tiny little room trying to pick the gravel out from between your butt cheeks.
When all is said an done, you've barely made a dent in Dow's bottom line.
These kids are creating "Cyber Laser Cannons" that can cost the same abusive corporations MUCH more then thousands of physical protestors can. It's brilliant! The cost of countering a organized Protest in meatspace is always passed on to the taxpayer, but the Corporations themselves bear the majority of the costs associated with Cyber Protests.
Even more important, no one gets physically hurt, not the protesters, or the poor (terrified) police horses, or innocent bystanders. The direct impact is to the corporate monetary system.
I've been reading where several of the "Anonymous" Cyber Protestors have recently been arrested, and I am so hoping they will plead "Not Guilty by Reason of Civil Disobedience" and ask for a Jury trial.
There is enough of them to seriously bog down the courts with NGCD pleas.
As effective as cyber protests are compared to civil disobedience, that really is dependent on what the objective is, and what the opposition is. If it is Dow Chemical, then great: their profits are hurt. But if the opponent is the PTB and the political, economic, sociocultural pathologies they promote, it probably is counterproductive. As mentioned previously by Laura (in the COINTELPRO thread) and the recent SOTT Focus article (http://www.sott.net/articles/show/234259-The-New-COINTELPRO-Cyberwarfare-hacktivists-and-the-Subversion-of-Anonymous), it may just give the PTB an excuse to up internet surveillance and exert further control and free speech and online access privileges (like the proposed three strike rule in France).
The reasons for this, I think, lie in moral polarity. STS vs STO.
In any conflict or disharmonious interaction, it is the more polarized of the two sides that proves the most decisive to the outcome. I feel this is self-evident for a number of reasons, but I'll drum up some examples.
- a brat spits on an older person who abruptly socks them hard (minor STS polarity versus a greater STS polarity: greater wins - which in this context means more "street cred" or other subjective possessions.)
- a person was manipulated into a relationship with a narcissist, and in spite of their good intentions of leading by example and being kind always, it fails to leave an impression and the emotional abuse continues (minor STO versus greater STS: greater wins - the narcissist keeps feeding energetically while the victim remains in illusion and wishful thinking.)
- an office worker has a bad morning and is rude to an intern, whom is patient and responds gently, causing the worker to come around and apologize (minor STS versus a greater STO polarity: greater wins - the worker's ideas of proper conduct in that situation change to match the intern's more polite and kinder methods).
My worry is that using tactics that are, I think, in themselves more service-to-self oriented (such as trolling, hacking websites, disclosing private emails and other information, et cetera) will backfire, because the opposition, full of authoritarians and the like, are exceptionally better at it. The most reliable way to deal with conflicts with such people (to the extent that we are forced to deal with such people) is to become more STO-oriented than they are STS-oriented.
[wiseacring alert]
What makes this cool is that, since according to the C's the benchmark for expedited graduation to 4D is either 51% STO or 99% STS, it almost seems like taking one step closer to STO requires an opponent to take 2 or 3 steps closer to STS in order to level the playing field again. Essentially, any small but willed effort we take toward altruism/objectivity and away from egotism/subjectivity has the control system working harder to maintain control. It's like STO-candiates are gluten and the matrix is like the gut of a celiac candidate: not food conducive to the health of the matrix at large. :P [/wiseacring alert]
