Slashdot Mirror
Congress Mulls China's Networked Authoritarianism
eldavojohn writes "Rebecca MacKinnon tipped her hand about her congressional statements on China and how much Americans are invested in China's censorship, delivered today at a hearing on 'China's Information Control Practices and the Implications for the United States.' In an attempt to describe what China is pioneering, she coins the term 'networked authoritarianism.' Of most concern was Baidu, which has two Americans on its board of directors (out of five) as well as a lot of funding from American investors and mutual funds. From her testimony (PDF): 'As I have described in my testimony, the Chinese government has transferred much of the cost of censorship to the private sector. The American investment community has so far been willing to fund Chinese innovation in censorship technologies and systems without complaint or objection. Under such circumstances, Chinese industry leaders have little incentive and less encouragement to resist government demands that often contradict even China's own laws and constitution.' Is Congress genuinely concerned or are they just curious how they can make 'networked authoritarianism' work for them?"
Oh man, I can't wait until we get networked authoritarianism too! That internet killswitch idea was a step in the right direction but this is so much better!
"Going to war without the French is like going deer hunting without your accordion." ~General Norman Schwarzkopf
Is Congress genuinely concerned or are they just curious how they can make "networked authoritarianism" work for them?"
I thought it was pretty clear at this point, our elected officials are two-faced pricks, whining about freedom everywhere else while doing everything they can to ruin it at home to "protect children" or "stop tourists".
Now, they figure it out!
will be a bunch of whines about their government selling out its principles to corporate influence, and how nothing can stop chinese policy, and this is our future, and we live in a corporatocracy...
and every single person making that comment, modding that comment up, or reading and nodding their heads ARE PART OF THE FUCKING PROBLEM
believe the world can be better. believe it. but if you only have that same tired easy typical empty cynicism that things are only getting worse, or that none of this situation can be changed YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM
yes, corporations and authoritarianism threaten your freedoms. the only question is: what the fuck are YOU going to do about it? if it is nothing but whine and ACCEPT THE STATUS QUO, then you are part of the fucking problem with what is wrong with this world. YOU ARE
there will always be threats to liberty and freedom. always, forever more. the existence of your liberties is a constant maintenance problem, forever. it is never, and never was, a concept that is fought for once, and then never worried about again. so now it falls on your shoulders form previous generations who actually fought for the legal status quo you enjoy. what are you fucking going to do about it?
the only question as to how far threats to your freedom goes is how far those who wish to defend the notion of liberty will push back. but if you don't push back, you just fucking whine and complain and accept with the typical lazy easy pessism and cynicism, and you want to know where your freedom went,
look in the fucking mirror
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
'
Next thing all PCs to be from one US company, as well as servers etc..
- ever heard of a Trojan boot loader?
there was once a nice article in popular science describing a made-up Xerox making Super8 images of all photocopies
which was rented to the USSR embassy. ( and they did not say to whom else )
-
Think they stopped doing this?
For the ethical investor, there are two possible responses to this problem. One is divestment from all ethically challenging situations.
OK, I'll have to pull my money out of all investments because I can find an ethical problem with everything. That doesn't server me. Selfish? Tell me that when I'm older and on government aid - your tax money - because I don't have a pot to piss in.
The other is engagement and advocacy, using financial leverage to work for positive change in industry practices and even government regulation.
Nobody will listen to a nobody with only a few thousand dollars in their mutual funds. They won't even listen to someone with a few million invested. Giant multi-billion dollar multi-national corporations really don't have to listen to anyone.
How much business is Google really losing? China is a Third World country. Most of their population is a bunch of farmers living in poverty. Advertising to most of them is pointless. And the Chinese in the big cities? How much is that business worth.
And in the process of this "protest" they're getting quite a bit of good PR.
RIP America
July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001
As shown in your 2000 elections, 48.4% of americans are intelligent. Let those 48.4% move north to Canada or south to Mexico and let the now-corrupt USA rot away. Your founding fathers would be ashamed of today's USA and so should you.
The US Government must win. Lives are on the line. If the US Government loses than many people protected by the US Government could be killed. The US Government therefore cares only about winning wars and battles. The easiest way to win is to maximize control over land, sea, air, information, human resources, etc.
I don't particularly like this fact but it's just how it is. Winning the war is all they care about and in some cases they don't even care about that. Winning is defined as winning militarily which means having the most power. This is not the same thing as having the most liberty or protecting the Constitution. Politics are about power distribution, war is about power distribution, money is about power distribution, and to win you must have might.
Congress Mulls China's Networked Authoritarianism....and finds that it closely parallels their own turn-over-as-much-taxpayer-cash-as-possible-to-multinational-corporations authoritarianism :)
(yes, i _am_ saying that once elected they do as they damn well please)
I've been saying this same essential thing for years, though instead of calling it "networked authoritarianism" what I've called it is "cyberpunk corporate feudalism".
The corporations control everything in today's world. Sure, the governments still have their military, but corporations operate within the nation states largely autonomously and often in partially parasitic relationships: if the corporation doesn't like the environment, it leaves.
Corporate relationships change much in the same way as nation-states and fiefdoms did during the Middle Ages: smaller gets absorbed by larger, larger breaks into smaller, and the larger ones fight against each other - but for everyone looking on, nothing substantial really tends to change.
States, and the people living within them, don't really have much (if any) sway over these corporations. They operate under their own rules (only in so much as they don't get caught). In essence, they're operating as the countries of the later Middle Ages did towards the Holy See - except the State is God. They'll do whatever they can get away with, and if the state finds out or protests, they'll just leave - or take over.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
Nobody in congress really cares about China's policies towards their own people. It's just something they like to trot out occasionally to show they believe in liberty.
They won't ever actually do anything but pass a non-binding resolution condemning the situation, after which they'll get back to making it easier for us to buy cheap shit from China.
The government is full of competitors, people who fight for their "right" to rule. The next logical step is to force your views on the playing field and try to protect the integrity of your memes.
Other politicians are risk enough, but it's the vast number of citizens who can cause real change if they wanted. That's why politicians want the people who take orders from them to be the only ones with guns. Now that the internet is a serious threat because of the power it gives to people that shadows the threat of guns.
"Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
Governments have military objectives. These objectives could be to secure the middle east. To win the war in Afganastan, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan etc. To protect Isreal. To isolate and defeat North Korea. To beat the Soviets.
It has nothing to do with principles. Principles are useful to help you win. Principles are a tactic, a means to an end rather than an end in itself. The only principle is to win. Winning means to protection national security. To maintain super power status. To protect the national interest. This usually means to control global resources, to control information, to control land, sea, air, and to maintain control over all assets.
It's fine if the government thinks this way but it's not right for the government to lie to it's own people, even it's own soldiers about why they fight. It's only the exceptionally smart or exceptionally experienced who figure out how it really works. It's not about principles and all about power. Nationalist vs Nationalist is what it's about. The US Nation against the Russian or Iran or North Korea or China or whomever challenges US global dominance. It's that simple.
Western companies making a buck off evil? Nothing new.
Infamous Auschwitz Tattoo Began as an IBM Number
Auschwitz Phone Book Shows IBM Hollerith Buro Phone # 4496
In August 1943, a timber merchant from Bendzin, Poland, arrived at Auschwitz. He was among a group of 400 inmates, mostly Jews. First, a doctor examined him briefly to determine his fitness for work. His physical information was noted on a medical record. Second, his full prisoner registration was completed with all personal details. Third, his name was checked against the indices of the Political Section to see if he would be subjected to special punishment. Finally, he was registered in the Labor Assignment Office and assigned a characteristic five-digit IBM Hollerith number, 44673.
The five-digit Hollerith number was part of a custom punch card system devised by IBM to track prisoners in Nazi concentration camps, including the slave labor at Auschwitz.
The Polish timber merchant's punch card number would follow him from labor assignment to labor assignment as Hollerith systems tracked him and his availability for work, and reported the data to the central inmate file eventually kept at Department DII. Department DII of the SS Economics Administration in Oranienburg oversaw all camp slave labor assignments, utilizing elaborate IBM systems.
Later in the summer of 1943, the Polish timber merchant's same five-digit Hollerith number, 44673, was tattooed on his forearm. Eventually, during the summer of 1943, all non-Germans at Auschwitz were similarly tattooed.
http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=663
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
The corporations and government go together as hand in glove. The corporation is merely the glove and the government the hand that controls the glove. The corporation's CEO very well could be a spy for some government. So you wonder why some corporations don't care about the American people? Maybe because they are owned and controlled by foreign powers.
The rest of what you say is correct. But it's economic espionage, economic warfare, corporate warfare, and the dollar is the ultimate weapon at this time.
and cynicism is a fine philosophy until you figure out that principles actually do exist, because some people actually believe in them, and these people are the only ones who ever make a difference or matter
everyone else is as you describe: parasites playing the system, the status quo, stasis. but if the world is nothing but parasites, and no host, then the parasites die: nothing gets better, natural decay leads us to worse, and the parasites certainly won't labor to make our situation any better
so understand your place in the world because of the words you have written: a parasite, and understand why your life has no meaning or dignity
or understand there is no pride or happiness or anything of value in what you believe, and stop being such a fucking parasite
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Chinese influence around the globe concerns them. If China can control information in China then the USA can't control information in China. It's a matter of which country has the control not a matter of whether one country or another believes in having it. They both want it and are fighting over who controls information just as they fight over who controls land, sea, air, money, and everything else. And that is what governments were invented for.
Governments are war machines.
The US Government is outsourcing its R&D to the Chinese. How long before they don't even need the kill switch ?
Governments do not have principles. Governments are war machines. Corporations are profit machines. The employees and soldiers have principles but thats for their personal lives and not for their work life.
You can have principles, just keep them to yourself and share them in your private life. In your public life or corporate life principles don't really exist. It's all about winning.
Is Congress genuinely concerned or are they just curious how they can make "networked authoritarianism" work for them?"
I don't think I'm going too far out on a limb to say the latter.
The ignorance of some /. posters never ceases to amaze me. You give an opinion yet never state any proof or cite any references.
The USA has supported dictatorships which have abused human rights. The USA has used and will continue to use human rights abuses such as torture as a tactic to achieve victory. If you think my statements are made in ignorance, why don't you explain why the secret prisons where torture goes on exists at all? Why don't you explain why free speech doesn't really matter or why not even the Constitution is allowed to get in the war of military success?
There is no real good and evil dollar. There is just dollars. In the end the team which has the most of them decides what is good and what is evil for the people who have the least of them.
If you check, there's some rather *odd* "coincidences" with stock moves related to this entire incident, and our great friends, the champion of the "little people" out there around the planet, at goldman sachs, are right up there in the thick of it.
The only cowards are the chinese government who use censorship to try to protect their power. The truth will set you free.
so many people who believe "this is the way life is" actually believe "this is the way MY life is"
the boundaries and limitations they perceive on themselves, they think apply to other people. they don't
what principles you believe in matters. for example: ghosts don't exist. but if you believe in ghosts, it alters your behavior, and therefore, your belief in ghosts matters. if enough people believe in ghosts, human society (not the natural world, but we're not talking about that: define your terms) is altered to match this
human society is self-emergent phenomenon. it is bound only by what people believe, not just natural laws. this makes it very powerful. if i believe in clothing, cities, electrical wires, court systems... then this is what i will live in, instead of a cave. this applies to technology... and principles of society
if you believe in something like, say, human dignity, that matters. you can say human dignity doesn't exist, and that's true, according to mother nature. she'll kill you in the most brutal sudden insulting ways, and carry on in a blink, your entire existence a forgotten joke. but in the realm of human society, belief in human dignity alters behavior such that human dignity becomes a REAL (in the bounds of human society) concept. people grieve. they write songs about your passing, they build pyramids: human dignity is a principle, and its effects are palpable, and so it matters
there also exists cynics, like yourself. they don't alter society, as a consequence of their own beliefs in not mattering. they live in the shadows, feeding off the positive efforts of others. they won't contribute: they don't believe in contributing to causes, but they're happy for the clothing, the cities, the electrical wires, the sense of justice, the notion of freedom, the human conscience, that others full of belief labored to build into edifices of human society. they're dead weight, they're parasites. they'll say your life has no meaning, but they won't apply that principle to themselves. they still love to live, a life that supposedly has no meaning, according to their words: hypocrites
those laboring under beliefs and principles are defining human society are actually making substantial differences. while those who simply sit there and deny that the effort matters in the end, only define the terms under which they themselves don't matter in the end
what you believe in comes to define your reality. so if you believe in nothing, you define your existence as nothing (but not my existence). your lack of faith and belief does not limit me, only you. meaning is a proof positive venture. so if you put nothing positive forth, your meaning is emptiness. that you have chosen, not me. but if i state my meaning as something that other people can understand and grasp and coordinate with me, then our meaning in life becomes the fruit of efforts laboring under a system of belief that we define. and that becomes real. the pyramids: someone built them, because someone believed in them. this boundary of belief, or lack thereof, is the only real limitation we labor in our entire lives. that you choose to believe in nothing, and do nothing, means you leave behind nothing... but the pyramids still exist. because someone believed in them. and your lack of belief did not negate them. you've only negated anything you could have done yourself
that's your place in this world: please understand that the callous limitations you have defined in human society are only limitations on your life. but not on mine. you've described the terms in which your life is empty and without meaning, but you haven't defined the terms under which my life does have meaning. and in the end, i'm the only one who matters, because i leave something positive that others can carry on and invest in further, and so, many generations down the road, you have tremendous societal constructs that millions live under in belief in, whether they be notions of liberty, generosity, freedom, fair play, or any other positive be
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
What companies are acceptable investments... does anyone know? For example, if I have stock in China Mobile, am I defending a totalitarian monster, or am I encouraging a freer market in a society that is now being opened much more by investment? Am I good for bad that I own stock... oh, you're not sure either?
We can all help China by running proxies on our computers. If everybody (or a critical mass) cooperates, there is no way for the Chinese government to block proxy IP addresses (or they will need to effectively shut themselves off from the rest of the world, and that will not happen of course). This could be similar to Tor, except more efficient, because only one hop is needed.
Also, the development of software for encryption or steganography (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography) could help to make network traffic transparent.
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
I see no reason America should allow any business with China. Their perpetual crimes against Tibet as well as their ongoing use of slave labor should be enough incentive for America to cut the phone lines and isolate China completely. As far as debts to China we should not pay them.
but thanks for the vote of no confidence
that you vote no confidence, without even knowing me, actually says more about you than it does about me
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
the biggest
that i need to justify myself to you. who the hell are you? on what authority are you empowered to judge me?
i'm quite confident in who i am and what i am doing, and i need no approval or justification from you to know that
especially since you go out of your way to offer me your disapproval, without even knowing a damn thing about me. like i said: that act says a lot about your character, and none about mine
the world has enough negative judgmental assholes. try something new friend, its a tired boring game, and you only hurt yourself in the end
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
"Under such circumstances, Chinese industry leaders have little incentive and less encouragement to resist government demands that often contradict even China's own laws and constitution."
Look in your own backyard, lady.
Your brain is not a computer.
Google is one of those investors in Baidu? Through a trust of course to hide it. They won't lose a thing..
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
Western democratically elected governments have checks and balances put in place to prevent them from "being solely about war".
There is a reason why Hitler for instance put away with the Weimar republic before he engaged in war preparations.
Many of the numerous wars the US fights and fought since its inception are nothing but a testament to how much these checks and balances have been failing the US republic. To extrapolate from this example to all other governments is a fallacy.
But I give you that - if you limit yourself to dictatorships and absolute monarchies you're statement about these forms of governments being primarily about war is generally true.
We already settled this. The Western board members aren't real; they're rented.
you can't or are unable to judge my words on their merit or lack thereof
you only give your approval/ disapproval based on my standing as some sort of authority or not
i think that logic and reason is a superior way to judge the value of someone's words according to their social hierarchy status, especially in A FACELESS INTERNET THREAD, but that's just me
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Do I have this right? You don't like the UN because it wants to have a monopoly on force yet you don't like the UN because it hasn't got any forces to enact this monopoly on force????
I think a better summation of your position is "I HATE THE UN!!!!!!".
addiction is bars inside the mind. in orwell's deepest darkest fantasies he couldn't derive a worse authoritarian government that destroys more freedom than drug addiction does... well, unless he had that government forcing people to use heroin or meth. drug use has destroyed more freedom in this world than the entire history of human government
the fight against drugs is the fight for freedom, and like all fights for freedom, its a maintenance function, and it will never end
yes, some people freely choose to do drugs. just like some people take the infinite possibilities of life... and choose suicide. is the choice to remove your own freedoms a choice to be respected?
that's a deep philosophical question right there: does freedom include the freedom to choose to remove your own freedom?
if someone freely chooses to be a slave, do you respect that choice?
me, personally i do not respect that: choices to remove freedom are never done in a vacuum, and often wind up removing other people's freedoms as well
and so, i deny people the 'right" to destory their own freedom. and in this way, i increase freedom in this world. and so i call suicide wrong, and so i call drug use (the most highly addictive/ inebriating drugs, not something mild like marijuana) wrong as well
drug use is just slow motion suicide, it is self-destruction of freedom. and if you don't see that, you don't know much about drugs
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Is there any web resource that tracks and lists these unscrupulous companies doing business with human rights violators? It would be nice to publicly out these guys.
which is wrong, and we should fight that
but you seem to be suggesting that the existence of this fact is a permanent limitation on our ideals, and a reason to stop fighting for what we believe is right
you use the weight of the world to crush you, and then you suggest to others they will only be crushed as well, so they should just stop fighting and accept
and so you are part of the problem you complain about: you see abuse, and you accept it
all that is required for evil to triumph in this world is for good men to do nothing. you are arguing for us to do nothing. so i say to you: shut up, and stop evangelizing your ignorant cynicism
fight for what is right, or fuck off. but don't tell us it is pointless to fight. then you are just as bad as the evils you dislike: you help them, by accepting them
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I'm not going to do a thing about it. The status quo provides enough distraction from the horrors perpetrated by our monstrous species that I can live comfortably numbed to my guilt.
someone out there gets it
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I believe my life is utterly meaningless, what should I do?
since you aren't a hypocrite about what you have chosen, i have no argument with you
enjoy your creature comforts
just a warning: the distractions lose their power to distract over time. you need stronger and stronger doses to get the same effect. meaninglessness becomes a burden. a guy can live in a penthouse palace and have all the hookers and blow he wants, and yet hate himself and feel emptier inside than he ever had
the relationship between meaning and happiness is strong
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
drug yourself into a stupor with creature comforts: food, sex, empty banter and media, real drugs
all the time, the meaninglessness becomes a larger and larger burden, and you need larger and larger doses of your creature comfort drugs to cope
eventually you break down, and make up a meaning for your life, and believe in it. only because its less painful than meaninglessness
and if you say meaninglessness isn't painful, then you haven't built your tolerance up of your chosen creature comfort drug yet. eventually and inevitably, tolerance builds up to where the creature comfort drugs have no more effect, and you have nothing left to dull the pain, except to choose meaning, once and for all
so good luck and see you soon in the realm of meaning
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
you don't even understand that what you complain about is the only thing that makes your life possible
without government, there is no civilization. without civilization, there is no little earnest you tapping away at a computer describing government in hilariously stilted terminology
i understand that you fear government. you have a nice list of downsides, all of which are real and i do not deny and i can add to even
now i'd like you to be intellectually honest and examine the upside of government, which through defect in intelligence, perception, or due to massive propaganda, you currently fail to conceive or understand
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Cuz I'd like to know when it's ok to stop living in fear and handing complete control over to the government. Or is that a national security secret?
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
what problem do you have with these entities that somehow would be better if they didn't exist?
i take it you somehow magically believe if there were no feds or no un, whatever you hate that they are doing, wouldn't continue to get done
truth, moron: whatever it is that you hate that the feds or the un is doing, would still happen in a world without the feds or the un. except now would be even less recourse to fix whatever it is you hate they are doing
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Most people who fight end in jail or dead.
See, that's utter rubbish. There are scores of old people that have fought for principles and causes that are alive today. Many of them are veterans of one country or another. I happen to know quite a few of them. If you don't like that example, I know of a half dozen authors that are in their golden years that successfully penned creations which went on to change the values and mindset of society. Robert Pirsig comes to mind...Chomsky is also a big one, though not my personal favorite. And then there are the men and women who worked, and continue to work in the space program. They help to embody and spread the virtues of hard work, discipline, and rigorous engineering. They also help to inspire young folk all around the world. Many of the men and women that first worked in the space program back in the 50's and 60's are still alive and not jailed today....
So maybe it's not a problem with the system, as you seem to think. Perhaps, you just don't know enough old people. But quite frankly, there are a lot of elderly, free, and alive people that have fought and worked for change their entire lives. You're just seeing things through a bitter filter which you imposed on yourself.
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
you're probably one of those assholes who if they see a gang beating someone up, you don't even report it to the police: fear of reprisal
take responsibility for your world, and work for what is right, or be a slave, as you currently have chosen
the more there are people who think like you in this world, the more the state of the world is misery and poverty and suffering. evil men depend upon slaves like you to stand there and do nothing while they perpetuate transgressions. that really is the truth
you've sold your conscience. you have declared you won't stand up for what you believe. and if you don't exercise what you say your principles are, then you really don't have any principles
you're a self-made slave. pathetic
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
staring at a vacuum tube and some tungsten, did he believe in progress, or was he just compelled by the laws of nature and the inevitability of it all?
actual human beings created the civilized world you live in, whether technology or social compact. and before those things existed, someone believed in it, and made it happen, out of force of belief
belief matters. plenty of beliefs are without consequence. but not all of them
look at the man inside the machine, he makes it run. apparently all you can see is the machine
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
what a moron
ever hear of specialization? when there's a fire, i call the professional fireman, i don't start building a hose. leave policework to professional policemen, idiot
"If you report everything to the police and you live in the same neighborhood as the gang, the members who aren't arrested will be beating your ass up. Stop trying to give survival strategies for a world you know little to nothing about."
if no one stands up to the gangs, there will be always be gangs
gangs exist everywhere, but are most potent where there are people who won't oppose them. if they go into a neighborhood and there is fierce opposition to their presence, then the gangs go away, because the police round them up, because the gangs are reported by people who live there
but if the gangs go to another neighborhood where no one complains as they do their dirty work, they stay there, and the police are stymied in their efforts by lack of cooperation by the citizens there
figure it out retard: you have to fight gangs, you just have to, to SURVIVE
if you choose NOT to fight them, then you will always have gangs threatening and menacing you, you live in fear: you are a slave. you can survive a day, sure, but you won't survive longterm, because gangs are gangs: they prey on the weak, and they will get to you at some point or another, until you stand up them to SURVIVE
or don't, and be their slave
you are really are a slave, you really do think like a slave
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
yeah, great ideas
you're truly a modern statesman, you got it all figured out, it's so simple and pat
(rolls eyes)
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
what a moron
ever hear of specialization? when there's a fire, i call the professional fireman, i don't start building a hose.
The proper response if you see a lot of crime in your neighborhood and a lot of gangs is to join the effort to fight it in an official capcity. This way you can have a fratenity/gang of your own, with your own guns, and your own powers that surpass that of the gang. If you are dumb enough to take on gangsters without the authority to do so, you can find yourself receiving death threats from those gangsters that you declared war on when you informed on them. Maybe you should read Sun Tzu, and never go into war unprepared.
leave policework to professional policemen, idiot
Why not become a professional police man? What stops you? You want to do something about gangs who bully innocent people? You have such a big conscience and you want to do something to improve the world? Why don't you become a policeman rather than tell everyone else what they arent doing? You cannot be a part time warrior. Either you are going to be a full time professional or you risk being harmed by gang members who only live that way 24/7.
if no one stands up to the gangs, there will be always be gangs
gangs exist everywhere, but are most potent where there are people who won't oppose them.
Either become a cop and stand up directly to them. Or you and your neighbors put up cameras and or make the police put up cameras. CCTV cameras don't prevent crime but it damn sure will make sure it doesnt happen in front of you.
if they go into a neighborhood and there is fierce opposition to their presence, then the gangs go away,
Yeah sure dude. I'm sure the mafia left little italy because italians there didn't want the mafia to take over. I'm sure it worked for all the organized crime mafias and gangs, outlaw bikers and I'm sure it worked in the wild west too. The shop owners could just put up a sign saying "no gunslingers" and thats all it would take right? Unless you have guns you cannot stop people who have guns. Unless you have the authority to use your gun you cannot protect yourself from people who kill with guns.
because the police round them up, because the gangs are reported by people who live there
This might work in rich suburban neighborhoods. This does not work in neighborhoods infested with gangs and dominated by poverty. When you take down the gangs in these neighborhoods you take out multiple sources of income that many families in these neighborhoods rely on. There are no jobs and you the do-gooder wants to crack down on the one group of people supplying all the jobs and money for the neighborhood? You do realize that some of these gangs actually have civilian supporters right? You do realize that some of these gangs are sophisticated and have civilians who spy and snitch for the gang right? Thats right you'll go to your neighborhood meeting and discuss how you want to crack down on the gangs, and someone at the meeting will record it and give it to the gang leader and now you'll be the target of the gang.
but if the gangs go to another neighborhood where no one complains as they do their dirty work, they stay there, and the police are stymied in their efforts by lack of cooperation by the citizens there
figure it out retard: you have to fight gangs, you just have to, to SURVIVE
if you choose NOT to fight them, then you will always have gangs threatening and menacing you, you live in fear: you are a slave. you can survive a day, sure, but you won't survive longterm, because gangs are gangs: they prey on the weak, and they will get to you at some point or another, until you stand up them to SURVIVE
or don't, and be their slave
you are really are a slave, you really do think like a slave
You know nothing about gangs, at least not any sophisticated gang
You can use drugs without being addicted to drugs.
The threat they faced is nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing, compared to the threat we face. They might have had to deal with risk but there was less laws for them to deal with, there was less technology for them to deal with, and in general there were less enemies for them to deal with.
Chomsky might have changed minds but changing my mind doesn't change society. Society isn't influenced by our hearts. Chomsky will get nowhere because the only thing the empire cares about is maintaining itself. Their generation allowed people to do those sorts of things because there wasn't covert surveillance on the level there is now.
And even if you have some people who invent things or write books, this is not going to change the minds of the generals and joint chiefs of staff who really decide what actions to take. They will decide along with the President. Chomsky is not the President, he's not general, hes not head of the CIA or FBI, he's not head of the NSA, he has no rank in the security establishment or the civilian leadership.
I might agree with what he says but he doesn't have the power to change anything any more than Ron Paul has the power to become President. And a majority of their followers WILL be ending up dead or in jail because the government labels them domestic terrorists. They are probably being spied upon as we speak, with informants detailing their every move. On top of that the ones who really are serious? They'll be framed on some BS charges and locked in jail.
The US Government does not follow the Constitution when conducting the war on terrorism. They will frame you up and lock you up, and in some cases they'll just grab you up and not press charges for years until the society forgets you exist.
Block all traffic coming out of china, unless it is mediated by an external open proxy?
First china would need to depend on an external internet to the extent that, it would not be efficient to create a separate domestic internet.
Alternately, data hosting companies could require incoming connections to pass through an anonymizing proxy within their jurisdiction, such that non-anonymous access would be cut off.
The internet is still young, and humans can make it into what they want it to be.