“In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
George Orwell
On Friday, August 30, a Brazilian judge ordered the nationwide suspension of one of the largest social networks in the world: X.com (formerly – and hereafter – Twitter). This order is currently being complied with by Internet service providers (ISPs) in Latin America’s largest economic power.
According to the media Magnifying glassOn August 17, Twitter announced the closure of its office in Brazil, which violates the country’s positive legislation. Because To operate in Brazilian territory, all social media platforms must have at least one legal representative who can be contacted.
If one were to think badly of the State, it could be understood that this figure of the legal representative was deliberately created so that a physical person on the payroll of the social network company could be pressured, imprisoned, legally kidnapped, tortured, disappeared or whatever was necessary for the government in power. All justified – of course – by the need for order and progress, democracy, human rights or some other proclamation empty of meaning, but useful to generate the necessary excuse for a large part of the population to tolerate the authoritarian attack.
Elon Musk retweets the consequences of the execution of the court order imposed against his company and the 350 million users who use the network. Source: Elon Musk’s Twitter account (x.com)
It is interesting to see how the thesis crypto-anarchist It is played out in everyday reality. With no flesh to tear, no bodies to imprison, and no land to expropriate or bomb, nation-states can really do very little in this context. And that is why they need to legislate norms as futile as the one Twitter has not complied with.
The cryptoanarchist thesis states that States do not have the technical capacity to enforce their laws in cyberspace. And that this will produce an alteration in the nature of the regulations of human relations.
In it Cyphernomicon (16.3.3) From 1994, Tim May states that “crypto-anarchy is, in a sense, a throwback to the pre-state. To those times of individual choice about which laws to follow.”
Thirty years after the publication of Cyphernomicon, we see how the owner of a company has publicly and openly decided to interpret the Constitution of a country for himself.
Twitter owner Elon Musk supports the claim that his platform was banned for complying with the law. Source: Elon Musk’s Twitter account (x.com).
In the recent Samourai Wallet administrators imprisonment case We saw the clash between the Bitcoin/” target=”_blank” rel=”noreferrer noopener”>FATF network and the Samourai network. Where the former punished all users of the latter by depriving them of the service and also attacked the administrators of the former by depriving them of their freedom of movement. There, both the users and the administrators now imprisoned interpreted that their activity was not money laundering or financing of terrorism, but the US interpreted the opposite.
In the even cooler case concerning the imprisonment of Pavel Durov We witnessed the power struggle between the NATO network and the Telegram network. In this case, the owner of the social network interpreted that he was doing a good job of moderation since his billion users enjoy his service and continue to bring members to the network that continues to grow, while the US offshore armed wing, NATO, interpreted that the placement of backdoors, censorship and increased moderation was effectively a legal requirement that was breached by the later imprisoned Pavel.
Elon Musk publicly admits that he has free will to interpret government orders and therefore disobey a court order that he considers contrary to law. Source: Elon Musk’s Twitter account (x.com).
“Fortunately, the way people vote has little effect on certain “basic truths” that emerge from new technologies and new economic developments.” and “I think crypto-anarchy is one of the few real contributions to ideology in recent memory. The notion of individuals becoming independent of states by bypassing ordinary channels of control is new.”
Tim May in the Cyphernomicon.
How many Brazilians think that blocking Twitter by decision of one of their own makes sense? How many of Twitter’s 350 million users benefit from the blocking of tweets produced from Brazil? And how many are harmed by the decrease in the quality and quantity of content due to the absence of the 20 million Brazilians expelled from the network by the judge? The approval ratings of the Administration do not seem to be in favor of the regulators.
And this is interesting because no matter how many elections are held, how many vote, or who occupies the presidential chair, no social order is sustained based solely on force. Just as the boogeyman ceases to be a problem when people stop believing in him, authority also ceases to be a problem when they fail to fall into the false myth of his existence.
Camilo JdL for CryptoNews at 859,578 timechain
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect those of CriptoNoticias. The author’s opinion is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice or financial advice under any circumstances.
Crypto Keynote USA
For the Latest Crypto News, Follow ©KeynoteUSA on Twitter Or Google News.
