Tianamen, Havana and the Decentralizing World

One tenet of the Marxist/Leninist worldview is the need for revolution to bring in the socialist utopia. I am reminded of the Tianamen Square protests. I read an article recently, commenting on the anniversary of the deadly protests. The article was suggesting, rightly, that years later, we know hardly anything about the "true" numbers of the killed, the imprisoned and their fates. Revolution only seems to suit the envious when they are out of power.

Another tight-fisted dictator is Fidel Castro. It baffles me (well... not really) that the champions of freedom -- the American elite -- have such an incongruous love for this despot. Again, revolution suits him when he is the challenger, not the defender. Nat Henthoff comments in the Village Voice about a May 20 meeting in Havana:

You wouldn't know it from The New York Times or nearly all the media in New York (the purported center of communications for this nation), but in Havana onMay 20—for the first time in Fidel Castro's 46 years of brutal rule—there was apublic mass meeting, with subversive shouts of "Freedom! Freedom!"

As Anita Snow reported for the Associated Press, "A little more than half [of the 200] present [for the Assembly to Promote Civil Society in Cuba] were delegates from diverse opposition groups around the island. The rest were organizers, international journalists, diplomats and other special guests." The resident dictator was clearly concerned at the refusal by these Cubans to be silenced for fear of being thrown into his gulags. He tried to keep the resistance quiet. As
the Financial Times noted, "Cuba denied visas to dozens of European politicians and Cuban American leaders who sought to attend the meeting, and expelled four European deputies."

And, the AP added, "Cuba on Thursday expelled two European lawmakers who had planned to attend the gathering and refused entry to two others. . . . Six Poles—three journalists, a human rights worker and two students"—were also expelled.

Among the Cubans intending to come who were arrested beforehand were two independent librarians from eastern Cuba, Elio Enrique Chávez and Luis Elio de la Paz. In a quick, secret trial, they were charged and convicted for the crime of "dangerousness" (peligrosidad). They were a danger to his dictatorship. (Read the entire article)

The world is escaping the grasp of its overlords. Many commentators, including Gary North, have commented about the meltdown of the traditional press being faciliated by the decentralized media -- the internet and bloggers primarily. I work in the information technology world. In the last twenty years, there has been a back-and-forth move from centralization to decentralization and back.

Decentralization is great for freeing people to do things that they might not be able to accomplish otherwise. The "killer" for this tectonic shift -- wouldn't you know it -- is the individuals to whom the decentralization flows. Many are unwilling to take the initiative to learn the technologies that come to them in this newfound freedom. They are positively irresponsible in their dabbling with detrimental technologies (loading junkware on their PC and spreading their misery to other users). They fail to recognize the overriding business goals that govern their technological freedom.

I commented several days ago that one necessary ingredient for successful decentralization is self-government. It all comes back to character. The downside of decentralized computing is applicable to decentralized governments. If we don't want despots, we must have overriding agreed-upon principles which glue our individually free lives together. We must take responsibility for progress and shun the detrimental. What a concept!