<p dir="ltr">Forgot to CC the list. Pls see below.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Jun 14, 2013 7:14 PM, "Daniel Bryan" <<a href="mailto:danbryan@gmail.com">danbryan@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
The point has been made that LA involvement in the EFF campaign could<br>
help to neuter accusations that the EFF are a "fringe" or "loony"<br>
group, but there's a real risk that LA could be seen the same way.<br>
It's common for opponents of the FOSS movement to lump everyone in<br>
with the copy-far-left, even as Linux has become The Mainstream.<br>
<br>
Comparisons of the government of the day - or its policies - with<br>
$WW2_ERA_POLICY_OR_ORGANISATION tend to make an point easy to<br>
dismiss or ignore - regardless of its merit.<br>
<br>
If that's the most sophisticated argument we can produce to challenge<br>
the post-modern, neoliberal form of surveillance driven as much by<br>
institutional inertia as policy that we're seeing now, my personal<br>
opinion is that a contribution or expression of support from LA would<br>
not be productive[1].<br>
<br>
That's not to say that I'm not a supporter of the EFF, nor of its<br>
campaign, but there is some strategic value to organisations like LA<br>
being perceived to be centrist or neutral except where an issue directly<br>
relates to their charter.<br>
<br>
Daniel<br>
</blockquote></div>