<div dir="ltr"><div>> I hadn't considered this angle. It's very much a case of </div><div>> "know your audience," </div><div><br></div><div>Indeed. I hadn't considered this either before I spent more time here. <span style="line-height:1.5">In general I'd say the order of positive perception goes: </span><span style="line-height:1.5">anti-corruption > human-rights > democracy</span></div><div><br></div><div>I'll give you this establishment vs activist perspective.</div><div><br></div><div>* The establishment perspective:</div><div>-- Their main goals are (1) increase GDP and (2) prevent revolt. Corruption is a known issue in the asia-pacific that both decreases GDP as well as increases societal dissatisfaction and with it risk of revolt. Ergo, corruption is *super bad*. To give an example, the benevolent dictator of Singapore, Lee Kwan Yew, wore a white uniform every day to remind himself that "a white garment, once sullied, is very difficult to make clean again." And this is a fellow who was adamantly against freedom-of-the-press.</div><div><br></div><div>Assuming they are against the free-press, odds are likely you'd have to sell them something like a "government office of whistleblowing", and documents leaked will goto both (1) the govt whistleblowing office and (2) the press. And then the press will be embargoed to report on any received documents for a week or two so that the govt has time to their ducks in a row when the media reports on it.</div><div><br></div><div>Emotionally speaking, the above whistle-blowing site is decidedly unsatisfying, but it's something you could get an authoritarian regime to actually *support* instead of hunt down. And you know, that's a significant step forward.</div><div><br></div><div>-- They will see human-rights as just a subset of anti-corruption. E.g., if factory workers are mistreated, it's likely that govt inspectors are being paid off somewhere. And the govt would want to find those inspectors.</div><div><br></div><div>-- democracy: almost third-rail. Democracy movements greatly increase risk of (2), which they are adamantly against.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>* The grassroots activist perspective:</div><div>-- they've dealt with bribes, etc. And it is immensely demoralizing. Saying they keep their money as well as call officials into account is deeply satisfying.</div><div><br></div><div>-- human-rights plays better with this group. It's entirely reasonable they will know someone who has had to suffer through terrible working conditions or unjust treatment. This is a fine place to pitch human rights.</div><div><br></div><div>-- Would still stay away from democracy. If they are not already pro-democracy, it's unlikely you're going to convert them here. In general, pro-democracy movements are far more likely to cramped down on by authorities than "relatively innocuous" causes like anti-corruption and human rights. Publicly being pro-democracy greatly increases their risk of antagonizing local powers against them.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>My two cents from living in the Asia Pacific and getting a sense for how the power structures work,</div><div>-Virgil</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 6:18 AM Kenneth Freeman <<a href="mailto:kencf0618@riseup.net">kencf0618@riseup.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
<br>
On 10/16/2015 01:01 PM, Michael Zandi wrote:<br>
> On 10/16/2015 02:12 PM, Virgil Griffith wrote:<br>
>> In general when I talk with leadership outside the anglosphere, they are<br>
>> much more interested in increasing GDP than rights. And they are well<br>
>> aware that corruption damages their effectiveness at home as well as<br>
>> perception abroad. And in these areas I've had much more success in<br>
>> selling Tor as an anti-corruption tool.<br>
><br>
> That's good to know and consider. In your experience, can bringing up<br>
> human rights/democracy issues alongside corruption issues hurt more than<br>
> it helps? If so, when?<br>
><br>
> It's plausible that you can have people on board when you talk about<br>
> anti-corruption, but lose them if you mention democracy/anonymity, so it<br>
> would be good to know when to especially be aware of this.<br>
<br>
I hadn't considered this angle. It's very much a case of "know your<br>
audience," but Tor is a knife which can cut pork as well as beef.<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
tor-teachers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:tor-teachers@lists.torproject.org" target="_blank">tor-teachers@lists.torproject.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-teachers" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-teachers</a><br>
</blockquote></div>