What did Hillary Clinton teach us about vulnerability? She has never been vulnerable. Ever.
To see just how invincible she is, watch [The New] Clinton Chronicles to the end, and you will see an unbelievably long list -- like the never ending movie credits following a film -- of the people who mysteriously died before they could fulfill their commitment to testify against her.
How can somebody with that much protection be vulnerable in any way? The answer is simple: Lack of privacy.
Don't get me wrong. As a former law instructor at West Point I concur with the majority of scholars who will tell you that every email she ever wrote in her capacity as Secretary of State was and is a public record -- which must be stored and disclosed as such. My point is:
If such a powerful person as Killary (or Hillary if you like her) could NOT KEEP what she wanted to keep private private -- then what chance have the rest of us got?
When things get that extreme, things change. They have to.
And I think the solution will be something like what the ZenCash project is trying to bring about. I'm not trying here to give an advertisement for ZenCash. This is not a promotional post. It is a post with a genuine heartfelt question: If someone as powerful as Killary can have their "secrets" revealed? How safe are the rest of us?
This post is going to be blockchained forever. That's appropriate on a public post. But what if I just want to say something very private to only one specific person? Is my status as a lowly unknown nearly-powerless citizen "enough" to make it "right" for the powerful to snoop on me?
If people start to worry about that, they are going to want encryption. If that leads to ZenCash becoming "in demand," it will be because ordinary people around the world -- not hoodlums, not drug-traffickers (the non-CIA-type), not money launderers (who doesn't love Ozark?), but ordinary folks who just want the government to "let them be" -- will have DECIDED that they want to DO SOMETHING to protect their privacy.
Think about how important privacy is. Just for a moment. Despite the fact that the word "privacy" does not appear anywhere in the United States Constitution, the Supreme Court -- who's job is to decide what "the Constitution says" -- ruled in a series of decisions that culminated in Roe v. Wade that the Constitution gives people a "right to privacy." Which is fundamental. Like the right to live.
So what Killary may really have taught us, by showing us that nobody but nobody can escape the consequences of having "supposedly private" communications broadcast. And even more importantly, that not even the most assisted, privileged, supported, feared, and powerful of people on the planet can really hide anything.
This is not right. This is not life. I am truly hopeful that privacy -- the genuine kind the ZenCash project is trying to preserve (or create?) for us -- will be a simple fact of life in the future.
So -- to that ideal, I propose a toast!
If you're willing to say "cheers," vote!
Best Regards