 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
He said he does not support network neutrality, the concept that telecommunications companies should be restricted from controlling broadband access to the detriment of Web companies like Google, nor does he support tech-friendly immigration reforms in Congress recently.
I think Ron Paul is misinformed about Net Neutrality.
The conflict exists between those who wish to exclude and those who wish to liberate. Those who wish to exclude are people who have access to the State in order to protect their monopoly of power over internet content. Those who wish to include are those who wish to ensure that those who wish to exclude do not have access to the State as a means of excluding.
In other words; if the companies wanting to maintain their power to exclude content, at their discretion, on the internet were not petitioning the State for protection or security of their power to exclude content, then, there would be no such thing as Net Neutrality - it would be left to purely market forces.
If I am right and Ron Paul is still against Net Neutrality, then, Ron Paul contradicts his stated principle of liberty.
I perceive the need to reiterate: Proponents of Net Neutrality simply want the State to keep their hands off the internet and DO NOT ENFORCE CENSORSHIP.
In other words; leave the people with the power to censor themselves.
Think about this, please, if anyone is commiting a form of crime on the interent, then, a Net Neutral internet leaves the evidence of those crimes trackable. This is the same old truth versus the same old falacy of crime and punishment. Punishing innocent people for crimes commited by guilty people is merely a means of punishming innocent people. Criminals do not abide by laws; by definition.
Is that hard to understand? Criminals do not abide by laws.
I can look further into Net Neutrality; however - I don't think this issue deserves much attention because censorship of the internet (by the State) isn't going to happen. I think it is impossible. I think internet censorship by the STATE is as impossible as making time go backwards or reassembling all the molecules blown apart during the Atomic Explosions in Japan in 1945.
Last edited on Sun Jul 15th, 2007 02:00 pm by Joe Kelley