• Home
• Reviews
• News
• Downloads
• CNET TV

About me

My posting summary

1 to 1 of 1

My comments

• Better Question: What does "free" mean?
  This is the "Who-owns-the-airwaves?" debate transferred to cyber space. The answer is: No one--but broadcasters DO own the equipment and, by extension, their broadcast signals. Piggybacking on broadcaster signals is like squatting on private property. It's wrong--a clear violation of any individual's property rights, said rights beginning with one's own life, i.e., body & mind.
  
  Now we have the same type of "squatting proposal" that gave rise to the Fairness Doctrine (among other forms of censorship) in broadcasting, except it's called "Net Neutrality"--that is, when it comes to property rights in cyber space, there are none. It should be called, for accuracy sake, "Rights Neutral."
  
  Cyber space is open to all who wish to investment in the necessary infra-structure costs to become an ISP. That infrastructure and the "roadway" it lays on the Net is *private property." Those who wish to loot that wealth in the name of "fairness" haven't clue one about the meaning nor the application of justice.
  
  Net Neutrality is a license to steal--to steal the billions of infrastructure created by Comcast, Cox, Time-Warner, etc.--and then to censor them by limiting their choices of what they may or may not send out (or limit) over/on their "broadcast signal."
  
  Democracy is a very old and very failed form of political philosophy. Our Founding Fathers did *not* create a democracy when they wrote the Constitution. They knew history and knew well its failure. They create a Constitutionally limited (by property rights, including individual rights), democratic republic--with "democratic" strictly contextualized to mean the electorate (and their representatives) are to be checked & balanced AND trumped by the rights of the individual, whether that individual is a man or a corporation (of men).
  
  If you want to see real Internet regulation, taxation and eventual censorship, just allow the FCC this toehold. Give a rat a cookie--and he'll next want a glass o milk.
  
  As for academe's who support this trash, someone opined a few years ago, after the Soviet Union crashed & burned, that the only sanctuary left for Marxism was America's universityies.
  
  As for the rich who declare their support of the State--whether it's increasing taxes, maintaining capital gains or inheritance taxes, establishing forced volunteerism or net neutrality--well, Hitler had his Krupps and Voglers.
  
  And we have our Soros's, Buffets, Gates's & Newmarks's.

  February 24, 2008

  2 replies