Net Neutrality & Information Tiananmen Square
If you were born after 1980, you may
have not heard of the Tiananmen Square protests. If you were to
now live in China, you may not know nor dare ask without
fear of acute consequence.
Governments have much power. If you, as I, feel as though powers here have recently become emboldened and unabashed with an agenda that does not include nor represent the best, healthiest and most common interests and concerns of the average American citizen, then read what can happen, what DID happen. And with government (and corporate) control of the dissemination of information, as we've seen ratcheted as of late, factual events can be wiped away as if they never occurred. Much of our conventionally taught history has already been shaped, fashioned and edited. Creationism is still taught in our schools today as if it has scientific groundings.
We've been well underway into a marvelously accessible and mostly open informational (and commercial) era. In America and most advanced nations, citizens are free to easily research, explore and discern truth from an infinite number of deliberately delivered sources. A rescinded neutral internet precept would begin the gradual downhill process of closing it.
We've witnessed mergers and acquisitions of major media organs, (AT&T--Time-Warner, Fox-Disney, National Geographic is now tied up as part of a Rupert Murdoch & Sons Fox/FX syndicate) not only calling into question anti-monopoly issues but also becoming aware that much of this march toward a new corporate cogency is according to strongly plied agendas that have less to do with humanity and sustainability than with short term gain and entrenched greed. There is scant concern for the broader welfare or common good of the people. It's my belief that it has even less ultimately to do with borders, patriotism or nationalism in any sense. Group think and team-playing tribalism responds to such rhetoric, however, and we continue to lap it up as readily as it's served to us on a subscription-bought spoon.
The Internet--this wondrous and heretofore relatively affordable facility is not invulnerable and can very quickly become limited, regulated, prohibitively priced and yes, policed.
Do you wonder why the present guard, who proudly tauts itself "anti-regulation" is seeing methodically to rescinding as many of these guidelines as "bad for business"? Why wouldn't seats of power here and abroad become dead set on regulating an open internet?
The time of this particular political season in which get involved has passed. Net Neutrality legislation had passed but has now been repealed.
We lost.
Governments have much power. If you, as I, feel as though powers here have recently become emboldened and unabashed with an agenda that does not include nor represent the best, healthiest and most common interests and concerns of the average American citizen, then read what can happen, what DID happen. And with government (and corporate) control of the dissemination of information, as we've seen ratcheted as of late, factual events can be wiped away as if they never occurred. Much of our conventionally taught history has already been shaped, fashioned and edited. Creationism is still taught in our schools today as if it has scientific groundings.
We've been well underway into a marvelously accessible and mostly open informational (and commercial) era. In America and most advanced nations, citizens are free to easily research, explore and discern truth from an infinite number of deliberately delivered sources. A rescinded neutral internet precept would begin the gradual downhill process of closing it.
We've witnessed mergers and acquisitions of major media organs, (AT&T--Time-Warner, Fox-Disney, National Geographic is now tied up as part of a Rupert Murdoch & Sons Fox/FX syndicate) not only calling into question anti-monopoly issues but also becoming aware that much of this march toward a new corporate cogency is according to strongly plied agendas that have less to do with humanity and sustainability than with short term gain and entrenched greed. There is scant concern for the broader welfare or common good of the people. It's my belief that it has even less ultimately to do with borders, patriotism or nationalism in any sense. Group think and team-playing tribalism responds to such rhetoric, however, and we continue to lap it up as readily as it's served to us on a subscription-bought spoon.
The Internet--this wondrous and heretofore relatively affordable facility is not invulnerable and can very quickly become limited, regulated, prohibitively priced and yes, policed.
Do you wonder why the present guard, who proudly tauts itself "anti-regulation" is seeing methodically to rescinding as many of these guidelines as "bad for business"? Why wouldn't seats of power here and abroad become dead set on regulating an open internet?
The time of this particular political season in which get involved has passed. Net Neutrality legislation had passed but has now been repealed.
We lost.
During the feverish 11th hour scramble to mobilise, we did call 1-202-418-1000 to reach the voicemail of the Chairman of the
FCC. Took 12 seconds. The fix was already in. We're losing our rights, our safety, our civility and the present climate (literally, as well as politically) is widdling away a promising future for our offspring and our one planet.
Read below not only of Tiananmen 30 years ago, but of China's repression to this day of its very presence within their arc of cultural history. Then attempt to successfully convince yourself and another that that very same phenomenon could never occur here. It may be a bigger challenge than what you anticipated.
The main reason for that is the abject evidence that within the Halls of Government, throughout the courts, throughout the corporate worlds and down your street that it's already underway.
“Democracy is direct self-government, over all the people, by all the people, for all the people.” ~Abraham Lincoln
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989
"Public memory of the Tiananmen Square protests has been suppressed by the authorities since 1989. Print media containing reference to the protests must be consistent with the government's version of events. Currently, many Chinese citizens are reluctant to speak about the protests because of potential repercussions. Rob Gifford held that many young people born after 1980 are unfamiliar with the events and are apathetic about politics while some older intellectuals no longer aspire for political change and instead focus on economic issues. Youth in China are generally unaware of the events that took place, of the symbols such as tank man,or of the significance of the date June 4 itself."
Read below not only of Tiananmen 30 years ago, but of China's repression to this day of its very presence within their arc of cultural history. Then attempt to successfully convince yourself and another that that very same phenomenon could never occur here. It may be a bigger challenge than what you anticipated.
The main reason for that is the abject evidence that within the Halls of Government, throughout the courts, throughout the corporate worlds and down your street that it's already underway.
“Democracy is direct self-government, over all the people, by all the people, for all the people.” ~Abraham Lincoln
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989
"Public memory of the Tiananmen Square protests has been suppressed by the authorities since 1989. Print media containing reference to the protests must be consistent with the government's version of events. Currently, many Chinese citizens are reluctant to speak about the protests because of potential repercussions. Rob Gifford held that many young people born after 1980 are unfamiliar with the events and are apathetic about politics while some older intellectuals no longer aspire for political change and instead focus on economic issues. Youth in China are generally unaware of the events that took place, of the symbols such as tank man,or of the significance of the date June 4 itself."
