Postaday for May 11th: New Internet Order. All the world’s countries have decided that the Internet itself needs a government. Your country asks you to run for Prime Minister of the ‘Net — do you accept? If so, what will your platform be?
House of Cards is an amazing TV show, (I’m talking about the made-for-Netflix version— I haven’t seen the BBC original yet) and I even liked the book it was based on. My wife and I have been binge-watching Scandal. Back when renting DVDs from brick and mortar stores was a thing, I plowed through as much of the West Wing as I could get my hands on. My point is, I really like watching political dramas. In other words, I graciously and without any doubts whatsoever refuse the offer to run for PM of the Internet.
And I’m pretty certain I’ll join whatever 5th column springs up once this “internet government” is formed.
When it comes to politics, at least in the United States, I’m more or less left-leaning. I don’t think I’m an extremist, but no one would ever confuse me for a conservative. I can’t see myself voting Republican, but that’s because our present two-party system inexorably intertwines fiscal, foreign, and moral policies. We rarely if ever have party candidates who’s ideals bridge the aisle.
That’s said, I do think the internet, right now, thrives under laissez-faire, and is furthermore healthier because no one country— or government— controls it. Unfortunately, a representative government requires citizen participation, which means potential leaders must advertise. Advertising costs money, and so big business, via donations, has too much to say in the process. If the internet DID come under the control of one government, the first thing to go would be Net Neutrality. I’m talking day-of.
I’m jaded, of course, and would not believe any prime ministerial candidate who claimed the new internet government would be fair and representative of everyone, rich or poor. Who pays for this government? And what is its agenda? Those two questions alone would render whatever the prime minister claims moot.
Don’t get me wrong, I recognize the need for government, and I am not calling for anarchy or the overthrow of our current leadership. Quite the contrary. But an internet government would only bog down what I feel is a self-regulating entity that thrives by allowing free expression. And while I know the internet can be used for foul purposes, so can pretty much anything. Attempting to eliminate malfeasance by creating government just makes perpetrators that more saavy when it comes to thwarting the people’s will.
However, in my house, I will gladly be the prime minister of the internet. I will confer with my constituents (my wife and children) and guide us to good internet usage. I will establish and enforce rules, and I will be subject to the people’s review of my leadership and step down if my wife decides she wants to be the one to choose our ISP.
Although in this town, we only have one ISP choice, and that’s just fomenting dictatorship.