Prompted by “How Putin Tried To Control the Internet”: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/10/14/1629207/how-putin-tried-to-control-the-internet
In this excerpt from the recently published The Red Web, Andrei Soldatov and Irina Borogan describe how the Kremlin has been trying to rewrite the rules for the internet to make it “secure” as it is understood by Russia’s secret services. “Vladimir Putin was certain that all things in the world—including the internet—existed with a hierarchical, vertical structure. He was also certain that the internet must have someone controlling it at the top. He viewed the United States with suspicion, thinking the Americans ruled the web and that it was a CIA project. Putin wanted to end that supremacy. Just as he attempted to change the rules inside Russia, so too did he attempt to change them for the world. The goal was to make other countries, especially the United States, accept Russia’s right to control the internet within its borders, to censor or suppress it completely if the information circulated online in any way threatened Putin’s hold on power.”
One of the greatest dangers we face during the continued excessive apathy by the masses is the refusal to defend the Internet from being abusively oligarchically controlled.
Too many people fail to care about abusive oligarchical dominance that can only be remedied by the sufficiently organized masses (as successful revolutions reveal).
No doubt the best tool for that organization is the Internet, at least as any flash mob can attest.
Humanity (like any species) is constantly being tested for its survival worthiness, and I’m concerned that stupidity is just too dominant in this case.
There basically hasn’t been more nationalizing of Internet boundaries, so words expressed here strictly only reach national minds by default. Then for trans-national communication across those boundaries, a passport (basically a digital key) would be required and factored into the expression (including website content) to determine its international reach. Thankfully, stupidity (e.g. pitiful international conflicts between oligarchies) has so far prevented that globally oligarchical implementation, but obviously we can’t rely upon that remaining the case (e.g. see real passport system already in use).
Reason abuse runs rampant globally and there’s no sign of reversal sadly. While drugs, guns, sex, and so on are blamed for the world’s woes (by the oligarchy “benefiting” from their disastrous prohibitions, so upheld by the excessively brainwashed masses), the truth remains that abuse is compensation for unhealthy stress.
That stress too often comes from individuals being misfits within the excessively rigid structures insisted upon being upheld by the masses to serve and protect their oligarchy (intentionally or otherwise). Doesn’t sound very American, by the way? That’s true, but our nation has dismissed true Americanism (the form supposedly preventing the abuse of law) from the beginning in favor of risk defined by our oligarchy spanning the public and private sectors. To define risk is to define liberty, and that fact crushes any notion that the obligatory and unalienable right to liberty (true progressivism that logically should have instantly ended slavery, racism overall, sexual discrimination, certain drug use discrimination, etc.) is being upheld.
When you choose supporting the public sector over the private sector (or vice versa), you empower the oligarchy overall and that’s obviously what the oligarchy wants (there really is no sector line when it comes to power — that line is merely a distraction).
The truest intra-humanity power struggle is the one between the oligarchy and the masses, but the latter excessively has been unable to organize enough to seize this window of opportunity (e.g. internationally massive online communities that advocate peace, but are prepared to defend Internet freedom by any means necessary — including a flash mob of millions of well-armed citizens ensuring any abusive oligarchy falls fast and hard).
Part of the aforementioned test is whether or not the masses will continue to buy into the idiocy that losing control over Internet expression is necessary to protect the children (etc.)
I know where I stand (and where our nation is also supposed to stand upon embracing consistency and logic for fairness, so justice), but I’m afraid excessive apathy (and the horrific amounts of corruption rippling harshly throughout society as a result) continues to press powerfully hard towards allowing the slowly adapting oligarchical forces shocked by rapid Internet success to seize control of your expression and delete it — or edit it (e.g. this) to oligarchical satisfaction.
Power to the people is power to the righteous oligarchy. I have no problem with a ruling hierarchy, but I do have a problem with the top of the hierarchy not promptly being addressed upon abusive behavior (so causing unhealthy stress to severe devastation putting at least our species at serious risk). The historical evidence of oligarchical abuse is ample, and serves as a powerful warning for our species (one being excessively idiotically ignored at terrible risk).
The true top of the ultimate human hierarchy must be the sufficiently organized masses, but too many of us refuse to honor that duty. Any effort to disrupt that organization is the most serious attack against humanity (obviously including the children), and we are all to blame for that effort.
The only answer to fear is ultimately courage, so my aforementioned fear must be translated to strengthen our just stand.