Wednesday, June 02, 2010

Yes, 'Net Censorship is Here

RedState refers to those pushing "Net Neutrality" as neo-Marxists.

Why not? That's what they ARE!

...The neo-Marxists at Free Press promised us that Net Neutrality had nothing to do with censorship. But as I’ve warned, once the FCC did their Title II Deem and Pass reclassification of ISPs as phone companies, in direct contravention of the Telecommunications Act, censorship was fully within their reach.

Even as Republicans have come out strongly against the FCC’s excesses and opposition is even growing from House Democrats, with total opposition now accounting for a majority of the House, Free Press and their pet commissioner Michael Copps are trying to control the whole Internet in the name of preventing “hate speech.”

"Hate speech" is a PC construct. Like beauty, it is in the eye of the beholder, and inter alia requires mind-reading as part of the prosecution's case.

In other words, "hate speech" is bogus from front to back.

But it offers The LightWorker's controllers and minions what they want.

Control. Complete control.

George Bush never asked for this.

5 comments:

John Foust said...

You mean like the way the government is censoring your phone calls and electricity and water and sewer?

VSO said...

"You mean like the way the government is censoring your phone calls and electricity and water and sewer?"

There it is, the tired old liberal strawman. This is why liberals have no credibility: because of stupid comments like that.

And it's called "Cap and Trade".

John Foust said...

I don't think anyone will have any luck reinstating the Fairness Doctrine.

On the other hand, it's clear the big telecom companies have contributed greatly to many candidates, and they don't want their Internet services administrated by the FCC at all, even if it is subsuming old-style land-line telephone and cable TV.
The wingnuts are promoting this notion that neutrality of IP traffic will somehow lead to censorship, and the telecom companies don't mind at all.

neomom said...

Funny - I don't recall being censored on any of my phone calls. You must be on one helluva watch list John if they are personally monitoring and bleeping you out when you are talking to people.

I don't want my speech, or my healthcare to become a public utility, thanks.

And if you read the article, they are taking pains to ensure they aren't bringing back the Fairness Doctrine. What they are doing is far, far worse. Because they aren't talking about limiting free speech, but eliminating it.

John Foust said...

If Internet service was treated as a utility, then carriers wouldn't be able to filter traffic. The main thrust of "net neutrality" is insuring that your provider isn't filtering, censoring or prioritizing your Internet traffic, which these days could include what you might otherwise call telephone or television. If your neighborhood only has ATT or Time-Warner as your Internet provider, and they both decided they weren't going to allow blogger.com traffic, what would your alternative be for visiting this web site?