Speaking of free speech, I’m trying to make sense over what Houlin Zhao, director of the ITU’s Telecommunication Standardization Bureau, said about the Internet:
People say the Internet flourished because of the absence of government control. I do not agree with this view. I argue that in any country, if the government opposed Internet service, how do you get Internet service? If there are any Internet governance structure changes in the future, I think government rules will be more important and more respected.
(Via Glenn Reynolds.)
OK. Late last night I copied the above quote. I thought that it made no sense, but I figured what the hell, I’m tired, and tomorrow morning I’ll immediately understand.
I’ve had two cups of coffee now, and I’m at more of a loss to understand it than I was last night. This man — who wants to run the Internet via the United Nations — is wholly unable to distinguish between government controls and the absence of government controls! Thus, he says, “if the government opposed Internet service, how do you get Internet service?” Such a mindset assumes that government must be everything — an all-seeing, all-knowing entity which must grant or deny permission before anything can happen.
The reason I can’t understand the man’s thinking is because it is not thinking. It’s a circular mass of mindless totalitarianism run amok.
And these people want to take over the Internet?
Why, yes.
Obviously, it all makes sense — to them.
And if we let them, they will!
Comments
3 responses to “Making sense now?”
I think what he was trying to say, was that the Internet exists and flourishes because of certain laws and government programs that make it possible and usable; and that it could not exist without active government intervention. Of course, this is simple historical fact, and one wouldn’t need to read this guy’s drivel to learn it.
Hmm …
I just read it as a comment from someone who does not understand that economic centralization is the death of innovation. In a society dominated by a Conservative hegemony, economic control is the exclusive provenance of the ownership classes. This leaves little incentive for knowledge workers and others to innovate, since they are excluded from getting any of the benefits from the innovation.
“I argue that in any country, if the government opposed Internet service, how do you get Internet service?”
I don’t know how, but people do.
And yeah, the Internet would not exist in its current form without DARPANEt preceding it. But something would. At the least, BBS-type systems.
—-
But this bustard (a type of game bird, and he deserves to be hunted) is arguing that since government (ie, the US government) intervened to connect a bunch of previously unconnected telephone-line data transmissions, governments (especially the UN) should control such transmissions. Nope. The hardware maybe, to some extent, but NOT THE CONTENT!