[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Democratic Internet Failure
To whom it may concern:
I think that we may be in danger of allowing the Politically Correct to lead
us toward an Internet that fails to serve its primary user's best interests.
As a long time Internet user and as a citizen of the USA I'd like to see the
Internet remain under strong U.S. leadership. I don't find a good case for
having a worldwide democracy, either pure or representative, governing the
Internet at this stage of its deployment.
I am very concerned that a worldwide body of stakeholders / netizens would
not vote for issues that are important to me as a US citizen. I use the
Internet as a business tool and am pretty much satisfied with the way that
it works right now. I don't see that I, as a US citizen, have much to gain
from an Internet that is controlled by a simple majority vote of
stakeholders / netizens worldwide.
I think that any democratic model of Internet control needs to be biased
towards those who make the most (and therefore best) use of the Internet,
i.e. the USA, Australia, Canada, Britain, and Western Europe. I don't see
much use in having equal citizen representation from either repressed or
technologically challenged nations.
I think that talk of a worldwide stakeholder, one man one vote, style of
democratic or republican representative representation is quite politically
correct while being at the expense of practical expediency.
Stakeholders / Netizens / Internet Users should have the weight of their
arguments be in direct proportion to their current dependence upon the
Internet for commerce and information exchange. Thus, American, Canadian,
Western European, Australian and Japanese user votes should have a higher
weight/value than those of other less developed nations.
I will strongly defend American entrepreneurial Internet leadership over any
form of "democratic" or "republican" worldwide Internet control.