1) So, I'm just going to come right out and say this: I'm against an internet bill of rights. Not because I'm against the Bill of Rights, but because an Internet Bill of Rights is the exact OPPOSITE of the Bill of Rights as enshrined in our constitution.
(sorry, work distracted me) 2) The Bill of Rights in our constitution were all laid out and designed to LIMIT the authority of the government. Each one drew lines in the sand over what the government could not infringe upon, over how the government must behave with its citizens.
3) The Internet Bill of Rights, as the idea is often portrayed, is the idea of forcing corporations to interact with its userbase in the same way that the government interacts with citizens. Guaranteeing free speech, data collection, etc.
4) Here's the problem: Why in the absolute hell should we trust the government to create a Bill of Rights when the government has been working hand in hand with the internet tech giants to cause the situation that we're in in the first place?
5) Government agencies like the NSA already violate our protection against unreasonable searches and seizures by having access to Facebook, Yahoo, Google, etc's user data. We've known about that shit since 2009. theguardian.com/world/2013/jun…
6) In fact, given the universal deplatforming of Infowars, it is now BLATANTLY apparent that these tech giants are all working in one massive trust, and it is entirely reasonable to presume that over the past decade Facebook, Google, etc have all worked hand in hand with the gov
7) To grow INTO being one massive data-sharing trust. What incentive does the government have to insert language into an Internet Bill of Rights that would stop this? What incentive do the NSA or the internet tech giants have to follow such a rule if it were created?
8) In the late 90's, United States vs Microsoft, the potential internet tech giant Microsoft was cut off at the knees for engaging in monopolistic behavior. Notice what corporation, as a result, is NOT on the commonly referred to lists of abusive internet tech giants.
9) The situation we're in now has been the result of straight up crony capitalism between the Obama administration and internet tech giants. See Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, Tim Cook is a straight up never-Trumper. For a decade they were allowed to become literal trusts.
10) Quite frankly, we do not NEED an Internet Bill of Rights. We already have the Bill of Rights. What we NEED is for the government to use the tools that are already available to it and actually take down the internet tech giants as the trusts and monopolies which they are.
11) What we NEED is for the crony capitalism to end, for the relationships between internet tech giants and the government to be severed, and for the trusts and monopolies that have been allowed to thrive on the internet to be broken up
12) So that they don't have the ability to destroy and deplatform conservatives.
Think about this:
Let's say we DO get an Internet Bill of Rights that allows the government to regulate internet tech giants more thoroughly, instead of breaking them up.
Think about this:
Let's say we DO get an Internet Bill of Rights that allows the government to regulate internet tech giants more thoroughly, instead of breaking them up.
13) What doesn't that prevent?
These same corporations can still deplatform and collude to shut out competitors from a market held captive by their overwhelming market shares.
This doesn't stop the abusive collection of private data and the involuntary nature of the collection.
These same corporations can still deplatform and collude to shut out competitors from a market held captive by their overwhelming market shares.
This doesn't stop the abusive collection of private data and the involuntary nature of the collection.
14) Instead, it gives the government MORE power, and it gives the government MORE control. The Internet Bill of Rights is basically Net Neutrality 2.0, government overreach that hijacks peoples fear of censorship and privacy invasions so they can do it MORE.
15) Fuck that. Fuck your fear. Screw giving the government more power. The fact that we've REACHED this point is proof that the government is unable to be trusted with the power that it has, because it allowed this situation to exist in the first place.
16) So yeah. Here's my libertarian no step on snek flag waving here. No new powers to the government. If they want to regain trust, the Sessions DoJ needs to use the Sherman Antitrust Act it already has in its arsenal, and the government needs to stop warrantless data collection
/end
