Ever wonder what it’s like to live in Venezuela? You may not have to pack your bags. That’s because with the FCC’s release of its 350-page broadband plan, the freedom needle is moving further away from our “protected” First Amendment rights and closer to a situation where government controls the message—in other words, indoctrination.
In the FCC’s report, two words above all others stand out: “ecosystem” and “transparency.” They have dangerous implications.
By using the word “ecosystem,” the FCC implies that the companies involved in the Internet should exist within a controlled utopia rather than a vibrant market benefiting from the chaos of competition.
And by using the word “transparency,” the FCC implies that it would have the authority to look into what makes each company more competitive than the other. In other words, the FCC could use that information to level the playing field.
The result will be a mediocre Internet at best, and indoctrination of your grandchildren at worst.
George Gilder had this to say in his WSJ editorial Tuesday, titled “Cap and Trade for the Internet”: “The FCC’s new regulatory regime amounts to a kind of cap and trade for the Internet: It will cap Internet growth and restrict Internet trade. The likely winners are lawyers and special interests leeching off the telecom and Internet industries.”
The WSJ’s Review & Outlook column “Broadband Trojan Horse” points out the following about Obama friend and FCC chairman Julius Genachowski: “Mr. Genachowski wants more control over broadband providers so that he can implement ‘net neutrality’ rules that would dictate how AT&T, Verizon and other Internet service providers manage their networks.”
In the end, if the FCC gets its way, we’ll be more like Venezuela. Just a lot colder.
