The Internet Isn't Going Away

I hear the following conspiracy theory frequently circulated. Allegedly, there's a new law that gives the President the ability to shut down the Internet for any reason. The bad guys are threatened by people who learn about freedom via the Internet. Allegedly, day a month ago when Facebook and Twitter went down was the bad guys testing their "Shut down the Internet!" technology.

This is silly. There are too many businesses that depend on the Internet. If the bad guys shut down Twitter or FaceBook or other popular sites, then they'll offend *EVERYONE*. Twitter can be used to spread the truth. Most of the time, Twitter is used for meaningless nonsense. You can't stop the truth without also shutting down the nonsense.

There are too many businesses that depend on the Internet. The telecommunication corporations and mainstream media corporations would love to censor or cripple the Internet. Corporations like Google are lobbying to keep an open Internet. Both sides are spending a lot of money lobbying. When *BOTH* sides on an important issue have deep pockets, then the issue is decided on its merits. Contrast this with the psychiatry/death industry. There, pharmaceutical corporations have deep pockets, but the anti-psychiatry advocates have no budget. Therefore, the bad guys win on that issue. The homicide industry is 100% legal.

It's much more convenient to spy on what everyone is doing, instead of outright shutting down the Internet. Fortunately, the volume of content on the Internet is so large. Any automated spying software would either have too many false positives that it's useless, or too many false negatives that it's missing important things. If the bad guys decided "We should spy on FSK!", they could do it. Figuring out who you should investigate is hard. Do I have dangerous forbidden knowledge, or am I some harmless fruitcake blogger?

If the bad guys want to shut down Twitter or Facebook, it's very easy to dispatch a group of armed thugs to their offices and shut it down. Of course, that would annoy a lot of people if it were done frivolously. It's much easier to let them operate, but require them to turn over information as requested.

Technology is neither good nor evil. It's the means for which it's used that is important. The bad guys are trying to use the Internet for evil, spying on people. The Internet also allows people to share the truth. At this point, enough people are aware of the truth that it's impractical to arrest/kidnap/kill all of them. Based on my analysis, the quality and volume of free market thinking on the Internet is greater than a year ago.

Too many people are using the Internet now. If there was an attempt to shut down the Internet, that would make a *LOT* of people very angry. There are enough people who profit from an open Internet, that it should continue.

Was an open Internet a historic anomaly? Was it deliberately introduced to allow people to share information directly and bypass mainstream media censorship? Or, did the bad guys make a huge error by allowing people access to computers and the Internet?

Computers and the Internet are valuable tools. Without the Internet, I would not have been able to learn about agorism and really free markets. You might be concerned "The bad guys will assault or kidnap me if I write about the truth on the Internet!" So far, that hasn't happened.

The State is merely composed of individuals. Whenever you spread the truth in person, a pro-State troll parasite nearly always silences you. When you spread the truth on the Internet, you can share the truth with less disruption. Parasites are almost everywhere, which creates the illusion of State omnipotence and omniscience. As a child, whenever you questioned the false beliefs of adults or teachers, you were always rudely silenced. As an adult, this leads to the fear "The police will raid me whenever I contradict official State propaganda!"

That's one reason I started my own blog. On a forum or wiki, it's very easy for parasites to disrupt the discussion. On my own blog, I have full editorial control. If you don't like it, start your own blog!

In order for the State to arrest/kidnap/kill me, some State enforcer must conclude "FSK is a threat and must be eliminated!" *AND* that State enforcer must convince his colleagues that I am dangerous. Once the power of the State is focused against me, I have a problem, but getting the State violence engine to start moving is difficult. Any State enforcer who is so trigger happy would probably have a short career. The goal of any State enforcer is to avoid personal risk that could ruin your career. Pursing an articulate person like me for a non-crime could be very embarrassing. Therefore, State agents pursue softer targets than me.

People have an unreasonable fear of the State. It's a symptom of the Matrix and pro-State brainwashing. In the USA at least, writing about the truth is not considered a crime. If I attempt to act on my beliefs, then I am taking a greater risk.