“Our job is to make media reform part of our broader struggle for democracy, social justice, and, dare we say it, socialism.”
There is NOTHING NEUTRAL about the Net Neutrality rules being imposed by the FCC vote and ruling yesterday. While the ignorantly gullible and emoting public gobbles up words the Oligarchs and Marxists use to sell it as ‘fairness’ and ‘cheaper’ – the actual architects and movers and shakers of the rules imposed by the FCC and FEC yesterday had completely different motives. ‘Net Neutrality’ is just a sell word – same as the “Affordable Care Act” was used to push the complete takeover of the healthcare system via ObamaCare.
While we already have learned everything we do on the Internet is spied on by the NSA, catalogued and stored by the various Alphabets at Mordor On The Potomac, the same generation that went berserk over learning GW Bush ordered incoming international cell phone calls from overseas tapped – are jumping for joy over the FCC takeover of the internet whose rules are STILL being kept secret as I write this. In short – they are cheering the takeover, taxation and restriction of their own playground. Once the consequences of yesterday hit them, and broadband across the board slows to dial-up speed, who will they be directed to hate for that? Will they demand Obama nationalize AT&T, Verizon and Comcast? They certainly are not going to blame Obama or government. I know – blame Republicans, probably talking points are already written for that.
‘Net Neutrality’ as a term is as Orwellian as anything we have ever heard before. The operative word of what happened yesterday is not NEUTRALITY, but NEUTRALIZE – as in to neutralize all non-‘progressive’ (i.e.: Marxist/Fascist) ideas from the internet and media. Neutralize the average American from internet access by fees, taxes and fines upon everything they do on the internet. Neutralize Capitalism from the internet.
Sound crazy? Those are the words of one of the main architects of the top secret plans the Leftists strong armed the FCC to impose by fiat. Consider it a Socialist-run purge of the internet. Their ultimate goal is banning and restricting content and limiting communication that poses a threat to the Ruling Class Tyrants in power and the various bogus agendas they push. For now, it is about getting the media giants into the control of government and micromanaging how the internet itself runs and what can be charged for it so a ridiculous treasure-trove of untapped revenue can be streamed into the greedy hands of government via taxes and fees for everything that happens online. Imagine having to pay taxes, or a ‘digital postage stamp’ on every e-mail you send and how much data you upload or download. The requirement of a digital ID before you can get online. Those things are coming, they were made possible yesterday. Today they set up the bureaucracy and target revenue streams.
Tomorrow, it is about silencing dissent.
Oppose the Climate Change and Global Warming hoax? The net will be devoid of any dissent. Anything that supports actual science instead of their agenda will be scrubbed and removed.
Support a political position or candidate that is not a Socialist/Marxist Ruling Class Oligarch? That will fall under FEC campaign rules and the fees and fines and reporting duties are so onerous and mind boggling – the IRS scandal that targeted Conservative groups will seem like child’s play.
This people have absolutely no clue or idea what happened to them yesterday as the velvet coup marches on to impose the MarxoFascist ‘Utopia’ on a nation these evil beings seek to punish and destroy.
Comrades for Net Neutrality
The powers behind the FCC’s muscling of the Internet
Today’s vote by a bitterly divided Federal Communications Commission that the Internet should be regulated as a public utility is the culmination of a decade-long battle by the Left. Using money from George Soros and liberal foundations that totaled at least $196 million, radical activists finally succeeded in ramming through “net neutrality,” or the idea that all data should be transmitted equally over the Internet. The final push involved unprecedented political pressure exerted by the Obama White House on FCC chairman Tom Wheeler, head of an ostensibly independent regulatory body.
“Net neutrality’s goal is to empower the federal government to ration and apportion Internet bandwidth as it sees fit, and to thereby control the Internet’s content,” says Phil Kerpen, an anti-net-neutrality activist from the group American Commitment.
The courts have previously ruled the FCC’s efforts to impose “net neutrality” out of bounds, so the battle isn’t over. But for now, the FCC has granted itself enormous power to micromanage the largely unrestrained Internet.
Back in the 1990s, the Clinton administration teamed up with Internet pioneers to promote a hands-off approach to the new industry and keep it free from discriminatory taxation. Many still prefer that policy. Nicholas Negroponte, founder of the MIT Media Lab and the charity One Laptop Per Child, says that net neutrality “doesn’t make sense” because “the truth is, not all bits [of data] are created equal.”
Will Marshall, head of the Progressive Policy Institute (which was once a favorite think tank of Clinton Democrats), issued a statement that net neutrality “endorses a backward-looking policy that would apply the brakes to the most dynamic sector of America’s economy.”
But such voices have been drowned out by left-wing activists who want to manage the Internet to achieve their political objectives. The most influential of these congregate around the deceptively named Free Press, a liberal lobby co-founded in 2002 by Robert McChesney, a University of Illinois communications professor.
His goals have always been clear. “At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies,” he told the website SocialistProject in 2009. “But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control.” Earlier in 2000, he told the Marxist magazine Monthly Review: “Our job is to make media reform part of our broader struggle for democracy, social justice, and, dare we say it, socialism.” When I interviewed him in 2010, he admitted he is a socialist and said he was “hesitant to say I’m not a Marxist.”
In essence, what McChesney and his followers want is an Unfree Press — a media world that promotes their values. “To cast things in neo-Marxist terms that they could appreciate, they want to take control of the information means of production,” says Adam Therier of the blog TechLiberation.
Certainly McChesney seems blind to the dangers of media control on the left. In 2007, he co-authored a remarkable survey of the media under Hugo Chávez’s already clearly thuggish regime in Venezuela: “Aggressive, unqualified political dissent is alive and well in the Venezuelan mainstream media, in a manner few other democratic nations have ever known, including our own.”
Despite his astonishingly radical goals, McChesney’s Free Press group was able to leverage foundation cash and academic “research” into an influential force behind net neutrality. Julius Genachowski, President Obama’s first FCC chairman, hired Free Press’s Jen Howard as his press secretary. The FCC’s chief diversity officer, Mark Lloyd, has co-authored a Free Press report demanding regulation of political talk radio. The FCC’s National Broadband Plan cited research from Free Press and other left-wing groups backing net neutrality more than 50 times.
The battle for control of the Internet isn’t over. Over two-thirds of the House and Senate are on record as opposing FCC regulation of the Internet, and a new president could change the policy overnight in 2017 even if the courts don’t block it.
But for now, the “media reform” movement led by McChesney and his allies can claim bragging rights for their Saul Alinsky–style outflanking maneuver on Internet regulation. They financed the research behind the idea, installed their political allies in power, got the government to consider them experts on the issues they cared deeply about, and finally ran roughshod over both Congress and an initially reluctant FCC chairman. Conservatives should study how the Left won on this issue even as they acknowledge and fight the illegitimacy of many of the results.