Cybersecurity or Cyberfascism?

Once again, the internet is under attack. The Senate has proposed a new bill that would give the federal government vast and unprecedented control over the internet. We've seen this before. This is another in a long line of attempts to reign in the last bastion of free expression. Almost all of the media is already in the government's pocket, with cable news and newspapers alike diligently toeing the party line. With talks about reimposing the Fairness Doctrine, talk radio will likely soon follow.

The internet is one of the few places where government really lacks a foothold, and this drives the power hungry politicians in Washington crazy. Unlike previous attempts at regulation, however, this bill does not seek to merely tax or censor internet content. I'm afraid it goes far deeper than that. The proposal, known as the Cybersecurity Act of 2009, would actually give the President the power to "shut down internet traffic" in the event of a national security crisis. Yes, you read that right: "shut down internet traffic."

Now we all know that "in the event of a national security crisis" is political code for "whenever we feel like it." The implications of such unrestricted government authority are simply staggering. Since the administration has already branded Ron Paul supporters, gun owners, gold purchasers and veterans as potential terrorists, you can imagine how quickly these folks will be silenced. The very fact that the internet was used to organize last week's Tea Parties seems to have sent the administration into a semi-panicked rage, so it's not surprising that they want to shut it down.

In addition, the Cybersecurity Act of 2009 would give the President access to tons of information from banks and other industries that is simply none of his business. In case you haven't noticed a pattern yet, this new administration is trying to grab power in every major industry in the country. Where will it end? Only time will tell, but I believe they will not rest until they have complete control of business, and that translates to complete control over your life.

While we're on the subject of Net Neutrality, I have a few things to say about censorship. On Bill O'Reilly's show last night, the host launched into yet another rant on the dangers of the internet,decrying the ability of children to access pornography. Now don't get me wrong, I like Bill O'Reilly. I find him entertaining and often insightful, but he has long complained about the "chaotic" staatee of the internet, and on the subject he is dead wrong.

I think the misconception that the internet is for kids arose as a result of the prominence of simple, kid friendly games in the early days of computing. Back then, people associated computers with things like Pong. But the internet is not for children, indeed, it is both as dangerous and as exhilarating as the streets of New York City. Sure, there's FAO Schwartz, but you wouldn't let your child wander around in there all alone, would you?

The problem arises when parents try to use the internet as a babysitter. What we need to focus on is not more regulation, but rather educating the public about the realities of the internet. As with any great tool, there is the potential for abuse, but where O'Reilly and others go wrong is that you can't outlaw or overregulate everything that is dangerous. Instead, you have to punish the bad behavior as it occurs. A hammer can be used to kill, but no one suggests regulating the sale of hammers. We simply have a law that punishes people who do use them to kill.

Now with the internet under threat of, at worst, extinction or at best, stultification, it is important that we all speak out in its defense. Now perhaps I am overreacting, as I find it unlikely that the Senate bill will pass, but the President is considering offering his own proposal on the subject. I expect that such a counteroffer will be mildly less intrusive, therefore prompting lawmakers to react with an "at least it's not as bad as that other bill" attitude and pass it. I can only hope that the vast willpower and organizational talents of internet users will rise up to make such regulation politically suicidal.