Looking Up at the Sky

Over on the Apex Magazine blog, Gustavo Bondoni posted a something about ToC Fail.  There was plenty of fail in Gustavo’s post, and the comments erupted.  It inspired posts by Athena Andreadis and Jesse Bullington (there are others, I know, but Athena and Jesse’s posts are the only ones I’ve read to date) on their own blogs, and the comments and arguments continued there.  Jason Sizemore offered an apology for Gustavo’s post and Athena is writing a response.  It’s rumbling on, the way these things do.

Something that came up, and something that always seems to come up in these discussions, is freedom of speech.  Both sides with almost inevitably say something along the lines of, ‘I can say what I want and trying to stop me is censorship’.

To be frank, I find this an insultingly US-centric attitude.

I don’t have freedom of speech.  People in China don’t, in Iran, Germany, France the list of countries where unfettered freedom of speech isn’t a right guaranteed by their government goes on.  To stomp around saying, ‘I have freedom of speech and you can’t stop me’ is insulting to all those people who live in countries who don’t have that guaranteed right.  Even more to those whose governments will actively prosecute them.

But that’s not the point.  The point is that the Internet isn’t the United States of America.  Rights guaranteed by the US constitution don’t apply on the Internet.

The Internet is a private space.  Every single webpage is owned and maintained by an individual or company.  Every single individual or company who own a webpage is answerable to the laws of their country.  They’re answerable to the people who host their website.  They’re answerable to their service provider.  Any one of those people can impose terms and conditions on the website.  And if you don’t like those terms and conditions, tough shit.

You don’t have the right to go on any webpage and say what you like, any more than you have the right to walk into someone’s house and start eating what you want out their fridge.

And someone saying, ‘you can’t say that on my site’ isn’t censorship.  Censorship is the denial of freedoms you’re entitled to.  And, as stated above, you’re not entitled to any freedom of speech on the ‘net.  What you’re entitled to do is come on to someone’s website and play by their rules, the rules of their ISP, of their hoster and of the government of the country they live in.

Someone stomping onto a website demanding their freedom of speech and complaining about censorship is like someone walking around London, England with a handgun insisting they’re allowed to because the Forth Amendment guarantees their right to bear arms.  It does, in the meatspace of US soil and no where else.

If you don’t like the rules of a website, go some where else.  Make your own site and say what the hell you like (subject to the rules of your ISP, hoster and national government).

And you know what?  Freedom of speech isn’t a Great Thing.  Especially not in discussions involving privilege.

I can’t find the quote, but I remember when Judge Walker overturned California’s Proposition 8 he was quoted as saying something like:  A majority do not have the right to deny rights to a minority.

Free markets create monopolies.  Sure, you can have the legal right to open a coffee shop.  But the bank doesn’t have to give you the money to do it, and Starbucks are well within their rights to open a shop next door and sell their coffee at below-cost.  Their within their rights to spend millions of pounds you don’t have on advertising.  They’re within their rights to tell their suppliers that if they deal with you, they’ll no longer have Starbucks’ far more lucrative business.  Monopolies, as I’m sure we all know, are bad for the little guy and bad for customers.

And when we’re talking about privilege, it’s the voice of the little guy we need to hear.  But when everyone has their sacred Freedom of Speech, the privileged majority can shout them down.  They can wade in with their democratic privilege and vote away the minority’s rights.  Sometimes the majority need to be shut up, need to be gagged, so the minority can exercise their rights.

Of course, that poses a question:  Who wields the gag, and on what authority?

On the Internet, it’s the person running the website.  Their home, their rules.  If you don’t like it, go somewhere else and don’t complain that rights you don’t actually have are being denied.

In meatspace… I don’t know.  I honestly don’t.  Not in economics and not in society.  But I do know that, in order for everyone to have the ability to live their life as they see fit, someone needs to stop the monopolies from dictating the rules to everyone else.


28/12/2010 — Edited to Add:

Allegra pointed this post out to me, which tackled the question of people demanding their First Amendment Rights on the Internet in a far more concise fashion, with an examination of what the First Amendment actually says:  “Congress shall make no law…”  So:

In other words, all things being equal, you can peaceably drone on about anything you please without fear of being arrested by peace officers and placed on trial in a criminal court of law.

Everyone else on the planet, though, is well within their rights to tell you to shut the hell up and get off their property (including their piece of the Internet).