RON PAUL & RAND PAUL
The Pauls' New Crusade:
“Internet Freedom”
Defending the Internet
— and the corporations that invest in it — from government regulation
is the new “End the Fed,” Paul advisors tell BuzzFeed exclusively. A new Paul manifesto: “This is our revolution.”
Ron Paul's New Primary Goal Is "Internet Freedom"
Charliemopps writes"Ron and Rand Paul are shifting the
central focus of their family's libertarian crusade to a new cause: Internet Freedom. From the
article: 'Kentucky senator Rand and his father Ron Paul, who has not yet
formally conceded the Republican presidential nomination, will throw their
weight behind a new online manifesto set to be released today by the
Paul-founded Campaign for Liberty. The new push, Paul aides say, will in some
ways displace what has been their movement's long-running top priority, shutting
down the Federal Reserve Bank. The move is an attempt to stake a libertarian
claim to a central public issue of the next decade, and to move from the
esoteric terrain of high finance to the everyday world of cable modems and
Facebook.' This seems like welcome news to me. Let's see if they can get more
traction here than they did with the Fed."
Posted Jul 5, 2012 10:51am EDT
Ron and Rand Paul are
set today to shift the central focus of their family's long libertarian crusade
to a new cause: Internet Freedom.
Kentucky senator Rand
and his father Ron Paul, who has not yet formally conceded the Republican
presidential nomination, will throw their weight behind a new online manifesto
set to be released today by the Paul-founded Campaign for Liberty. The new
push, Paul aides say, will in some ways displace what has been their movement's
long-running top priority, shutting down the Federal Reserve Bank. The move is
an attempt to stake a libertarian claim to a central public issue of the next
decade, and to move from the esoteric terrain of high finance to the everyday
world of cable modems and Facebook.
The manifesto,
obtained yesterday by BuzzFeed, is titled "The Technology Revolution"
and lays out an argument — in doomsday tones —for keeping the government
entirely out of regulating anything online, and for leaving the private sector
to shape the new online space.
"The revolution
is occurring around the world," it reads. "It is occurring in the
private sector, not the public sector. It is occurring despite wrongheaded
attempts by governments to micromanage markets through disastrous industrial
policy. And it is driven by the Internet, the single greatest catalyst in
history for individual liberty and free markets."
The manifesto quotes
Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises and attacks not just the federal
government, but also progressive groups that have called for similar measures
to keep the Internet largely unregulated: "Today, the road to tyranny is
being paved by a collectivist-Industrial complex -- a dangerous brew of
wealthy, international NGO's, progressive do-gooders, corporate cronies and
sympathetic political elites."
The manifesto lays out
five specific battles with government regulation and with liberals who state
their goal of online liberty in similar terms, but who view corporate
encroachment as a more immediate risk. The Paul manifesto seeks to rein in anti-trust
actions against companies in new industries; to stop attempts to impose
"Net Neutrality" rules on broadband providers; to prevent government
control of online infrastructure; to broaden private control of the wireless
spectrum, and shore up "private property rights on the Internet."
The Pauls also take a
stand for the growing industry known (and widely criticized) as "big
data."
They deride the notion
that "private sector data collection practices must be scrutinized and
tightly regulated inthe name of 'protecting consumers,' at the same time as
government’s warrantless surveillance and collection of private citizens’
Internet data has dramatically increased."
Paul's so-called
"Audit the Fed" bill will soon be put to a vote in the House of
Representatives, and the new campaign will kick off shortly thereafter.
"We are going to
bring to this project the same kind of intensity, resources and energy we
brought to the Fed Audit," said one Paul adviser.
The document is
intended to serve as a conservative counterpoint to a Declaration of
Internet Freedom released
this week and hosted by the group Free Press, though the two share some goals.
The earlier document, which sets out broad principles but does not take sides
on divisive issues like Net Neutrality, was signed by groups including the
American Civil Liberties Union as well as Internet companies such as Mozilla.
The language of the
document tries to reclaim the issue of Internet freedom from the strange
bedfellows that have staked a claim to it: progressives and tech companies on
one hand, and more traditional conservative politicians like California Rep.
Darrell Issa.
"Internet
collectivists are clever," the manifesto says, accusing their foes of
series of Orwellian linguistic twists. "They are masters at hijacking the
language of freedom and liberty to disingenuously pushfor more centralized
control. 'Openness' means government control of privately owned infrastructure.'Net
neutrality' means government acting as arbiter and enforcer of what it deems
tobe 'neutral'."
"This is our
revolution -- government needs to get out of the way," the manifesto
concludes.
This is also a new
stage for what supporters refer to as the Ron Paul Revolution, and a way to
make sure that Ron Paul's followers stay on board with the movement after the
congressman's retirement from the House of Representatives. Paul supporters are
already Internet-savvy, frequently launching digital campaigns of their own,
and skew young. And the new cause gives his son Rand an easier way to connect
with them, given that his relationship with his father's supporters has often
been fraught.
Internet freedom, Paul
insiders say, is going to be Rand's end-the-Fed.
Making Rand Paul the
standard-bearer of Internet freedom "is one of the goals," said a
Republican strategist close to the campaign.
"As you may have
noted he has been speaking out about Internet Freedom a fair amount including
in his endorsement of Romney on Hannity," the strategist said in an email.
"Freedom online and freedom and liberty offline are seamlessly linked and
Senator Paul gets that."
A Paul adviser told
Buzz Feed that the full Campaign for Liberty Internet project will start about
two weeks after the Fed bill vote.
CORRECTION: An earlier
version of this story mischaracterized the Declaration of Internet Freedom
signed this week by several groups.
But, ironically, just
as decentralization has
unleashed the potential for free markets and individual freedom on a global
scale, collectivist special interests and governments worldwide are now
tirelessly pushing for More centralized
control of the Internet and technology. Here at home they are aided and abetted both by an Administration that whole
heartedly believes in the wisdom of government to manage markets and some in
the technology industry that cynically use the cudgel of government control and
regulation to hamstring competitors
–
the Apple’s and Microsoft’s of tomorrow.
Internet collectivism
takes many forms, all of them pernicious. Among the most insidious are
government attempts to control
and regulate competition, infrastructure, privacy and intellectual property.
According to them;
Successful companies in brand new frontier industries that didn’t even
exist as recently
as five years ago
should be penalized and
intimidated with antitrust actions in the name
of “fairness” and “competition.”
Privately owned
broadband high-speed infrastructure must be subject to collective rule
via public ownership and government regulations that require “sharing”
with other
competitors.
Internet
infrastructure must be treated as a commons subject to centralized
government control through a variety of foolish “public interest” and
“fairness”
regulations.
Wireless, the
lifeblood of the mobile Internet
revolution, must be micromanaged as a government-controlled commons, with
limited exclusive property rights.
Private property
rights on the Internet should exist in limited fashion or not at all, and what is considered to be in the
public domain should be
greatly expanded.
Private sector data
collection practices must be scrutinized and tightly regulated in the name of “protecting consumers”, at the same time as government’s warrantless surveillance
and collection of private citizens’ Internet data has dramatically increased.
Internet
collectivists are clever. They are masters at hijacking the language of freedom and liberty to disingenuously
push for more centralized control.
“Openness” means government control of privately owned infrastructure.
“Net neutrality” means government acting as arbiter
and enforcer of what it deems to be" neutral".
“Internet freedom” means the destruction of property rights.
“Competition” means managed competition,
with the government acting as judge
and jury on what constitutes competition and what does not. Our
“right to privacy” only applies to the data
collection activities of the private sector, rarely to government. The eminent
economist Ludwig von Mises wrote that when government seeks to solve one
problem, it creates two more. Nowhere is this more evident than in the realm of
Internet collectivists and the centralized control of the Internet they seek.
The body of incremental communications law and regulation that has emerged
since the days of Alexander Graham Bell are entirely unsuited to the dynamic and ever-changing Internet
for one simple reason:
Technology is evolving faster than government’s ability to
regulate it. Ronald
Reagan once said, "Freedom is never more than one generation away from
extinction." But in the Internet era, true Internet freedom can be lost in far less than one generation. Around
the world, the real threat to Internet freedom comes not from bad people or inefficient markets
-- we can and will always
route around them -- but from governments'
foolish attempts to
manage and control innovation. And it is not just the tyrannies we must fear. The road away from
freedom is paved with good intentions. Today, the road to tyranny is being
paved by a
collectivist-Industrial complex -- a dangerous brew of wealthy,
international NGO's, progressive do-gooders, corporate cronies and sympathetic
political elites. Their goals are clear: The collectivist-industrial complex
seeks to undermine free markets and property rights, replacing them with
"benevolent" government control and a vision of "free" that quickly
evolves from "free speech" to "free stuff." We know where
this path leads. As
Thomas Jefferson said, "The natural progress of things is for liberty to
yield and government to gain
ground." A benevolent monopoly for "the public interest" is nothing more than a means for the old
guard to reassert their power. The role of the government on the
Internet is to protect us from force and fraud, not to decide our
interests. But while the Internet has produced a revolution, it has not, in fact, "changed everything".
We do not need to
reinvent our principles for the web;
we only need apply our core principles to it. When faced with Internet regulation, we should ask these key questions:1.
Is this a core
function of the
federal government?2.
Does it execute
Constitutionally defined duties?3.
Does it protect
Constitutionally defined rights?4.
Does it protect
property rights?5.
Does it protect
individual rights?6.
If the federal
government does not do this,
will others?7.
Will this policy or
regulation allow the market to decide outcomes or will it distort the market
for political ends?8.
Is this policy or
regulation clear and specific, with defined metrics and limitations? Yes, there
will always be problems and challenges that exist in the online universe. These
challenges are sometimes significant and important and other times not.
Government, however, will never solve them. Markets will. As a matter of
principle, we oppose any attempt by Government to tax, regulate, monitor or
control the Internet, and we oppose the Internet collectivists who collaborate
with the government against Internet freedom.
This is our revolution…. Government needs to get out of
the way.
Verizon Claims Net Neutrality Violates Their Free Speech
Rights
New submitter WickedLilMonkies writes"In a stretch of
the meaning of 'free speech' that defies the most liberal interpretation, Verizon defends throttling your data
speed."In its continuing case to strike
down the FCC net neutrality regulations, Verizon is arguing that
Congress has not authorized the FCC to implement such regulations, and
therefore the FCC is overstepping its regulatory bounds, but (from the
article): "Verizon believes that even if Congress had authorized network
neutrality regulations, those regulations
would be unconstitutional under
the First Amendment. 'Broadband networks are the modern-day microphone by which
their owners [e.g. Verizon] engage in First Amendment speech,' Verizon
writes." They are also arguing that "... the rules violate the Fifth
Amendment's protections for private property rights. Verizon argues that the
rules amount to 'government compulsion to turn over [network owners'] private
property for use by others without compensation.'"
