I think it’s not a right and the concept, as others have noted above, of a “right” has been seriously abused. If you want to make internet access a univeral public policy, fine, but don’t call it a right. A right is much more fundamental than that. In that vein, I would also say “health care” is not a right either.

This is my test of a right. Society is bascially human interaction, and the smallest possible society is two people. Anything that is a fundamental human right would and should exist in that society of two. For instance, free speech, free association, self-determination, etc. Those rights are inherent in free human existence. Now try introducing a right to “health care”, or internet access, or education into that society. What it comes down to would be one person being able to demand that the other person use his resources to provide a specific service to him, regardless of whether that person was qualified to do so, could afford to do so, or was interested in doing so. In essence, the one being demanded of would become a slave to the one doing the demanding. That hardly sounds like a definition of a society based on rights. Unless slavery to one’s fellow man is also a fundamental human right.

Compassionate public policy is a fine and wonderful thing, when freely arrived at. We can choose to do all sorts of things with the public purse for our society in general and our fellow citizens in particular. But in my mind the distinction between a fundamental right and an enlightened public policy needs to remain crystal clear at all times. One belongs to us from the day we are born and is inherent in our existence and the other is based on the society and social and economic circumstances we live in. As a society, we can choose to enact a specific public policy, but it would be unwise in the long run to forget that it was a concious choice to spend money in a certain way (and not in another way) and that choice is not some fundamental aspect of existence.

I have a couple of more thoughts about this at http://www.westbronxnews.blogspot.com.

Great discussion to be having. Thanks, Jeff, for starting it.

But your ISP only gives you the bandwidth and not ‘the internet’, which is so incomprehensibly vast that it can be regarded as belonging to everyone, and therefore not something anyone should be excluded from.

Civilized societies are based upon freedom of information and the internet – the most advanced form of information distribution – should of course be regarded as something all citizens are entitled to. No, that doesn’t necessarily mean everyone should be given a computer at birth (although it’s economically viable nowadays), but it does mean that a citizen will have unfettered, unfiltered access to the internet.

There are all too many people in the business world who are desperate to lock us into a more closed internet which will present a handful of large companies with more opportunities to monopolise the market and boost their own coffers. This is exactly what happened with old media and it’s frightening to think the same thing could happen to the web. That’s why we need unfettered internet access to be an established right.

” The Fourth Amendment protects “[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures … .” U.S. Const., Amdt. 4 (emphasis added). It must be acknowledged that the phrase “their . . . houses” in this provision is, in isolation, ambiguous. It could mean “their respective houses,” so that the protection extends to each person only in his own house. But it could also mean “their respective and each other’s houses,” so that each person would be protected even when visiting the house of someone else. As today’s opinion for the Court suggests, however, ante, at 4—5, it is not linguistically possible to give the provision the latter, expansive interpretation with respect to “houses” without giving it the same interpretation with respect to the nouns that are parallel to “houses”–“persons, … papers, and effects”–which would give me a constitutional right not to have your person unreasonably searched. This is so absurd that it has to my knowledge never been contemplated. The obvious meaning of the provision is that each person has the right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures in his own person, house, papers, and effects.”

The internet is a “privilege.” Education is not a right, it is a privilege. Most people think voting is the “right.” It is not. It is a privilege.

Also, you infer that by having unfettered access to the internet for all, civilzation is better for a number of reasons. My question is, how is it that we don’t already have open, unfettered access as you describe? Dial up is ridiculously cheap, and broadband rates are not expensive either. If people want the internet, they can have it. The problem is the availability doesn’t mean people will use it. It also doesn’t mean it sustains itself. Not everyone wants to be as connected as you wish to believe.

For example, is classical music a right? ….open, unfettered acces to classical music? A variety of public financed radio stations exist to push classical music over the airwaves. Still, does that mean society is more cultured or worldly because classical music is available to the masses? I would argue “No.” This is because people still must choose to listen to classical music. If people don’t listen, then there is no effect.

If it is done by private enterprise, then I am fine with it. The market will dictate its success or failure. However, I could not be more against our government doing this.

Smile! Gerrit – We speak Online.

September 21th,2005

Marshall McLuhan’s [1911-1980] famous quote, “The medium is the message,” was an early perceptive
prophecy, but it did not take into account human nature as we moved from The Industrial Age to The
Technological Age.

He was a respected visionary who could not have prophesied the profound imbalances between needs
and desires of humanity, independent of the multicultural and multilingual nature of the global village.
These imbalances are symptomatic of the economic, political, social, cultural, environmental and
spiritual vertigo our world is experiencing today.

Since we are well into the first stage of The Technological Age, although we still live our lives with
one foot in The Industrial Age, it is the infaliability of human nature that is causing all the trouble.
This is The Paradox of The Technological Age; in our quest for technological innovation and
integration, nobody asked what the philosophical implications human nature would have in the way we
live our lives. Our inability to accept this paradox, and the multitude of other paradoxes inherent in our
civilization, is our problem; and we have not even begun to understand them, let alone come up with
the questions that must be asked in the first place, in order to begin to understand them.

It’s human nature to fear and worry.
It’s human nature to become desensitized.
It’s human nature to want to believe in something larger than ourselves.
It’s human nature to react in unpredictable manner.
It’s human nature to protect and to preserve.
It’s human nature to destroy and to waste.
It’s human nature to solve problems.
It’s human nature to be lazy.
It’s human nature to become fed up.
It’s human nature to initiate change.
It’s human nature to give up on ourselves, our families, our work, our beliefs, and our lives.
It’s human nature to dream.
It’s human nature to have hope.
It’s human nature to do right or wrong by ourselves, by our families, by our friends, by our
communities, by our countries, and by our world.

The Message has to get out that The Individual Is Our Most Valuable Resource and That The
Individual Counts.

By examining the life of Einstein and reading about him and studying his papers and books a quote he
said might shed light on where we can begin to look for the questions that will give us the answers to
help stop or at least lesson the effects of the economic, political, social, cultural, environmental and
spiritual vertigo everybody feels.

One hundred years after Einstein wrote his five papers in 1905 Albert Einstein had said at some point in
his life, “Look deep into nature, and then you will understand everything better.” This message raised
the questions that led to the writing of this manifesto. The reason was in it’s simplicity; he tells us how
to look at things. Deeply; and that is why this manifesto is a philosophical approach to understanding
how we might come up with the questions that need to be answered.

This quote inspires everyone in one way or another, but it would take a cross-section of people from all
walks of life to harvest the questions for this manifesto to raise our consciousness to a level, where
some insight into possible answers might be illuminated. I believe it will be quite some time until we
know the effect this collaborative effort have; the how come and why questions that would define a
shift in the paradigm of our thinking today.

So I begin this manifesto having introduced a theme and have invited many others to contribute their
abstracts to create a collaborative piece of work to allow the reader as many views as possible. I hope
this manifesto serves you well.

Here are some further notes for your understanding.
In 2003 I discovered Email.
In 2004 I discovered the web.
In 2005 I discovered virtual communities.
In 2006 I will started a revolution: The Last Renaissance.
I turned of my computer and wrote the most sought-after manuscript in the history of humanity; I was
no where to be found.

I ask you now to consider the following.

They said The New Knowledge Web couldn’t be built.
Some said, “I thought the Internet is a Knowledge Web?”
Still others said, “What is a New Knowledge Web?”

I looked deeper. Something wasn’t right. I believed that the world was experiencing economic, social,
political, cultural, environmental and spiritual vertigo. I believed that a rip in the moral fabric of our
society ran deep. I believed one person could make a difference. And then I asked the question that
started the whole journey for me, one which made me get out of bed every day with a purpose to attend
to.

What if you knew for certain that your idea could change the world; or start a movement to help others
or even redefine how we live, so that the way we live, brings out the best in people? What would your
idea be?

Following my gut instinct, and the places it led me to, taught me to look at the world in a whole new
way. I wanted to share this with the world so I wrote about it and it turned into this Manifesto that
would express the way people truly think about their lives; their families; their friends, their
communities; and the global village..

So, I begin with the most important message I want to deliverer; a message to empower people: That
the individual counts in the global village and that creativity is unique to the individual; it is not a
collective thing. That the new currency of the global village is the creative spirit of individuals
and their productivity. That we have to share our creative ideas and visions; and we need a launching
pad for it, so, that people will feel part of something big, which is human nature.

This launch pad by nature must be a revolution and I start it by naming it The Last Renaissance. It’s
agenda is to collectively take back the web and use it as a Knowledge Web as it was originally intended
backed by a new philosophy of thinking that would produce a shift in the paradigm of thinking in
todays World Order?

Then I looked deep, deep into the nature of the Internet and the following is what I discovered.
The Internet is like a thousand lakes and wild powerful rivers running into and out of it; this is the
untapped potential of the Net. The lakes are basins of knowledge molecules that collectively look
simply like a thousand lakes, but upon closer examination we see that all life flows from nature and
what’s in it, just as all knowledge flows into and out of the Net.

The idea of Building The New Knowledge Web is akin to the building of great dams; feats of
engineering to harness the power of the waters energy. It’s like the building of Eden Laboratories to
study the biological make up of water to discover new natural medicines to heal the sick. It’s like the
building Olympia Construction to build ecological communities around the lakes to provide housing for people and give them a better quality of life.

Our ability to do this is not limited by the Net; quite the opposite is true. The Net is owned by no one
so you can do whatever the hell you want. The potential is there to get creative and see what you can
do.

The problem with the Net is the way we use it. Einstein said, “Go deep, deep into nature and you’ll
understand everything better.” It’s not about absolute knowledge or perfectionism; it’s about
understanding everything better.

The Building of The New Knowledge Web is about shifting the paradigm of thinking on a global level
to harness the untapped potential of the thousand lakes and rivers of the Internet. I have identified this
potential: it is the creativity of each individual at their ends of the Internet.

Einstein also said, “The problems of the world cannot be solved by the minds that created them.” The
knowledge that exists at the ends of the Net and throughout it is the untapped potential of the Net; the
evolution of the Net for the express purpose of bringing each individual at their end of the net together
with each individual at the other end of the Net to build an intelligent exchange of collective creative
ideas.

The knowledge exists. The Net exists. Creativity is alive and well.

“It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity,” said Albert
Einstein. Well he was right and his message still resonates with us today.

Never has humanity seen such a potential for a Renaissance of the most intellectual and artistic creative
ideas as exists on the Net today. No one anticipated another great Renaissance movement. No one has
defined it or even named it. The Last Renaissance is a Renaissance unlike anything humanity has ever
seen. It is the first Renaissance that is global in scale, and it is fueled by our civilizations most valuable
resource, the individual, and the knowledge that the individual counts.

The reason the individual is humanity’s greatest resource is because of the untapped creativity of the
individual and the fact that creativity is unique to the individual; it is not a collective thing. Albert
Einstein said why it’s important to encourage individuality, “It is important for the common good to
foster individuality: for only the individual can produce the new ideas which the community needs for
its continuous improvement and requirements-indeed, to avoid sterility and petrification.”
Imagine if we were to share our knowledge of ideas; in the collective sense the results would be
profound.

There are two powerful forces at work today affecting civilization as we know it: The inability to tap
into the potential of the creativity of individuals because knowledge is not shared easily and the way the Internet is being used. To date no one has figured out a way to bring them into a harmonious
relationship with one another in order to inspire the change we need to see in the world today to
preserve our civilization for tomorrow; where integrity, security and trust;is the accepted norm.

Through the fusion of philosophy with technology we will be able to tap into the creativity of each
individual at their ends of the Net to bring about change.

But before this can be done one very important point has been made by Seth Godin that has to be tied
up. He says, “The currency of our future is ideas,” but we have to ask ourselves where do ideas come
from? My answer to that is from the creativity of individuals.

It is very important to distinguish between the idea and creativity. They are connected, but the
connection is not at first glance obvious. Philosophically, creativity is unique to the individual; it is not
a collective thing. Secondly, creativity is governed by the law of moral sanction; the idea that if an
individual has knowledge of their own moral value as a human being then they will be more creative
and productive members of society. Finally society must accept that it’s most valuable resource is the
individual and that the individual counts in the Technological Age.

Assuming this philosophical hypothesis is correct then we have a duty to create a platform for global
conversations between intelligent creative people who know that they count in our society.

The concept or idea that the individual counts in the Technological Age is as I see it the foundation of
The Last Renaissance.

The Last Renaissance which is taking place around the world now, on and off the Net, is the new global
Renaissance that is fueling the search for harnessing the individual collective creative energy to build a
new knowledge web where people will say or are saying, “Let’s get a global conversation going.”
By my philosophical calculation it will take only five percent of the Intellectual Elite to share their
knowledge to create a global revolution.

Imagine if everyone had knowledge of their own moral value as a human being. What would our world
be like?

If the message got out that the individual counts and that the individual is society’s most valuable
resource then when critical mass consensus is reached civilization as we know it will begin to heal.

A new generation Net will evolve and we will have together created The New Knowledge Web; not a
new Internet but a new way to use what we have so successfully built. As I have said it’s not about
building it, but rather the fusion of philosophy with technology. It’s about building a consensus of a
new paradigm of thinking that allows humanity to look deep, deep into the Net to understand
everything better.

Now the doors are open and you begin to see a better world is possible to live in.

If you knew for certain that your idea could change the world what would your idea be takes on more
relevance now. There’s possibility in the air. So what would your idea be? You hesitate and therein
lies the fundamental problem of the Net today: sharing knowledge freely; let alone trying to manage it.
Economic theory dictates there will be winners and losers in a free market economy and in order for the
free sharing of knowledge that can change the world it has to be accepted that the sharing of knowledge
serves a higher purpose and therefore it must be shared freely. This leads to sustainable development of
ideas. Of course the ninety-five percent of ideas shared freely will create winners and losers from an
individual economic perspective, but imagine the reality that only the remaining five percent of freely
shared knowledge will produce economic winners and the results will be enough to solve all of our
problems. This is going to be the hardest thing to sell to a world full of people who don’t trust and don’t
feel secure giving away their precious knowledge; however I believe in a higher noble cause and I
believe that people are fed up enough to begin trusting and sharing their knowledge. This is human
nature at its most noble moment.

We have to recognize that the world is in economic, political, social, cultural and spiritual vertigo. And
it has been brought about by the minds that have created the world we live in today. As Einstein said,
“The problems of the world cannot be solved by the minds that created them.” It’s not about pointing
fingers; it’s about tapping into the untapped potential that lies at each and every one of the ends of the
Internet and sharing this creative knowledge freely in order to reverse economic, political, social,
cultural, environmental and spiritual vertigo. The moral fabric of our civilizations has been ripped
wide open.

What are we going to do about it?

We have to recognize that a movement called The Last Renaissance has already begun. Its the greatest
Renaissance the world has ever seen and it will be the last Renaissance because it is the first time a
renaissance has been global in nature. If we are successful at working together sharing knowledge
freely, then we will always be in a Renaissance for the next thousand years; if not, if we can’t find
community amongst each other, then I fear a world that will implode upon itself and this is as close to
Armageddon as I venture to suggest. We must begin to use our imagination again just like we did as
children.

Imagination belongs to kids because they are innocent; adults have the battle scars and the memories to
last a lifetime to keep them from being who they really are: kids at heart. If everyone can reconnect
with their child inside and start to use their imaginations again, then the world will be a better place.
Pablo Picasso said, “Every child is an artist. The problem is how to remain an artist once he grows up.”

I say we must stand up and make a choice to do right by ourself, right by our family, right by our
friends. Right by our community, right by our country, and right by our world. This is the Last Great
Renaissance. What are you going to do?

In closing you can’t have innovation without factoring in human nature. A massive psychic shock has
opened a void created by the innovations of the technological age; it is human nature to bring balance to one’s world. This is the innovation of the New Knowledge Web and the beginning of The Last
Renaissance period.

I’ll end this manifesto with three thought provoking quotes all from the same man that inspired me to
write it hopefully in a reflective and thought provoking piece that will help people to shift their thinking into a new paradigm of thought and take action on their ideas without fear.

On where Einstein’s inspiration came from:
“The state of mind which enables a man to do work of this kind…is akin to that of the religious
worshiper or the lover; the daily effort comes from no deliberate intention or program, but straight from
the heart.”_Albert Einstein

On imagination:
“Imagination is more important than knowledge, for knowledge is limited while imagination embraces
the entire world.”_Albert Einstein

On solving problems:
“The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we
created them.”_Albert Einstein

We now have a situation where only 8 members of congress are allowed to see some government documents, but all the rest are supposed to create legislation without this information. Even these 8 aren’t allowed to take notes or share information with their staffs.

Just yesterday the Treasury released a document showing which firms they were hiring to run the bailout program. The documents have large areas blacked out – including the amounts paid to these firms.

This is no way to run a country. Allowing uninformed citizens to discuss things unhampered by the government means nothing if they don’t have the information with which to base their discussions.

A good dose of democracy could fix both problems. I don’t see any push for this by either party.

I’m reminded of Valleywag’s definition of net neutrality, as “Google’s god-given right to sell ads on the Internet without sharing any revenue with ISPs.” We’re down to that level of silliness.