Censorship: the Great Paradox

Censorship: The Great Paradox An amazing gift has been bestowed upon us: the Internet—a digital world capable of providing us with a plethora of diverse information, communication, and recreation. When we hear “diversity”, often times we correlate it to an event from which we can broaden our minds through exposure to a variety of differences. We can use an others cultural experiences and personal views and beliefs to challenge our own. The result of such an experience, whether negative or positive, can play a role in our own minds and generate a close and thorough self-examination. In the words of Socrates, “The unexamined life is not worth living.” (qtd. on Kemerling). But, imagine for a bit that people could not aid you in self-examination, for fear of offending you by challenging your beliefs. Visualize wanting to tell someone exactly how you feel and think, yet you know a dire consequence of censorship and banishment possibly awaits you. Imagine the masses being propagandized and their outspoken opinions silenced. Welcome to a once diversified digital world, now lacking First Amendment rights because of individuals with selfish personal agendas. Those who would violate such rights must be stopped, and I propose that not only do we preserve the first amendment on the Internet, but that we completely abolish and prevent any governmentally or corporation-ally instituted online law, act, or system, which may hinder such a right. We need public educational programs to instruct people on proper usage of the Internet and how to personally and positively regulate their (or their children’s) experience. Furthermore we need to grant every Internet user the full ability to censor out that which offends them. One of the many benefits the Internet has to offer is that it employs a system for true democracy. It’s governed by the people, for the people. Multitudes of private online communities ranging anywhere from games to politics exist, and are quite