The Internet vs. the State

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare

 

Hear
the LewRockwell.com Conference on Gold, Freedom, and Peace

Did
you miss the exciting, inspiring, and informative conference
on war, gold, and the future of the dollar? Hear all
17 talks and panel discussions involving some of the
stars of the libertarian movement for liberty, peace,
and sound money. One attendee said he would budget his
entrance fee as part entertainment and part mental health.
That pretty much sums it up!

Hear
Ron Paul, Gary North, Butler Shaffer, Doug French, Justin
Raimondo, Eric Garris, Jacob G. Hornberger, Anthony
Gregory, David Gordon, Robert Blumen, Chris Leithner,
Kevin Duffy, Bruce Ramsey, the warfare state panel,
the Fed-financial panel, Burton S. Blumert, and Lew
Rockwell.

Postage
paid in the US. Phone or email us for foreign postage.

Three
formats are available:

  • Audio
    tapes: $109
  • CDs:
    $139
  • MP3s:
    $45

You
can order via phone 800-325-7257 (California office
hours), our donate
form
(and note that it is an order rather than a
donation, though we would appreciate that as  well!), or
PayPal (and
be sure to give us your land address).

Join
us!

 
 

This talk
was delivered at the Burton
S. Blumert Conference on Gold, Freedom, and Peace
.

At the 1977
Libertarian Party Convention, mind-expansion advocate and LSD guru
Timothy Leary gave a speech that few of us took very seriously.
He spoke of something called the Internet, a network that would
connect computers worldwide, allowing participants from around the
globe to sign on and retrieve text, photographs, audio and video
instantaneously, and to communicate in realtime with anyone in the
whole world who also had a computer and a connection. He said that
it would be the new revolution against the current social order
and stifling status quo. He predicted it would be much, much bigger
than drugs in its ability to overthrow the establishment. Whereas
tuning in, turning on and dropping out had been of great interest
to a somewhat narrow subset of the population, everyone would be
able to use the Internet, in his own way, and thus the new revolution
against the old order would transcend class, age, nationality and
all other demographics. The bourgeois would have just as much interest
and use for it as the so-called counterculture. And nothing would
ever again be the same.

As I said,
no one at the time really believed it. We figured Leary had just
done a little too much acid and his imagination had gotten the best
of him. The network of information he described seemed totally impossible
— and yet it exists, precisely as he predicted it, right now.

In fact, even
Timothy Leary might be surprised to see the newest developments.
Hardly a week goes by without some substantial revolution in cyberspace.
When Leary died in 1996, data storage, processing and transfer had
yet to approach anything anywhere near their current magnificent
levels of utility and speed. And next year will make this year look
like nothing. Already, we think back five years and can hardly comprehend
the breathtaking progress over that time.

A lot of people
say the Internet is overrated. They think it’s just a bunch of vanity
sites and ranting and raving kooks — and while they acknowledge
it is nice that you can buy products online and have them delivered
to your house, they doubt the net will prove as revolutionary of
culture and industry as is predicted of it. Ever since the Dot-Com
Boom of the late 1990s and the subsequent bust, many are inclined
to dismiss the alleged greatness of the net. Some see it only as
a novelty or fad that will hardly evolve far past its current size
and scope.

These people
could not be more wrong. The Internet is not just not overrated
— it is vastly underrated.

In the Internet
we see our greatest hope for freedom and for the continual progress
of humanity. In the Internet we see the anachronistic and obsolete
institutions of society being pushed aside for a new dawn of better
things. In the Internet we see the key to diminishing the power
and status of the state and liberating ourselves from its oppression
and deception.

Let us first
consider an indirect but nevertheless essential reason to have hope
for freedom, thanks to the World Wide Web. The Internet is proof
of libertarianism in action. In this unregulated sector of society,
we have seen more progress and changes and improvements than in
any other sector in any comparably short period of time. No other
invention went so far so quickly. And all of it rests on the economic
principles of spontaneous order that we have been touting for years,
but had to wait until now to see fully realized.

On eBay, we
see millions of transactions occurring every day in one of the freest
markets in human history. And almost all of the transactions are
satisfactory for both parties. You really can trust most people
most of the time to keep their word in business matters, and never
before has it been so clearly shown. eBay’s primary mechanisms of
quality control and contract enforcement have sprung about in the
voluntary sector, with no coercive monopoly. Reputation plays a
very crucial role. If you have not sold much online to people who
will vouch for you, it will be harder for you to unload a large
expensive item at a reasonable price. The market at eBay is self-correcting.
People succeed roughly as much as they deserve. Honesty and entrepreneurial
cunning are rewarded and cheating and waste strongly discouraged.
Every week, billions of dollars exchange hands on this site alone,
which has encouraged people everywhere to trust the methods of mutual
exchange and, even if only subconsciously, no longer associate market
success with central planning. Entire businesses, small and not
so small, thrive by selling on this site and doing nothing else.
eBay could have probably brought us out of the Depression, and the
unbridled capitalism it represents, along with all the millions
of other marketing sites online, might be the only things keeping
us out of another one.

Along with
eBay came the success story of PayPal, another site that has helped
to revolutionize an economic sector, in this case of money itself.
Money can be anonymous and transferable to anywhere in the world.
With the proliferation of such sites, we might see the unraveling
of people’s hope in the government as a major fiscal and monetary
player. The Internet has many people more jealous of their money,
more resistant to hand it over to the tax men, and that alone is
a blessing.

Consider Google.
Here we have the ability to search billions of pages of text in
a matter of a couple seconds. With the expansion of this software
into new applications and uses, we are seeing the information age
really coming to life. What used to take all day at the library
to dig up, even just ten years ago, now sometimes takes less than
a minute. The newest foray of Google into the book world is just
the newest bloodless revolution — we now have the capability of
searching the text of thousands of books, and their number is growing.
Have you ever had a phrase that you remembered from one book or
another, but you couldn’t remember which? What only a decade ago
might have kept you awake at night, causing a brain itch you might
have taken with you to the grave, might soon only take a minute
or two to look up and turn from nagging suspicion into verified
fact.

I remember
a scene in the movie All
the President’s Men
, where Robert Redford as Bob Woodward
spends an entire day in a room full of phone books looking for the
location of someone named on an incriminating check. Today, his
search would have taken seconds.

The searchability
of text has only blossomed with the great success of PDFs — one
of many digital formats that is fast replacing its analog counterpart.
I went to an Adobe Acrobat convention years ago, but was later disappointed
when their enthusiastic promises of a totally searchable format
weren’t totally realized in the first few versions of the program.
Anyone who has experienced how quickly and amazingly PDFs have evolved
knows the folly of too quickly judging a technology by its initial
incarnation. As with so many other things in the digital revolution,
I can only expect PDFs to continue to impress us.

Perhaps nothing
right now is so astonishing as a demonstration of the wonders of
spontaneous order as that online encyclopedia, Wikipedia.
For those of you don’t know, Wikipedia is the largest collection
of encyclopedia articles in the world, which are written completely
by volunteers. Anyone can edit the articles, anyone can write a
new one. It now boasts more than 810,000 articles in English, as
well as hundreds of thousands more in dozens of other languages.
Each article was written, edited and rewritten by whoever in the
world decided to contribute. The division of labor, the capacity
of people for consensus building and totally voluntary cooperation,
and the general goodness of most people to respect each other’s
boundaries are on display at this one site, and the entire world
is better informed as a result.

Wikipedia is
a microcosm of a phenomenon online that many statists would have
denied was possible before it came about. Online we see millions
of times more information than any of us has the capacity to read
in our lifetimes — and it’s all free to anyone who wants it. Interestingly
enough, people will put effort into sharing information with their
fellow man. The good side of humanity — the charity that we libertarians
are so used to insisting exists and doesn’t need government to thrive
— is right there. It is online, for everyone to behold.

With the explosion
of information especially, a transformation of publishing and information
distribution that compares only to the invention of the printing
press, one is tempted to wonder how long it will take for the people
to realize how bad a deal public education really is. In the near
future, people will see that the failing pubic school system can
easily be replaced with a more customized, and far less-expensive
system of learning.

The spontaneous
order that has cultivated a free market in ideas, goods and services
online has unmistakably been met with approval by the masses. It
is a genuine market, open to everyone for miniscule start-up and
administrative costs and nothing like the barriers of entry we see
in the highly regulated industries of realspace. It is no surprise
that most of the major Web sites and companies — eBay, Yahoo, Google,
Pay Pal, Amazon — lean so heavily toward freedom and against the
state. Unlike the big businesses of the mercantilist realspace economy,
the big players in e-commerce tend to see the government more as
a clumsy obstacle, or more likely, a nonentity rushing to catch
up to the technology of 1997, rather than as a major player to lobby
for kickbacks and favors. There are surely big software and hardware
companies that are not so favorable toward freedom, but they are
almost all in bed with the state in one way or another, and so have
a vested interest in the corporate state surviving. Like the state
itself, they will be on the losing side of history.

And when we
see the way the state regards the Internet, we can only smile. Half
the time the politicians claim enthusiasm. The other half they appear
afraid, such as when they threaten to censor, tax or regulate it.
But it is clear that the political establishment has no idea whatsoever
what it’s up against, and those of us who love liberty can only
cheer.

In the 2000
campaign, George W. Bush was asked what he thought about a parody
website, designed to look like his campaign page, which portrayed
him as a former cocaine-using, corporate tool ignoramus. His response?
He said he didn’t think it was too funny and “there ought to be
limits to freedom.”

Many of us
didn’t now how to react at first. Should we be scared of this potential
president’s overtly anti-liberty statement? Or should we snicker
that he would think that he could actually stop the wonderfully
nasty things people were saying about him on the miraculously free
Internet?

What was even
more notable was how quick the word got out — thanks to the Internet
— that Bush was against our freedom of speech. The man probably
had no clue that what he said, along with all the many other stupid
things he would say, once widely circulated on the net, would be
far more damaging to his pretense of authority than any satire web
site accusing him of being a drug addict.

During the
last presidential campaign, almost everyone was online, keeping
tabs on what the candidates were saying as had never been feasible
for any of the other elections in American history. And so when
John Kerry posted on his Web site that he believed in a mandatory
national service program, some activists caught it immediately and,
correctly predicting the Kerry camp would take it down as soon as
it was noticed and criticized, make caches online for posterity’s
sake. The buzz about a possible draft spread infiltrated the mainstream,
thanks to the net. People began to fear conscription would come
back under Kerry, and others suggested Bush might bring it back,
too.

The Kerry people
took the offending line off its site — which was pointless, since
more people probably read about the removal than read his online
platform. But what was hilarious was Bush’s reaction. He said, “I
hear there’s rumors on the Internets that we’re going to
have a draft.”

That’s right,
he referred to that which he clearly didn’t understand at all as
“the Internets.” Well, when we see the dangers posed by the Internet
to the obviously ignorant politicians who know nothing of its workings,
we, along with the rest of the world, can see why Bush might think
there ought to be limits to freedom.

Just recently,
the White House has threatened to take action against The Onion
for proprietary violation if it continues to use the Presidential
Seal in its parodies. This story has also been spread all over the
net. You can’t make this stuff up. The Onion’s writers could
probably use some of the president’s men on their staff.

Reporting on
the goofs and verbal gaffes of politicians might sound like a trivial
act in the overall fight for freedom, but it relates directly to
the huge issue of news reporting and politics. I need not argue
for the importance of a free, independent press as a bulwark for
freedom, as a guardian of truth against political deception and
an irreplaceable service to the people. Everyone in this room knows
the significance of a press that will speak truth to power.

For many years,
however, the establishment press has not done so. There was, of
course, the wonderful anomaly of the Nixon years, and a few other
aberrations, but the mainstream press has, for as long as I’ve been
alive, been a reliable mouthpiece for the political establishment.

Back in the
early nineteenth century, people at least knew that the press was
biased. Political parties published the widely read papers. No one
thought that a newspaper called the “Daily Democrat” was going to
stray too much from the party line. Starting in the 1870s, there
was a concerted effort toward so-called journalistic objectivity,
and for a century afterwards people believed that what they read
in black and white must have been neutral and true. So when a paper
upheld this Splendid Little War or that New Frontier, this was the
objective journalists talking, not just a partisan hack.

Thank goodness
for the Internet! Nowadays, people know that anyone can start
up a web page, and of the millions of people ranting out there,
it is known that you cannot believe every word — or even most of
them. And yet, the truth largely comes out through the processes
of reputation. The Internet is not built around an arbitrary traditional
hierarchy, nor is it mindlessly egalitarian. It combines the best
of all worlds. Allowing total freedom of speech, grounded in private
property, and total interconnectivity thanks to HTML and hyperlinks,
anyone can say anything and yet few will believe you unless you
substantiate it. Thomas Jefferson said, “Error of opinion may be
tolerated where reason is left free to combat it.” Were Jefferson
alive today, he would see his insight applied in the real world
beyond his expectations — on the Internet, where the error of opinion
is unlimited and only rivaled by the efforts of good people to combat
it, the truth does, more than in the old media, come out.

Jefferson also
said that, if it were up to him, he would choose a world with newspapers
but no government rather than a world with government but no newspapers.
Thanks to the net, we might get to see the day when both artifacts
are finally swept into the status of irrelevancy they deserve. People
still think of the press as anti-government, especially given the
current so-called liberal media and the current so-called conservative
president, but it’s just not so. They are basically on the same
side, while the Internet is definitively on ours.

Whereas the
establishment media echoed the administration line about weapons
of mass destruction during the run-up to the Iraq war, the Internet
was bursting with dissent and exposure of the lies. Whereas the
imbedded establishment media are dependent upon the good graces
of the emperor and his cabinet, the Internet is saturated with independent
thought and criticism. While we can trust the talking heads on television
to cower in fear of losing access to the White House or even being
harassed by the FCC, there are billions of gigabytes of information
on the Internet from which we can spring forward to attack the state
and recoil back into a crowd of friendly faces.

And the truth
is winning, and the Internet is winning, in the market of information
and news media. The print newspapers are hardly surviving the brutalities
of the free market and competition. According to the Audit Bureau
of Circulations, there was a 2.6 percent drop for the circulation
of 786 papers over a six-month period this year. 1.2 million subscribers
in that time abandoned their papers. According to the Pew Research
Center, 23 percent of people under 30 read a daily newspaper, contrasted
with 60 percent of their elders.

And as the
Internet is the medium of the future, it is the medium of the young.
If we libertarians expect our ideas to thrive, we must get them
to the young. And the Internet is where they are, with all the expectations
of freedom and doubts about the government I have outlined.

Doubtless,
the Internet is taking over. And it only makes sense. There soon
will be no structural, operational, logistical or technological
reason for hardcopy to be a major player any more.

Witness the
old media struggle just to figure out how to deal with the new medium.
They try to charge for their subscriptions online, often to compensate
for the losses they suffer in their hardcopy operations. When new
online journals are popping up every week, some of us might even
feel sorry for the anachronisms being swept away. But we shouldn’t.
The newspaper as we have known it all our lives will largely go
the way of the buggy whips and ice delivery. Good riddance.

For libertarians,
and opponents of war, the Internet has especially been a boon. Now,
I hear all the time people saying that we can talk on forums and
Web sites all we want, but real activism is what’s needed to make
a difference. Well, even on this, who can doubt how much the Internet
has done? In 2003, twenty million people congregated in protests,
all around the world, in anticipation of and in mutual opposition
to the U.S. and U.K. war against Iraq. 20 million! This would have
been unimaginable in previous times. Thanks to telecommunications,
and especially e-mail and Web sites, activists were able to arrange,
more-or-less spontaneously and in decentralized fashion, these enormous
shows of international solidarity against the war. This was not
in any way a real world departure from the ways of the Internet
in political activism. It was in fact only possible because of our
online capacity.

These days
we will sometimes finally see leaked information about secret meetings
in the Oval Office of the Johnson administration from 40 years ago.
Meanwhile, we are already getting leaked information about secret
meetings in the Oval Office of the Bush administration from last
week! If the Internet had existed during the 1960s, the Vietnam
war would have ended sooner. It is because of the Internet that
there is such universal dissatisfaction of the current regime, such
low approval ratings, and it was largely due to the net that even
right after 9/11 so many people were willing to speak up against
war. Such dissidence would have not been nearly as easy during the
World Wars or Cold War, when most information ran through the old
media oligopoly. No wonder the politicians fear the net.

The state and
its old media simply cannot keep up. At Antiwar.com and LewRockwell.com
and hundreds of other sites we see the truth coming out every day.
A politician lies, and as soon as someone with a computer knows,
we all know. An innocent family is bombed by the government and
video footage appeared is on your desktop in an hour. A famous columnist
tries to pass off a slimy smear or a dishonest argument in the mainstream
press, and suddenly a thousand people are debunking him and ridiculing
him on their independent blogs.

Antiwar.com
was little more than a hobby of mine when I started it back ten
years ago, but if you told me at the end of the 1990s how many readers
we’d have now I’d say you were as crazy as I thought Timothy Leary
was in 1977. We reach nearly 100,000 — three football stadiums of
people — every single day. They read from across the political
spectrum and from more than 100 countries, and they see the radical
libertarian case for nonintervention backed up by a dozen columns
and 200 articles of new stories, culled from the independent and
mainstream press, daily.

LewRockwell.com
also offers an indispensable service, reaching tens of thousands
every day, far beyond what libertarian publishers would have ever
thought possible just five years ago. For many years, libertarians
were so few in number and those who wanted to make a difference
spent the majority of their time and resources just to organize
and get their message out to a small number of people. To succeed
at a print run of 1,000 was considered a grand accomplishment, and
Lew achieves that, through the virtual world, dozens of times over,
every single day.

No other website
comes close to LewRockwell.com in reaching those type of numbers
with an explicitly libertarian message.

The best libertarian
commentary on the newest political crimes appear on your computer
first thing in the morning. Old writers, new writers, scholars on
economics, antiwar journalists, revisionist historians, anti-state
intellectuals and radicals of the libertarian ethic, all together,
all on one site.

The archives
available at LRC, and at Lew’s other organization, the Mises Institute,
are alone a wonder. He has made thousands of the greatest writings
of the classical liberal and libertarian movement available to anybody,
anytime. And it’s all at a cost of nothing for the reader. Classic
economic texts and historical essays are completely retrievable
and searchable with a click of a button. Send that one compelling
article to your friend that you were arguing endlessly with about
taxes or gun control; if it can’t convince him, maybe nothing can.
What we see at LRC and at the rest of the great libertarian sites
is the libertarian movement finally finding its perfect method for
outreach. Nowhere else are people so open-minded, disabused of the
administration’s newspeak and the conventional history and economics
that plague academia and the mass media, and ready to consider voluntary,
peaceful solutions to fix society’s problems and serve our individual
needs. Nowhere else are people so simultaneously skeptical of the
current social order but grateful for their fellow man and the many
fruits of voluntary, free exchange.

The Internet
really is the destined home for libertarianism, and our greatest
hope for freedom. On it we see the free market of ideas and services
flourish even as the politicians try to stamp out civil society
in realspace. On it we see the truth win out over the political
and media establishment. On it we see the spirit of liberty.

The state cannot
catch up to, it cannot match, and it cannot begin to comprehend
the full power of the Internet. Politicians are baffled by it because
it doesn’t conform to their assumptions about the world, about human
organization, about the need for central planning. The glorious
Internet is a major source of confusion for all with a statist mindset.

The net is
revolutionizing society, all toward more voluntary, civil and efficient
methods of organization. It has given us all a way to participate
in speaking the truth and standing up to the state. The Internet
is ours — it belongs to the people and especially the friends of
freedom and peace who feel so at home online because it is so free
and so much the way we’d like to see the rest of the world.

And
so, when the revolution comes — when the state declines and freedom
triumphs — the Internet will have played a deciding role. And I
am hopeful of that future, and the move our culture is making toward
it. Thanks to the net, our wildest imaginations and dreams might
come true, and our destiny and our society might prove to be — just
like LewRockwell.com, and just like so much of the Internet culture
— anti-state, anti-war, and pro-market.

My great
thanks to Anthony
Gregory
, without whom I could not have organized my thoughts
so well.

November
22, 2005

Eric
Garris [send him mail]
has been a political activist for 38 years. He is currently Webmaster
for Antiwar.com and LewRockwell.com.

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare