In your opinion,

[Jazzy]

should Internet access be considered globally as a human right? Why or why not?

 

[Lees]

should Internet access be considered globally as a human right? Why or why not?

Where does this 'idea' of a 'human right' come from?

Lees

 

[Fritz Kobus]

should Internet access be considered globally as a human right? Why or why not?

Absolutely not. No proper human right would require other peoples' money be paid to provide it to the person. Our human rights are to life, liberty, and private property, the latter of which we have to earn by our life and liberty.

 

[Stravinsk]

Internet access has become a human right simply because some of even the most basic services are now tied to it. For example, where I live, there is no land line phones anymore. To communicate with anyone, you must have a mobile service or have internet access. If payments of any type for basic needs become completely electronic (ie: living in a cashless society) then it also becomes a basic right. I see things progressing this way to the detriment of the individual, as the internet we enjoy now as anonymous or semi-anonymous may some day become a thing of the past.

 

[tango]

Ordinarily I would agree with Fritz that a human right is something that pre-exists and does not inherently require someone else to pay for. But with the relentless push to take away services in any format other than online, a lack of internet access naturally excludes people from the most basic services.

It has at least some parallel to the whole idea of the mark of the beast - the way things are going it probably won't be long before an inability to get online will mean someone can't buy or sell, and as soon as one entity gets enough control over who is online that entity can knock people offline for pretty much any reason they choose. Of course it might not be as overt as "you're banned", it could just be the kind of mysterious technical issues that plague someone, so it looks like they can do what they need to but nothing quite works.