YES! - Knowledge is power & the internet should be available for all.
93%
NO! - Access to the internet is not a right. It’s a luxury.
7%
Comments
Thom's Blog Is On the Move
By webmaster
Hello All
Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.
Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.
Images of Thom
From Unequal Protection, 2nd Edition:
"Hartmann combines a remarkable piece of historical research with a brilliant literary style to tell the grand story of corporate corruption and its consequences for society with the force and readability of a great novel."
From Cracking the Code:
"Thom Hartmann ought to be bronzed. His new book sets off from the same high plane as the last and offers explicit tools and how-to advice that will allow you to see, hear, and feel propaganda when it's directed at you and use the same techniques to refute it. His book would make a deaf-mute a better communicator. I want him on my reading table every day, and if you try one of his books, so will you."
From Unequal Protection, 2nd Edition:
"If you wonder why and when giant corporations got the power to reign supreme over us, here’s the story."
As more people rely on the internet for their news due to the abrogation of major media's responsibility to cover real news instead of the cultural flotsam and jetsam that passes for important and worthy of attention in an empire circling the drain; quick and uncensored access to the internet should be the right of an informed citizenry. Or maybe internet impedance is just another way to keep the sheeple grazing in pastures depleted of any nutrient that might stimulate the brain.
My access is limited to one hour per day at the public library. I can't afford home Internet. I rely on web-sites for diversity from around the world. I can join a chat-room or web community (such as Thom's) and communicate with someone from the other side of the globe or from across town.
“Basic Fundamental Right?” VERY loaded question! Sounds too much like “unalienable rights” in the Constitution, so I would conclude, NO. I would put it in the same category as having the right to access to news papers, telephone and tv service, and transportation. People consider these factors when they decide where to live, and there are still many areas in these services are not available, yet people choose to live there. The public and private sectors provide these services based on demand and economics and I think should continue to be the guiding reasons to providing internet access.