Slashdot Mirror
Is Anti-Municipal Broadband Report Astroturf?
Glenn Fleishman writes "A report issued today by the New Millennium Research Council (NMRC) and The Heartland Institute says that municipalities shouldn't build wireless networks because it's anti-competitive and will waste taxypayer dollars. The report has some interesting points (mostly about building fiber networks), but eWeek (second page) uncovered that NMRC is a subsidiary of Issue Dynamics, which is a lobbying firm that represents most US telcos and cable operators. It's astroturf. The Heartland Institute won't reveal its funders. I wrote a long account trying to track down the connections between the sock puppets involved in publicizing the report."
Astroturf, in the literal meaning, is fake grass.
Astroturfing in the political sense is fake "grassroots" political activity.
---
Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
(I read with sigs off.)
When ordinary people (not paid lobbyists) begin to come together in support of (or against) a specific issue, the issue is said to have "grass-roots support." Since the support comes from people without a financial stake in the outcome, that support is seen as "untainted" and is more likely to attract the attention and support of other people. Over the years, politicians and corporations have been caught putting out misleading press releases and funding fake "concerned citizens' groups" in an effort to make an issue appear to have grass-roots support where it really doesn't.
Fake grass = Astroturf.
I do not own a car or have children; should my tax dollars go to fund roads and schools I do not use? I did not want our military to invade Iraq.
I have two kids in school. I support killing extremists in Iraq and demonstrating to Islam that it will either moderate or die, just as Christianity, Judiasm, and Mormonism learned.
Yet I agree with you. I'm furious that you're required to support things you are morally opposed to, or do not see any benefit from and wish not to support. I'm personally digusted that my money goes to support meth abusers I know that buy groceries with food stamps so they can have money for more meth. It is clear I'm helping to enable their abuse. Why should I be forced to be an enabler?
We need a different model for taxation. User fees for everything that works into that model. Line-item contributions for everything else. Money goes directly to the agency. Fire the IRS and much of the Federal and state administrative overhead.