Slashdot Mirror
A Monroe Doctrine for the Internet
InklingBooks writes "An article in Foreign Affairs suggests that in a tersely worded statement the United States has issued a 'Monroe Doctrine' for the Internet. The Monroe Doctrine was a unilateral declaration by the U.S. that it would not permit European powers to establish new colonies in the Western Hemisphere." From the article: "Everyone understands that the Internet is crucial for the functioning of modern economies, societies, and even governments, and everyone has an interest in seeing that it is secure and reliable. But at the same time, many governments are bothered that such a vital resource exists outside their control and, even worse, that it is under the thumb of an already dominant United States. Washington's answer to these concerns -- the Commerce Department's four terse paragraphs, released at the end of June, announcing that the United States plans to retain control of the Internet indefinitely -- was intended as a sort of Monroe Doctrine for our times. It was received abroad with just the anger one would expect, setting the stage for further controversy."
The Monroe Doctrine essentially told European powers to say out of the affairs of the Americas. In this case, the US is meddling in the affairs of everyone else by controlling the name servers that everyone uses.
Perhaps the "World Domination Doctrine" would be a more apt name.
The rest of the Americas weren't too happy with the idea of the Americans appointing themselves the stewards of the W. hemisphere. I doubt that the world will be any happier with this. On the other hand, the US was a rising power then, but is now in decline, and the world may be more annoyed or even amused than angry.
"No nation ever existed without some sense of national destiny or purpose.
Manifest Destiny -- a phrase used by leaders and politicians in the 1840s to explain continental expansion by the United States -- revitalized a sense of "mission" or national destiny for Americans.
The people of the United States felt it was their mission to extend the "boundaries of freedom" to others by imparting their idealism and belief in democratic institutions to those who were capable of self-government. It excluded those people who were perceived as being incapable of self-government, such as Native American people and those of non-European origin."
Hmmmm... Iraq? The Intrawebs? What's next? Oh yeah, the moon. Let's install a giant frickin' laser on the moon and then we can hold the rest of the world hostage.
Mmmwwwuuuuuuhhahahhhhaahhaahaa...
"Michael, I did nothing. I did absolutely nothing - and it was everything that I thought it could be."
well it seems that "us" don't think people have the freedom of sexual preference or abortion
I think the US is catching up to a lot of the petty, religious run third world countries
The Internet should remain as is... If some country doesn't like it then go make your own internet and stop bothering us. I encourage them to disconnect themselves from the rest of us and take control of their own area.
You may feel safe that YOUR "democratic" country is "responsibly ruling" over the internet. Just remember also, that your country has George W, Microsoft, SCO, the RIAA, the MPAA, the "Patriot Act" and the US Patent Office.
Enjoy your "safety".
We might be willing to see things your way, if we had any confidence whatsoever that ICANN under UN control would continue to function in as free, objective, and efficient a manner as it has thus far. However, due to the hostility, corruption, and outright incompetence of the UN bureaucracy, we do not.
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
www.cheese-eating-surrender-monkeys.fr?
...more?
www.beret-wearing-napoleon-complex-midgets.fr?
www.paris-is-burning.fr?
www.muslim-girls-must-not-wear-scarves.fr?
You can't talk about Wikipedia's flaws on Wikipedia
I would strongly prefer the remain under the control of USDOC bureaucrats, however flawed, than become the next ITU committee dominated by Chinese Communists and UNESCO New World Information Order types who have no interest in free speech.
sulli
RTFJ.
Banana "republics" and brutal islamic theocracies will all want equal say with Western powers-- and countries like France will play along only as far as their arrogance and conceit will allow. Then again, grease the palms of a few French bureaucrats and all the TLDs will end up in Iran or Sudan before you know it.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Pease then provide us with a better option than what we have now. The UN? Well, I guess if you don't mind domain registration costs skyrocketing so there's enough for all the high-ranking UN officials to get a cut.
I'm not sure I'm in favor of any one country controlling most aspects of the internet either. But I see no proposed alteratives that look reasonable from a technical perspective. And that's what people (especially SLashdot readers) need to concern themselves with, is how viable or desireable is any proposed change technically.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Typical. We get absolutely not one iota of gratitude for our immense generosity in access to the DNS infrastructure, and accomodation of worldwide requests through ICANN. Instead, all we get is a demand for more! more! more! In fact, it's because of our openness with the networks, that we are now told we are bad guys for not giving it up completely.
I'm sorry, but I do not believe anybody who tells me that other countries will like the US more if we do what they say, if we just give away our blood, treasure, and influence with no expectation of anything in return. I've heard it over and over again, and it has never been true, because as soon as the very next disagreement comes up, everything we've done inthe past is forgotten like it never happened. As for the root servers, I say MOLON LABE!
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
Yeah! Anyone that had business dealings with Saddam should have the s#!t fined out of them. Oh wait, that includes Haliburton and most of the senior officials of this administration. Never mind.
"Washington's answer to these concerns -- the Commerce Department's four terse paragraphs, released at the end of June, announcing that the United States plans to retain control of the Internet indefinitely -- was intended as a sort of Monroe Doctrine for our times. It was received abroad with just the anger one would expect, setting the stage for further controversy."
This is the same unacceptable behavior that has always defined the Bush administration:. Arrogant self-indulgent uncompromising unilateralism. Like most of what Bush has done, it will not bring anything good to the world.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Oh. So they're just dicks that can't think of an actual problem. Got it. Thanks for clearing that up.
The "half a day of WTFs" was the one on our side, you idiot. I don't kid myself that American content is utterly useless (heck I'm on /.) just like you shouldn't kid yourself that the world outside of the USA is worthless. Of course if I have to base my judgement on the American tourists I meet here...
Global warming is a cube.
Now that you mention it I am in the process of moving.
Be a man and give up your citizenship while you're at it. After all, if the country is soooo bad, why would you want to be a citizen of it?
Or will yoube a chickensit and keep it, so you can go running to the US Embassy as soon as you get in a bit of trouble?
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1