Mar 9 2011: Preventing one population from accessing the internet should definitely be stated as a sign of civil war.
Just like blocking planes and phone communications was stated as a sign of war.
But then, from the individual point of view, I wouldn't say it is fundamental for anybody to have an access to the internet. If I someday choose to cut my networks and live a simple life, I don't want anybody to say "Hey, he's not enjoying the human rights..." or something. I probably wouldn't care about gossiping anymore, but well...
It's something everyone should chose.
Being able to chose is good.
Not being able because of financial/connexion/ethic matters, isn't that bad.
Not being able to chose because of political matters is fundamentally wrong.
TEDCred score: +0.10 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A comment on Conversation: Should the internet be a fundamental right?
Just like blocking planes and phone communications was stated as a sign of war.
But then, from the individual point of view, I wouldn't say it is fundamental for anybody to have an access to the internet. If I someday choose to cut my networks and live a simple life, I don't want anybody to say "Hey, he's not enjoying the human rights..." or something. I probably wouldn't care about gossiping anymore, but well...
It's something everyone should chose.
Being able to chose is good.
Not being able because of financial/connexion/ethic matters, isn't that bad.
Not being able to chose because of political matters is fundamentally wrong.
Great topic to think about!