> whims of a private American corporation
Exactly. Private corporations that adhere to US law and have demonstrated that they don't operate in good faith.
Each country should control official channels of communication.
Exactly. Private corporations that adhere to US law and have demonstrated that they don't operate in good faith.
Each country should control official channels of communication.
P.S.: In a perhaps different sense, it has been decades since modernity ended.
Am I mistaken somehow ?
And notably, this was a fairly common view during the height of the modern age (19th century), so much that its incompatibility with societal liberalism was widely ignored, probably because it allowed for paternalistic colonialism, which made the people practicing it very rich...
the sentiment methinks is misplaced. the US is a 23 trillion dollar GDP. sooner or later, all private corporations adhere to its law.
a better observation is that technocratic trappings of neoliberalism are more akin to neofeudalism than most western governments are willing to confess in 2022, lest they anger the spirit of Thatcher and Reagan or god forbid induce some sort of mass reform.
Vint Cerf said it best at the southern california linux expo when he explained how the digital frontier is really no different for sovreignity than air, land, sea, and space are. You either delineate the domain and maintain stewardship of it, or youre at the mercy of others with the digital equivalent of bluewater navy and satellites. the EU masto instance is a shot across the bow for major US corporations in that a contested battleground has been abruptly created in the absence of leadership and command at the largest fleet carrier (twitter)
> the US is a 23 trillion dollar GDP. sooner or later, all private corporations adhere to its law.
While the EU and China are not quite as large as the USA on their own, they are close enough that many multinational corporations already face the challenge of being the servants of three masters.
I don't want to create 100 accounts to access each countries totally unique and special websites. It's a bad system and ultimately will lead to less discourse and not more.
However, unless you are a resident of 100 countries, it's probably not particularly essential that you do so, is it? I mean, I can imagine my being interested in the official channels of communication for governments of countries in which I am not a resident, but I cannot imagine why they should care to make it particularly easy for me to access those communications. It seems that the most that I should be able to ask is easy read-only access without having to sign up for a special account.
Do, ĉiuj homoj devas paroli Esperanton.
;)