A Declaration of The Indepedence of Cyberspace

A declaration of the independence of cyberspace, which was written by John Perry Barlow, is a prominent article on the applicability of government on the fast growing of the Internet. It was published online on February 8, 1996 in Davos Switzerland.  Its purpose was in response to the passing of the Telecommunication Act of 1996 in the United States.

The article was written in a unique format with 16 short paragraphs and each of the paragraphs illustrates his unhappiness and rebellious attitude towards the United States government towards the usage of the Internet by outside powers. Barlow thinks that the United States government does not have the right to apply any law regarding the usage of the Internet and so every country in the world does not have that kind of right to do something like that. Barlow believes that the Internet should be a tool which lets the users to create their own relationship with government in order to handle their problems based on the common and logic idea that one should treat others as one would like the same in return in a positive manner and as well one should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated which is in a negative manner.

Barlow seeks to make it crystal clear that the governments that govern the respective nations in this world do not have the right to enforce or nor has it any jurisdiction what so ever in the global social space. The main point is that, jurisdiction of Cyberspace does not fall within its borders as the author points out. Cyberspace as it stands today is free from any form of dictatorships or politically motivated agendas and is not a tool in the game of chess that certain power hungry nations seek to indulge in.  Barlow explains that no government or organisation has ever been approached nor elected by any “leaders” or stakeholders of the global social arena. Barlow would go on to allege that through means of raising conflicting issues and throwing accusations that there is indeed trouble in Cyberspace. The author refutes these baseless accusations and makes a strong stand that its community will resolve problems in Cyberspace and that any form of government intervention is unwarranted, unwanted and not needed.

Moving on, Barlow stresses a very interesting and important point when he raises the topic of matter. The legal concepts of property, expression, identity, movement, and context all apply only to matter. In Cyberspace there is no matter, there is no physical environment; there is only a global network of human beings engaging with one another in “free airspace”. In reality, governments through its courts and policing are able to prosecute a physical being but in Cyberspace there is no physical being or environment to juristic and government intervention would lead to this barrier being broken. He stands on his own with visible and invisible audiences who might support or who might be against him.

Furthermore, Cyberspace is free from marginalization and racial discrimination and each and every stakeholder is treated with the same rights and privileges.  A place where freedom of speech is applied and not give people fear or any doubts when they expressing themselves. Most people on cyberspace consider themselves as ordinary human being with no extra identities, which means like they are no politicians or government staff who have the need to protect themselves and portray a good image to the public. An ideal example would be the ability to sign up for electronic mailing account where as in a so called “democracy” certain sectors of society are marginalized and are not able to have a basic education. In Cyberspace this works differently where all is fair and even on a level playing field. In the real world, nations are ranked by economic strength and military power.

Barlow condemns the Telecommunications Reform Acts passed by the United States government as an insult to the Forefathers’ of America and the very own Constitution of the United States of America. Nations around the world are proposing laws and increasing their jurisdiction as well making clam downs on Cyberspace. The very liberty that is present in Cyberspace is at risk but as man fought for their freedom and rights during the hostile periods of colonialization and prevail so will the stakeholders of Cyberspace. Barlow declares that even though governments and nations may have control over their bodies but the minds of humans are able to reproduce at a rate of infinity and these thoughts can conveyed limitlessly throughout the world until a civilization of the Mind of Cyberspace is achieved and created. A more humane and equal society. 

Let's take few counter-factual cases as to what will happen if government intervention does to take place. An ideal example for that would be what is happening in the UK at the moment. Through the use of social media, lotters, thugs, and rioters were able to gather and have coordinated strikes. In Iran, the Green Revolution took place cause of Twitter. In Egypt, people take over the streets to overthrow the government for cutting of the Internet. It is good and bad. Governments can be toppled through the sue of Cyberspace.

Also note, in the age that we live in, there is an immense threat of coordinate of Cyber Warfare. It is for this reason that governments breach their juridiction and try to enforece Cyberspace. CNN has been hacked, British Intelligence, NASA and etc.

To conclude, this article was written in 1996, fast-forward today's events and an article like this would be rubbished and has little effect and impact on today's society. There is a fine line between social liberty and abusing the freedom given.