In a neat op-ed, Vint Cerf argues that we can’t rationalize internet access as a human right.
On that I think I agree with him. The designation of human rights should be reserved for core tenets that permit basic health, basic safety, and basic agency.
My agreement ends, however, with Mr. Cerf’s implication that internet access should also not be considered a civic right. My objection here is to the premise, not the reality. To my knowledge, there is no jurisdiction that recognizes web access in this way, and in that sense Mr. Cerf’s analysis is correct.
But civic rights, unlike human rights, are not static or universal. They are bound by borders, real and imagined.
My civic rights as a Canadian are different from those of a Luxembourger or a Singaporean. And one of those rights is the ability of citizens to review, redact, and reinforce the laws that govern them.
If a nation decides that it wants a reasonable standard of internet access to be one of the base opportunities that it guarantees its citizens (and catalyzes legislation to cement it), those ideals instantly become a recognized civic right of that society. I reject the contention that the fact that it hasn’t yet happened means that it can’t, or shouldn’t.
