I’m not exaggerating when I say that the introduction of the internet and the declaration of the human rights are among the best what humans have achieved in the last century. Unfortunately, both share a similar faith: while promising as a concept, they fail in practice.
That “all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights”, that “they are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood” sounds so wonderful, it could actually be the beginning of a fairy tale. Well, unfortunately, it has probably become the longest fairy tale. Without the need to go too much into details, one will realize the dud at the very beginning of the declaration when Article 3 reads that “everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.”
Not just that the human rights have never been enforced at a global scale, worse is that they aren’t even binding as an international law. They are a declaration and nothing more than that. From a juridical perspective they aren’t worth more than an empty piece of paper. That is, if and where citizens have the right to a (fair) juridical process at all. Unfortunately, the majority of world citizens have neither rights nor access to courts.
Similar to the human rights, the internet has – in theory – a huge potential. It is what big men dreamt of in earlier centuries, namely that humans among the planet could connect with each other and that citizens at one end would be able to see what was going on at the other. However, if we look at what is really being distributed in the internet, then one might only hope that the Earth was still flat and we couldn’t so easily see at its dark side. Who needs beheadings or superficial nonsense after they successfully got rid of TV decades ago?
Even in terms of positive information the internet is very limited. If one wants information on a certain topic, they first need to click through thousands of websites, skimming through exhaustive long documents, all unstructured, semi-true and very likely biased. Yes, climate change concerns us all, but seriously ‘who on Earth has the time and nerve to read a one thousand seven hundred thirty-four pages long climate report that the IPCC produces on a regular basis?’ Until you are done, the planet will have warmed for another two degrees.
Now, if we’d try to kill two birds with one stone, we might actually unify above problems and use one to solve the other. What if we spent our time in the internet trying to make human rights become a reality? What if we exposed all those who interfered with them, while a citizen court found and formulated a verdict (with “likes” and “don’t likes” if you want) which our governments enforced, using their power and energies in a good way rather than wasting resources banning twitter, facebook and BBC, while treating travelers like terrorists? What if we made online contests on ‘how to easiest reduce our ecological footprint’ while scientists planted trees instead of writing reports that nobody reads? The world would be a better place if we used all available tools in the right way and if we voted against terrorists instead of distributing their propaganda.
Let’s hope that the fairy tale will end like this: “after citizens voted against all forms of tyranny, slavery, cruelty, torture, and discrimination and once they exiled all those contributing to it into a virtual world where latter had to suffer under their own horrifying phantasies in eternity, the few hundreds left over on planet Earth lived happily and in harmony ever after.”
 I explicitly don’t mention the name of those bastards, nor the link to whatever pictures, because I believe that ignoring them is the only means to stop cruelty.
 As is the case in Vietnam