The Internet is by far the most potent and widely available tool undermining the control of public thought and opinion that has ever been created. Invented in 1960*, the Internet is an electronic global communications network enabling almost instantaneous sharing of information worldwide among basically anyone with a computer and a place to plug in. The individual freedom and anonymity inherent in the net are what make it such a valuable resource for fighting restraints on what opinions and information American citizens can and cannot express or access. While the validity of opinions and "facts" conveyed on the Internet can't be confirmed, the necessity of an absolutely unrestricted method of sharing information is very real. The government already restricts the content of newspapers and magazines along with television and radio programming; these mediums, unlike the Internet, distribute directly to the public with no real feedback on the part of the average consumer. This has its place, as these publicly sanctioned media channels enjoy a higher degree of officiality than does most Internet content. However, those whose opinions and knowledge have been expressed solely on the Internet do not have a history of clamouring for government sanction or absolute authority; the informality and accessibility of the Internet are precisely what make it so valuable a tool that all citizens can participate in. If any regulation were to take effect, the reasoning would most likely be to eliminate "false information," however, while the majority will rule, the majority has very rarely agreed on what truth is. Democracy allows Americans to define their own boundaries, but unless they can all agree on what those boundaries ought to be, it does them very little good. Far be it from the sovereign government of the people, for the people, and by the people to let a history of standardising opinions begin at this stage, but when it all comes down, that's precisely what a government clampdown on the views expressed on the Internet would ultimately entail. While it would likely never reach the scale of the ancient Chinese Legalists, who burned more than half the books in the world during the Qin Dynasty to control public thought, the core of the issue remains the same: state-issued mandates restricting every form of mass communication will ultimately strip people of their freedom. No matter how benevolent the intents behind a nationwide standardisation of information available on the Internet, and no matter how positive the results at first, eliminating the only mass medium that is totally free of constraint would not, in the final analysis, work for the good of the American people. The Internet is the most valuable tool ever created** to combat oppressive governments and limits on personal opinions, and any alterations to that facet of its identity will jeopardise the sovereign right to freedom of speech and opinion, whether they come from a democratic society or not. *by Al Gore **by Al Gore, at least