A G K Y R A

BBC News reports the results of a worldwide poll (conducted on behalf of the BBC World Service): according to almost everyone, internet access is a fundamental human right.

Don’t these people know what a human right is? It’s not just something you happen to like or enjoy. Or is watching American Idol also a basic human right, together with ski vacations and ice cream?

It’s also not just something convenient. Or are dishwashers, electric razors, and cell phones also fundamental human rights?

The secretary-general of the International Telecommunication Union, Dr. Hamadoun Toure, says that “the right to communicate cannot be ignored.” How did internet access suddenly become equated with a so-called right to communicate?

The BBC report tells us that “countries such as Finland and Estonia have already ruled that access is a human right for their citizens.” If we’re talking about human rights, we’re not talking about rights that are particular to citizens of one country or another. There is such a thing as a legal right that is particular to one country or one kind of person. Ancient Roman citizens had the legal right not to be crucified. Slaves had no such right. People on trial in the U.S. have the legal right not to incriminate themselves. No claim is made that people in Mongolia have such a right. It’s not a human right but a legal one.

There is so much confusion evident in this BBC report that I wonder how much of it is due to poor survey design incorrect interpretation or reporting of the results, or just plain shallowness by the respondents. Let me help shed some light: when we’re talking about human rights, we’re really talking about human obligations and duties. If someone else has a human right, then I have a moral obligation and duty to that person, and so do you, to protect and preserve whatever it is he has a right to. If to life, then I must not take the person’s life and must do all I can to protect it. If to religion, then I must not try to coerce a person to believe something or to act in a way that would violate his genuine religious scruples, and I must defend a person’s right to hold his religious beliefs and act according to their dictates.

If you believe internet access is a fundamental human right, then you should by all means act immediately to fulfill your own personal obligation to give internet access to anyone who doesn’t have it. Have fun!

New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, as is now well known, has been visiting prostitutes. It wasn’t just a one-time mistake — in the federal wiretap investigation that brought all this to light, Spitzer talks about being behind in his payments to the prostitutes and wants to catch up and pay ahead, to have a credit on his account!

I am dismayed, but not surprised, at how many people I am hearing in man-on-the-street polls who say that it’s his private life and has nothing to do with his governing, so the media should just leave him alone. I guess when you have that kind of person voting, you get that kind of governor.

When he was inaugurated — just last year! — Spitzer took an oath to uphold the constitution of the State of New York (watch the short video below). That very constitution specifies his gubernatorial duties, chief of which is to “take care that the laws are faithfully executed” (article 4, section 3).

How can he be responsible to execute and enforce the laws when he, himself, personally, privately, knowingly, willfully, with full intent and a plan, breaks them?

We elect legislators to write and enact laws. What are we saying about the power of the executive if he can single-handedly thwart the will of our entire legislature with impunity?

How can he govern our state and enforce our laws when he goes to the District of Columbia, where Congress, no less, is the governor, and breaks their laws?

Our leaders should be our best people. If the rest of us let ourselves become like these “who cares?” types, they are bound to be our worst. If our leaders are to hold us accountable, we have to hold them accountable. If we don’t, then upholding the law becomes simply optional, a matter of personal preference according to our own convenience.

Governor Spitzer must resign. If he doesn’t, he must be impeached.