Government of Cyberspace

To conclude the book, Deibert acknowledges the difficult nature of removing governments from the equation with respect to online companies.  There isn’t anyone else that has the same resources and power that governments have to secure online communities.  Governments are in a crisis to control the daily attacks and crimes committed through the cyberspace community.  Deibert calls for an alternative approach toward security “that meshes with the core values and decentralized architecture of an open and secure network” through a distribution of power (Deibert p.238).  Deibert wants a bureaucratic system to control cyberspace, which is a system of government where non-elected officials make the decisions.  James Beniger says bureaucracy “tends to appear wherever a collective activity needs to be coordinated by several people where explicit and impersonal goals are controlled” (Beniger p.58).  Bureaucracies have shown to be successful many times in the past through organizations such as the “Bank of the United States and the Post Office Department” (Beniger p.59).  Left unchecked, these mounting government interactions will “result in gradual disintegration of the long-term interest of all citizens” (Deibert p.234).  I strongly agree with Deibert’s argument because it maintains the involvement of a higher authority within cyberspace.  There are often big differences between government’s regulations of separate nations, which can make it complicated for an online company to determine what laws they should have to comply with.  Deibert believes there should not be just one form of government that decides on the rules, but the “governance should be diffused and distributed across multiple forums and meetings at local, national, regional, and the global levels” (Deibert p.239).  For this to be successful, there is required participation from people at every level, which can be difficult to institute, especially at the local level.  At the minimum, I think there needs to be an organization with participants from each country that establishes controls to secures cyberspace for everyone.  There can’t be an overriding influence from any one nation because everyone uses cyberspace.  Equality is the only option for the users of cyberspace.  Without a bureaucratic system, the fight to govern cyberspace will continue down a path of varied “control and surveillance” (Deibert p.235).  Many people would argue against a bureaucratic system for the governing of cyberspace due to the difficult nature to establish one.  It is unclear how countries like China or Afghanistan will agree to join forces with the United States on this issue.   I believe nations can eventually come to agreement and adopt one set of rules for global cyberspace for the betterment of the cyberspace users.  If we don’t, I believe Deibert when he says there won’t be any going back.  Governments will continue fighting for overall control if the users of cyberspace don’t start fighting back.  Every individual has access to the growing evidence of the actions governments are taking with respect to their surveillance of cyberspace.   Citizens need to take the time to analyze these actions. realize that their rights on online are being slowly taken away, start doing something about it, before it’s too late.