In The Republic, Plato introduces the Ring of Gyges thought
experiment. This intellectual device—a ring of invisibility—has since become a
standard in fantasy and science fiction literature and movies. What would
Tolkien’s The Hobbit have been
without the ring of invisibility? In Plato’s thought experiment, the possessor
of this ring of invisibility uses it to seduce the Queen, murder the King, and
usurp the throne. In a column
in Time, Walter Isaacson, the president and CEO of the Aspen Institute,
wishes to conjure up his own Platonic magical ring. This ring would allow him “to
know and publicly reveal the names and addresses of all people who anonymously
post vulgar rants and racist tweets.”
Isaacson complains that anonymity
makes one less civil. He contends that “if we all thought we were subject to
being rated, we might work harder to be on our best behavior.” He fantasizes of
a world where everyone is rating everyone else in a Yelp or TripAdvisor
fashion. While he admits that such a world would be Orwellian, he sighs with
pleasure: “[I]magine how much better we would behave.”
A few thoughts are in order here.
First, any person is already free to use the Internet to rate others. Providers
of goods and services can be rated on Yelp, TripAdvisor, HealthGrades, Rate My
Professor, etc. as Isaacson acknowledges. In a free market, those who provide
goods and services in an honest and reliable fashion and provide excellent and
courteous customer service are likely to best succeed. This is not new or
revolutionary.
Secondly, and more importantly, online
anonymity is good. The positive consequences of anonymity on the Internet
outweigh the negative ones. Does anonymity embolden jerks to be rude? Sure.
Discussions on internet forums quite often degenerate quickly into name
calling. However, anonymity also emboldens truth telling. If no online speech
were anonymous, then speech would be chilled. Who would ever blow the whistle
against corruption in government or in business if he or she could not publish
or post these revelations anonymously? How many fewer people would openly
criticize the government or other powerful persons or entities if he or she
could not do it anonymously online?
Thirdly, any person who does not
wish to mix it up with the rude anonymous unwashed Internet masses can avoid
websites and forums that allow anonymous posting of comments. One can
exclusively frequent sites that require registration. One can even develop and
exclusively use sites that require very detailed user information—a name, a
verified e-mail address, a photo, a physical address, etc.—in order to post
comments.
Fourthly, those like Isaacson,
who lament how anonymity leads to rudeness which prevents online discourse from
being “elevated” (whatever that means), confuse etiquette with morality. It is
not difficult to imagine well cultured monsters. Imagine the Wannsee Conference
on January 20, 1942. Nazi
senior officials gathered to discuss the “Final Solution” to the Jewish
problem—namely, the deportation of Jews to Poland
where they were to be murdered. One can imagine that these Nazis were well
behaved and well spoken at this conference. Perhaps they never raised their
voices. Perhaps they never used vulgar words. Harmless euphemisms instead of
anti-Semitic epithets. Maybe they even sipped their tea just right with their
pinkies extended. Certainly none belched at the table. Contrast this with a
typical day in the British Parliament. MPs screaming at one another like
inmates in an asylum and using language that would make the saltiest of sailors
blush. If the etiquette “elevated the discourse” at Wannsee, is that better?
Finally, and most importantly,
the less anonymity there is on the Internet, the less privacy there is from
government. One can imagine that there was a lot of smiling and politeness in
Stasi East Germany
during the Cold War. In a world without any possibility of anonymity, there is
less and less privacy. For anyone who loves free speech, rudeness and vulgarity
is well worth the assurance that one can speak his or her mind online without
fear of reprisal from the government, powerful private entities, society, or
anyone else.
(For more analysis of the First
Amendment, natural rights, and the Real Culture War, read my book The
Real Culture War: Individualism vs. Collectivism & How Bill O’Reilly Got It
All Wrong available now in print and digital on Amazon.)
