（写在前面：自由浏览互联网是基本人权，如果失去网络中立，那么所有人都会成为ISP们的奴隶。）
THE OFFICIAL expiration date for “net neutrality” has come and gone. So what happens now?
“网络中立”的官方到期日已经过去了。 那么现在发生了什么？
On June 11, regulations passed by the Obama-era Federal Communications Commission (FCC) preventing Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from prioritizing certain websites — and slowing down others — came to an end.
6月11日，奥巴马时代的联邦通信委员会（FCC）通过的阻止互联网服务提供商（ISP）对某些网站进行优先排序—并放慢其他网站的速度—的规定结束了。
Internet companies will now have the freedom to charge varying rates to access “premium” content, creating a two-tiered system for the internet, where only those who can pay can access information freely.
互联网公司现在可以自由地收取不同的费用来访问“高级”内容，为互联网创建一个双层系统，只有那些可以付费的人才能自由访问信息。
The net neutrality debate has understandably taken a back seat to the myriad of other crises hitting working people in the Trump era. But it’s an issue whose impact extends far beyond the tech industry and Silicon Valley.
对于在特朗普时代打击工人的无数其他危机，关于网络中立性辩论已经退居二线。 但这是一个造成的影响远远超出了科技行业和硅谷的问题。
Changing our access to web content is an attack on the right of ordinary people to access the Internet as a basic public utility. As socialists, we should stand firmly against new legislation undermining net neutrality, and we shouldn’t allow the June 11 to be the end of the fight.
改变我们对网络内容的访问权限是对作为基本公共事务的普通人访问互联网的权利的攻击。作为社会主义者，我们应该坚决反对破坏网络中立性的新立法，我们不应该让6月11日成为战斗的终结。
THE STORY of net neutrality begins decades before anyone ever heard of the internet.
网络中立的故事开始于几十年前，甚至在任何人听说过互联网之前。
In 1934, Congress passed the Communications Act, which created the FCC as THE central commission to ensure that all wired and radio communications were regulated as interstate commerce.
1934年，国会通过了“通信法案”，该法案创建了FCC作为中央委员会，以确保所有有线和无线电通信都作为州际贸易被监管。
Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal administration aimed to make sure that telephone and radio providers wouldn’t give special treatment to certain signals, whether phone calls or broadcasts, over others, based on whether their senders paid more.
富兰克林罗斯福的新政政府旨在确保电话和无线电提供商不会根据他们的发件人是否支付更多费用，对某些信号（无论是电话还是广播）进行特殊处理。
Eighty-one years later, FCC chair Tom Wheeler decided in 2015 that internet and broadband internet should be regulated in the same way — over the objections of Republican FCC member Ajit Pai, who is now the agency’s chair.
八十一年后，FCC主席Tom Wheeler在2015年决定互联网和宽带互联网应该以同样的方式加以监管 – 共和党F的CC成员Ajit Pai现在是该机构的主席。
Industry trade associations like the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA), along with their political supporters like Ajit Pai, would have us believe that this deregulation has “liberated” the internet from silly and costly government intrusions into the “free” market that have only hurt consumers.
像国家电缆和电信协会（NCTA）这样的行业协会，以及他们的政治支持者们，如Ajit Pai，让我们相信这种取消管制已经“解放”了互联网，使其免于愚蠢而昂贵的政府入侵“自由”市场，这只会伤害消费者。
According to this logic, it’s government regulations that have prevented broadband corporations like Comcast — which reported $80 billion in revenue for 2016 — from expanding access and reliability, as opposed to coldhearted capitalist reluctance to expand access into what are seen less profitable or more “difficult to service” areas.
根据这一逻辑，是政府法规阻止了像康卡斯特这样的宽带公司—其2016年的收入达到800亿美元—扩大了接入和可靠性，而不是冷酷的资本家不愿意扩大接入，因为利润较低或是更“服务困难”的地区。
Comcast’s earnings report exceeded expectations from investors concerned about the growing number of users who are “cutting the cord” on traditional cable and satellite TV in favor a-la-carte services like Netflix, HBO and Hulu.
康卡斯特的收益报告超出了投资者的预期，投资者担心越来越多的用户在传统的有线电视和卫星电视上“切断电线”，转而支持像Netflix，HBO和Hulu这样的单点服务。
Variety reported last year that “22 million will have canceled cable, satellite TV by the end of 2017,” — and that number is expected to grow, both from more people ditching traditional TV and from increasing numbers of young people who never knew that model to begin with.
去年多个报告称，“到2017年底将有2200万人取消有线电视，和卫星电视”，而这一数字预计会增长，无论是放弃传统电视的人还是越来越多的从未知道过传统模式的年轻人。
As “cord-cutting” has grown, advertising revenue has dropped accordingly, presenting some of today’s telecom behemoths with a massive problem on the horizon.
随着“切断电线”的增长，广告收入也相应下降，在今天的一些电信巨头面前呈现出即将出现的大问题。
It isn’t difficult to draw a connection between the revenue losses to cable and satellite TV created by cord-cutting, and the push to end FCC regulation of the Internet as a basic utility. It’s also not difficult to see the contradiction in deregulating the broadband market, and the increase in mergers and acquisitions in the Internet and broadcast companies.
将切断电线产生的有线电视和卫星电视的收入损失与推动终止FCC将互联网作为基础设施的管制联系起来并不困难。 不难看出，在取消对宽带市场的管制以及增加互联网和广播公司的兼并和收购方面存在矛盾。
In most parts of the country, people’s cable and satellite TV provider is the same as their ISP, and many locations in the U.S. have fewer than two ISP options. In fact, Americans have on average one and a half providers to choose from. So even as millions are jumping ship from cable to internet, they still find themselves beholden to the same handful of monopolies.
在这个国家的大部分地区，人们的有线和卫星电视提供商与其ISP相同，而且美国的许多地方只有不到两种ISP可供选择。 事实上，美国人平均有一个半供应商可供选择。 因此，即使数百万人从有线电视上跳到互联网上，他们仍然发现自己仍然受到同样少数垄断者的青睐。
The FCC and NCTA would like us to believe this is the result of irresponsible government regulations that prevent companies from providing a wide array of options for consumers at a competitive price.
FCC和NCTA希望我们相信这是不负责任的政府管制的结果，这些管制阻止公司以具有竞争力的价格为消费者提供广泛的选择。
In reality, it’s our extremely unregulated economy that has given license to a handful of corporate behemoths to engage for the last 30 years in a veritable “arms” race to gain the largest market share, either by mergers and acquisitions or by cartel-like non-competition agreements with one another.
实际上，这是我们极度不受管制的经济授予了少数企业巨头在过去的30年中参与真正的“武装”竞赛，以获得最大的市场份额，无论是通过兼并和收购，还是通过和另一家签订类似卡特的不竞争协议。
If the desire of super-sized communication conglomerates to dictate the terms of the market is one important factor driving the FCC’s decision to end the net neutrality regulations, another is the desire of economic and political elites to shape and control our media.
如果超大型通信集团的独占市场的欲望是推动FCC决定终止网络中立管制的一个重要因素，那么另一个欲望是经济和政治精英们希望塑造和控制我们的媒体。
The political danger of telecom monopolization was made apparent when the right wing Sinclair Broadcast Group was exposed for airing a propaganda script — ironically about the dangers of “fake news” — across their dozens of television and radio stations. The Orwellian fiasco showed how concentrated media monopolies can create and distribute completely false information because they have total control over the content being produced.
当右翼的辛克莱广播集团（Sinclair Broadcast Group）在他们的数十家电视台和广播电台播放宣传剧本—具有讽刺意味的是关于“假新闻”的危险性—时，电信垄断的政治危险就显而易见了。 奥威尔式的惨败表明，集中媒体的垄断可以创造和分发完全错误的信息，因为他们完全控制着被生产出的内容。（备注：看来美国的媒体基本都是被右派们控制的，所以上面根本找不到社会主义内容，除了稻草人抹黑之外。）
Control of the media plays a crucial role in what Noam Chomsky and others have dubbed “manufacturing consent” for ruling-class policies that lead to wars, poverty, mass incarceration and the continued deterioration of conditions for the working class.
媒体的控制在诺姆乔姆斯基和其他人称为“制造共识”的统治阶级政策中起着至关重要的作用，这些政策导致战争，贫困，大规模监禁以及工人阶级的处境的持续恶化。
By contrast, the internet has provided the working class — so far — a potential platform to inject our ideas and interests into public discussion.
相比之下，互联网为工人阶级—迄今为止—提供了一个将我们的想法和兴趣注入公共讨论的有潜力的平台。
Social media campaigns like #BlackLivesMatter and #MeToo have played a critical role in enabling grassroots activists and everyday people to build awareness and solidarity against oppression. Nor should we forget the role social media played in the Arab Spring. The FCC’s June 11 decision will compromise access to what has become a vital tool for social change.
像#BlackLivesMatter和#MeToo这样的社交媒体运动在帮助草根活动者和普通人建立反对压迫的意识和团结方面发挥了关键作用。 我们也不应该忘记社交媒体在阿拉伯之春中扮演的角色。 FCC在6月11日的决定将会使获取已成为社会变革重要工具的内容的能力打折扣。
In the last decade, members of Congress, both Democrats and Republicans, have tried to pass three bills — the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA), PROTECT IP Act (PIPA) and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) — that would have enabled the Justice Department to censor and shut down websites containing “confidential or copyrighted material.”
在过去的十年中，国会议员，民主党人和共和党人，都试图通过三项法案—打击在线侵权和假冒法案（COICA），保护知识产权法案（PIPA）和停止在线盗版法案（SOPA）—使司法部能够审查和关闭包含“机密或受版权保护的材料”的网站。
The loose definitions in these bills about what constitutes confidential or protected material created widespread fears of corporate abuse, and ultimately all three failed to gain passage, due in large part to pressure from activists around the U.S.
这些法案中关于什么构成机密或受保护材料的宽泛定义引发了对公司滥用的普遍担忧，最终三者都未能获得通过，这在很大程度上是由于美国各地活动者们的压力。
The FCC’s decision potentially puts this power of censorship fully in the control of corporate ISPs, and provides ordinary people with few avenues to challenge their decisions to block access or throttle bandwidth to any chosen site for any reason.
FCC的决定可能将审查权完全置于公司互联网服务提供商的控制之下，并为普通人提供了几乎不存在的途径来挑战他们阻止访问或因任何原因限制任何选定网站的带宽的决定。
Deregulating net neutrality could give Comcast the ability to censor YouTube videos of Black men being shot by police on the basis that the videos constitute “inflammatory content” or are “not in alignment with our corporate culture.” Or an ISP could decide to only stream the video if either YouTube or the consumer (or both) pays a premium fee.
取消对网络中立的监管可以让康卡斯特能够审查警察开枪杀死的黑人男子的YouTube视频构成“煽动内容”或“与我们的企业文化不一致”。或者ISP可以决定只对支付了额外费用的YouTube或消费者（或两者）提供视频流。
Some large media corporations like Facebook and Amazon have come out in support of net neutrality. Of course, their interest is less about consumer choice or political freedom than about keeping their costs down, as they make obscene amounts of money through their own monopolistic practices, as well as by collecting and selling our data to the highest bidder.
一些像Facebook和亚马逊这样的大型媒体公司已经出来支持网络中立。 当然，他们对消费者的选择自由或政治自由的兴趣少于保持低成本的兴趣，因为他们通过自己的垄断行为赚取令人恶心的大笔金钱，以及向最高出价者收集和出售我们的数据。
WHILE THE FCC has made its decision, but the fight for net neutrality isn’t over.
虽然FCC做出了决定，但争取网络中立的战斗没有结束。
Even if these telcom monopolies start imposing a fee-based structure for various packages, users will inevitably find ways around it — like using paid or free virtual private network (VPN) services that appear to access the internet outside of the U.S., thereby circumventing restrictions.
即使这些电信垄断企业开始对各种套餐强加基于收费的结构，用户也会因此想办法解决这个问题 ——比如使用可以访问美国以外的互联网的付费或免费的虚拟专用网络（VPN）服务，从而绕过限制。
If states such as California follow through on their pledges to become “net neutral states,” this in turn could give rise to VPN services that appear to access the internet from California, effectively “opening the gates” on internet content.
如果像加利福尼亚这样的州履行其承诺成为“网络中立州”，这反过来又会产生从加利福尼亚进入互联网的VPN服务，有效地为互联网内容“打开了大门”。
The internet is a battleground that we need to win. It was designed as a communication and information system. We’ve seen its benefits to education, medicine, organization, and social change. On the other hand, if it passes wholly over into the unregulated hands of capitalists, it can become a tool of social control and mega-profits to a far greater extent than it already is.
互联网是我们需要取得胜利的战场。它被设计为通信和信息系统。 我们已经看到它对教育，医疗，组织和社会变革的好处。 另一方面，如果它完全被控制在资本家的不受管制的手中，它可以成为一种社会控制和攫取超级利润的工具，其程度远远超过现有的程度。
While we stand in solidarity with #BLM, #MeToo, #FreePalestine, #BDS, we need to also make sure we protect a media platform that belongs to us and that has been so vital in all of these movements.
虽然我们与＃BLM，＃MeToo，＃FreePalestine，＃BDS团结在一起，但我们还需要确保我们保护了属于我们的媒体平台，并且这些平台在所有这些运动中都至关重要。
https://socialistworker.org/2018/07/19/we-cant-let-net-neutrality-die