The role of Internet governance in sanctions

Mel Beckman mel at
Thu Mar 10 15:25:11 UTC 2022

In my view, there is a core problematic statement in this document:

“Military and propaganda agencies and their information infrastructure are potential targets of sanctions.”

What is a “propaganda agency”. A political party? An incumbent candidate for re-election? The IRS? Anyone the “majority” disagrees with?

Propaganda is in the eye of the beholder, and we’ve seen both sides of the political aisle sling this term in recent elections and legislative debates.

I think it is a colossal mistake to weaponize the Internet. The potential for unintended consequences is huge, as is the potential for intended, politically-driven consequences 

 -mel beckman

> On Mar 10, 2022, at 5:03 AM, Randy Bush <randy at> wrote:
> maybe it is just that i am sufficiently anti-authoritarian that i try
> not to have the hubris to set myself up as the authority.  maybe that
> in itself is hubris.
> as i was raised by someone who was a conscious objector in ww2, i can
> not bring myself to contribute to weapons etc.  so i have donated to
> folk such as which is focused on medical
> support.
> randy

More information about the NANOG mailing list