Net Neutrality: Preferential Regulation and Legislation to Protect Monopolies
The implementation of Internet neutrality is nothing more than the culmination of a process in which the largest ISPs launch their last assault on the communications market to consolidate their growing monopoly.
Powerful ISPs are supported by big government, whose so-called deregulation plans – which in reality are heavy regulatory scams governed by rules written by the industry and not by legislators – intend to kidnap and eliminate user choice.
The ongoing process that seeks to consolidate control over communications infrastructure is a clear example of modern Fascism.
Net neutrality ultimately means that government entities will be able to exercise total control over the way in which ISPs function and that these entities will have unlimited access to metadata as well as all information that runs through ISP networks.
Giving any government control over global communications is equal to concentrating military power solely in its hands.
In fact, what the alleged government regulators are doing is using the bureaucratic structure to facilitate the concentration of power over the Internet, which is the only significant tool available to people to counteract the corruption that results in monopolistic practices sought by large corporations.
Adopting net neutrality far and wide would effectively be like concentrating all military might in the hands of one single entity such as the United Nations, for example. In that case, the U.N. would be the only organization with the power to force nations to do what it wants them to do.
In the same fashion, Internet neutrality would allow the two-headed monster composed by large communication companies and government to have their way with everyone else.
See the video below for an in-depth explanation about the past, present and future of the Internet, should net neutrality take over national and international communications infrastructure.
As explained by Stefan Molyneux in the video above, the imposition of net neutrality will end up as all other cases of government intervention. When the government attempts to control big businesses and / or the marketplace, the result is exactly the opposite: Big businesses end up controlling government, which is in itself the definition of Fascism.
When corporate-written, government-enforced regulations dictate the way the world functions, the result is Fascism.
It is the government of the corporations, for the corporations and by the corporations.
This reality is already true in many aspects of our lives. Corporations are largely in control of food supply, water supply, transportation, basic services, the military, communications technology, health and insurance, among others.
In all of these cases, governments have, under the excuse of ‘de-regulation’, worked hand-in-hand with industry to eliminate competition, thus strengthening their monopolies.
After monopoly triumphs over competitive national markets in developed nations, the same model is exported to other regions of the planet in the form of Free Trade Agreements (FTA), whose only goal is to eliminate national barriers so that global corporations are able to flood local markets with heavily subsidized, cheaper, lower quality products.
In the case of Internet services, it would result in strongly surveilled access to Internet content, poorer and more limited access due to decaying infrastructure that will run on the “slow lanes” of the web. In the near future, it will also mean open censorship of content due to lack of capacity by users and some content producers to pay for acess to “fast lanes” or because regulators decide that some content is not adequate.
Is net neutrality good or bad for you? You decide. Just remember that, in Molyneux’s words, the world is full of people with very low morality, those with deep pockets and empty hearts. Remember that those people are the ones who are now in control of corporations which in turn are in control of government and that they are the ones behind the push for Net Neutrality.
Many people like you read and support The Real Agenda News’ independent, journalism than ever before. Different from other news organisations, we keep our journalism accessible to all.
The Real Agenda News is independent. Our journalism is free from commercial, religious or political bias. No one edits our editor. No one steers our opinion. Editorial independence is what makes our journalism different at a time when factual, honest reporting is lacking elsewhere.
In exchange for this, we simply ask that you read, like and share all articles. This support enables us to keep working as we do.
Luis Miranda is an award-winning journalist and the Founder and Editor of The Real Agenda News. His career spans over 20 years and almost every form of news media. He writes about environmentalism, geopolitics, globalisation, health, corporate control of government, immigration and banking cartels. Luis has worked as a news reporter, On-air personality for Live news programs, script writer, producer and co-producer on broadcast news.