BrianGarst.com

Unable to pass “net-neutrality” legislation through the normal democratic process, those looking to expand government control of our lives to one of the last remaining bastions of freedom, the internet, turned to the unelected bureaucrats at the FCC to take action.  Without statutory authority, they eagerly leapt forward to take charge of regulating the internet.  The courts have now rebuffed this illegal powergrab.

Net neutrality rules are a “solution” seeking a problem.  No one has shown any cause for why they are needed.  But that hasn’t stopped liberals from responding with doom and gloom to the courts rightful ruling that the FCC’s attempted reach exceeded its grasp.  Megan Tady, a Google lobbyist at the Huffington Post, calls the ruling “the biggest blow to our nation’s primary communications platform,” quixotically warned the courts not to “take away our internet.”  As if maintaining the exact same rules which has allowed the internet to grow and thrive would somehow suddenly threaten its very existence.  She didn’t bother to explain how that could be so.

The hyperventilating at Mother Jones was even worse.  There, we were ominously warned that the FCC is the “last hope” of the internet.  Give me a break.

The left just cannot believe that there is any mechanism other than government to provide institutional accountability.  There is and it’s called free choice.  Why do they have so little faith in American consumers that they assume anyone would tolerate censorship on the internet?  If a company were to block websites people want to see, then they would use a different company. Clean, simple, and no expensive government rules necessarily.

If you look at who actually practices censorship of the internet throughout the world, you’ll see that it is only governments.  Why are American liberals so intent to hand the wolves the keys to the hen house, under the guise of protecting the hens, when there isn’t even any evidence that they are in danger?

FCC net neutrality