For months now, rumors have fluttered around the blogosphere that the FCC, an old remnant of FDR’s alphabet soup, would use its authority to enforce a doctrine of “net neutrality.” Similar to the old Fairness Doctrine, which forced radio stations to air as much liberal content as conservative across the airwaves, Net Neutrality forbids private internet service providers from blocking access to websites and applications. Furthermore, the internet providers cannot treat any website, regardless of traffic, differently (e.g. Google should not be given special privilege over unheard of blogs just because much more traffic).
While intended to promote some sort of “social good,” as most misguided programs are, the fact is that Net Neutrality simply is not constintutional. The Federal Communications Commission, already an unconstitutional organization by its very existence, uses its authority to supersede the constitution and, once again, tell private businesses how to direct themselves. Why should ISPs be compelled to redirect resources and effort to support websites that its users would otherwise not care about or pay for? Why should they be forced to provide greater service without first expecting greater pay from their customers?
It is not a matter of censorship, but is instead a matter of control — the unconstitutional bureaucratic branch of the federal government controlling private businesses and interests. If we do not keep our eye on this issue, the Internet as we know it could change forever and, if private Internet Service Providers are forced out of business by the FCC, we could be well be on our way to a government-provided (and ultimately controlled) Internet.