Peoples' petition called "net neutrality" has been one of the more ill-conceived goals of civil liberties advocates to date. "Net neutrality" is a misnomer of public benefit. It misidentifies agitators' true objective (to exercise gov prerogative to "fix" telecom owner/operator rates), true problem (carrier OR "publisher" monopoly rate prerogatives), true market structure and political constituents (differential carrier AND rate-payer types), thus true value of a natural monopoly (intrinsic utility), telecommunication.

Consideration due this human "right" is conspicuously absent among "net neutrality" arguments for gov mediation of trade, or interstate commerce. Its advocates might have been prepared to challenge so-called business needs of a privately-owned "system" directly with antitrust complaints by demanding "consumer" protection from monopoly pricing power exercised by both carriers AND publishers. But that would defeat common wisdom in the USA, that is, government is for naught. By now, since '96, it's difficult to deny the "level field" without appearing to play a team-favorite. Everyone with a game, a streaming network, a bitch, an ad [!], a geneology, a has executed a scheme to extract "value" from eyeballs. Yet another reason why "net neutrality" appeals to arrest censorship just now are all the more incoherent.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.