Why Net Neutrality and Libertarians Don't Mix

I read Nick Gillespie's thoughts on Net Neutrality (and more) today, here

And I respond to him thusly:

 An interesting article.  I enjoyed reading your take on it, and discovering the viewpoints on that side of the issue.  I fundamentally disagree with many points you've made, however.  I'd like to respond to some of your points here:

10MB/s being the top-rated FCC speed: netindex.com shows how our speeds compare to other developed countries.  We're in 31st place, last I checked.  And we're the second-biggest user of the internet.  These upward trends have been slow.

On addressing a problem that doesn't exist yet: My ideology allows for the prevention of these problems, while sticking pretty closely to "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."  It seems like your motto is closer to "if you can't tell that it's broke, don't fix it."  I'd prefer to avoid the potential trouble rather than wait and see if it happens.

On your stance that what net neutrality proponents fear won't become a reality (that vast and completely hypothetical leap) : Capitalism without proper regulation begets monopolies.  It's math.  That's why we want this type of regulation.

On your allusions to the past: What you reference is true.  The FCC has lost in court.  Netflix and Comcast have set a precedent.  My ideology allows me to assess these happenings as "good" or "bad."  It seems like yours does not allow you to make these types of judgement on past events.  If a law was passed, if a business transaction occurred, if a court ruled, then it MUST be the best thing.  I wish you were more open to questioning the past.

On the FCC being terrible: I ABSOLUTELY AGREE!!! I don't want the FCC to have more regulatory power that could further ruin the internet.  However, I believe true Net Neutrality regulation is needed to keep ISPs in check, and disallow practices that can exacerbate the progress along the inevitable path to monopoly.

I am personal witness to the effects of the absence of such regulation.  Comcast provided me particularly choppy service when I was using Microsoft Lync (business Skype, basically) for work.  Incidentally, Comcast offers phone services which are in direct competition with this type of internet usage.  So I got a device that encrypted my data.  Since then, Comcast doesn't know I'm making internet phone calls, and the connection has been flawless.

What I want to see (and I believe the rest of the Net Neutrality proponents can agree to this) is regulation that mandates ISPs to not give priority to certain services.  We don't want ISPs to be able to use their oligopoly power to strongarm users into buying more of their services or hold content hostage unless content providers pay them a fee.

It is clear that your libertarian outlook shapes your thoughts on this issue.  The fundamental difference between you and me is that I don't trust corporations the way you don't trust government.  In this case, however, the evidence for your stance is weak and ill-founded.  Net Neutrality is a real issue with real consequences which are already being felt, and it's about time we did something about it.