The Left used to want ‘net neutrality,’ now they want net censorship

Look back a few years and you will see shifts in political positions that fascinate. Take the once-heated debate about “net neutrality” — a controversy that the Left portrayed as an existential threat to internet accessibility, freedom, and democracy itself.

A decade ago, just like now, European elites copied a hot-button issue straight from the US, namely the debate about open internet and net neutrality. 

Democrats in the US were spreading claims that internet service providers (ISPs) such as Comcast or Verizon could potentially create a dystopian “pay-to-play”, including ISPs throttling speeds unless premium fees were paid, favouring their own streaming services, charging extortionate rates for website access, and potentially blocking content at will.

The metaphor was clear: imagine a highway where the operator could sell fast lanes to the highest bidders while forcing others into crawling slow lanes — or blocking access entirely. This, they claimed, would destroy the open internet and concentrate dangerous power in the hands of ISPs.

Reality showed that this was nothing more than a scaremongering theory.

When President Trump repealed net neutrality rules in 2017, his administration made a compelling case: the regulations were a solution in search of a problem. The internet had flourished without such oversight before 2015, and market competition, coupled with rising VPN usage, provided natural safeguards against abuse. The heavy-handed regulations threatened to stifle investment in network infrastructure.

Yet the European Union, true to form, jumped in to make bureaucratic regulations.

The European Commission established its framework through Regulation (EU) 2015/2120, mandating that ISPs treat all internet traffic equally. Through BEREC (Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications), they created implementation guidelines while progressive parties trumpeted net neutrality as essential for equal access and consumer rights.

This regulation enshrined the principle that internet service providers must treat all internet traffic equally, prohibiting practices such as blocking, throttling, or prioritising specific types of data.

Progressive parties consistently highlighted that net neutrality was essential for preserving consumer rights and ensuring that all users have equal access to information and services online.

Fast forward to today, and irony is striking.

So-called progressive parties now advocate policies that fundamentally contradict their previous stance on internet equality. In the name of combating “misinformation,” they push for selective access, preferential treatment of certain messages, and increased control by large corporations or government entities. The very practices they once denounced — blocking access and restricting free speech — are now rebranded as safeguards for freedom and democracy.

The hypocrisy is glaring, and it is unsurprising that citizens feel compelled to voice their unvarnished opinions about these political reversals. But attempts to silence public discourse will ultimately fail. After all, the internet — the very medium they sought to regulate — ensures more transparency and accountability than ever before.

There is no putting the toothpaste back in the tube, and no matter what they claim, that is a very good thing.