you can do your own youtube searches and look at the socialist USA and communist USA sites. they are pretty open about what they are doing and about working with the democrat party to do it.
I suspect they are engaging in a little ego boosting. They would like to think they are on the inside of a powerful party. I don't think that's true these days. The only time I saw real socialists inside the Democratic Party was when McGovern won the nomination. Those guys really were socialists and very dangerous but they didn't win because of the choice of members of the Party. McGovern was in charge of the rules for delegate selection and he was the only one who actually understood the very complex rules. So he used those rules to win against the wishes of the majority of Democrats. Which of course is why he only carried Massachusetts. Look, there are neo-Nazis who brag about how their tea party Republican candidate will send the blacks back to Africa. That does not mean thats the platform of the Republican Party.
if you looked at the people and organizations that were behind this FCC thing, (they are in the article) you see that they are all progressive groups with the usual suspects behind them. soros being perhaps the most notable, not just because of this, but because he's also buying into various media outlets.
What I look at is Slashdot.org. There are some people there who really understand what is going on with broadband "shaping".... the use of selective blocking of packets to control who gets theirs through. Those guys are very smart and very much in favor of free speech. And they are in favor of net neutrality... IF you define it as requiring carriers not to discriminate based on who is sending the packets. Now I agree with you that tacking on a bunch of other rules is a bad idea. But if packet discrimination is allowed, that alone will destroy free speech on the internet because at some point that power will be used for political as well as economic purposes.
you seem like an intelligent person yet you give the impression that you feel you need the government to look out for you. some evil profit seeking company might take advantage of you if your beneficent government doesn't step in a act in your best interest? do you really believe the government acts in the best interest of the individual? our founders sure didn't. that's why they wrote a constitution designed to LIMIT government and protect people from it.
As bad as government sometimes is, it is still much more transparent and influenced by the public will than large corporations are. Yes, I think that I as an individual need government protection from the unethical practices of some companies. Ask the Enron employees who had their 401ks locked while the top management sold their shares. Ask the people (including my daughter) who got salmonella poisoning because some factory manager in Georgia decided he didn't really need to keep rats out of the peanut butter processing vats. Etc, etc, etc.
Companies have money as their chief moral good. That is a useful motivation for free market efficiency, but requires a layer of government regulation for protection of the public. Yes, I want to see competition in the internet carrier business, but I don't want to see those companies regulating who can say what.