Mike Huben, author of the “critiques of libertarianism” (“critiques of Randroid minarchist capitalism” would be a more accurate name for the most part), looks at efforts to communicate on the part of Egyptian activists, & chalks up the result as a libertarian flaw — because big business & government would collude to stop the concept of a truly unstoppable network. Seriously.
I don’t have time to explain the entire history of where the divergence from what was originally an anti-government movement from the Left to being, in the popular mind, associated with people like the organizers of this event protesters got arrested outside recently. To put the gist of such bluntly, the hackers and other agitators asserting absolute public rights over all spontaneous networks has a vastly more legit claim than the CEO of a company that attempts to regulate access to them. Think about that for a moment.
Huben ends with this:
The solution is a citizenry that is attentive to good government, and seeks to change bad features. Libertarianism doesn’t solve that problem, because it has no method for deciding what constitutes good government, good life, or anything else.
This is because, properly understood, libertarianism rejects the premise he bases this on: that there is, or ever can be, such thing as “good government”, and that the definition of a good life is the proper decision of a hierarchy at all.