Thigh-High Politics is an op-ed column by Teen Vogue writer Lauren Duca that breaks down the news, provides resources for the resistance, and just generally refuses to accept toxic nonsense.

On December 14, the Federal Communications Commission is set to vote on whether to repeal regulations that ensure equal access to the Internet. The proposal, created by Trump-appointed FCC chairman Ajit Pai, is intended to dismantle Obama-era rules that prevent Internet service providers (ISPs) — like Verizon, Comcast, and AT&T — from exploiting their roles as the gatekeepers of the Web. According to the New York Times editorial board, the FCC wants to “turn the Internet into a latter-day version of cable TV, in which they decide what customers can watch and how much they pay for that content.”

Let me put it in terms that will appropriately piss us all off: The web is the primary hub of all human communication and knowledge, and this proposal would allow that space to be controlled by toll-collecting corporate giants. It would place juggernauts of capitalism in charge of the public square.

Last Week Tonight host John Oliver has done several segments on this issue, once crashing the FCC’s website after sending viewers to provide feedback. In an episode from earlier this year, he invited the star of the 2007 viral hit “Chocolate Rain” to explain net neutrality in under 30 seconds.

“Net neutrality is the idea that your pipe to the Internet, whether that is your cable Internet connection, your LTE wireless connection — however you are receiving information via the Internet — that pipeline to the Internet is not allowed to arbitrarily pick favorites in terms of the content that you consume,” Tay Zonday explained. “For example, if you like to use Google search, and your roommate likes to use Bing search, your Internet service provider can’t say, ‘Well, Bing is paying us a lot of money, so we’re going to slow down Google and Yahoo and their other search engine competitors to make Bing load fast.’”

“At its heart, it is the principle that ISPs...should not be able to engage in any sort of f*ckery that limits or manipulates the choices you make online,” Oliver continued. “It also helps ensure a level playing field so that big companies cannot undermine small companies before they can take off.”

Under Pai’s proposal, that would change. Dismantling the current rules will hurt consumers and content creators, potentially crush small businesses, and, most pressingly, open the door for anti-democratic abuse of power from companies whose primary motivation is turning a profit. The repeal of current regulations demolishes the structure in place to police the gatekeeping powers of ISPs. It allows megacorporations to functionally control American access to information with no incentive to do so ethically.

The only remaining regulation would be require ISPs to be “transparent” about what they are doing, according to The New York Times. That basically means they have to explain their standards and practices in teensy-tiny terms-of-service-style font, which few ever take the time to read. It’s about effective as letting bullies steal your lunch money so long as they’re open and honest about the whole thing.

Some say that anxiety over the loss of net neutrality is unwarranted and point to the rarity of ISP oversteps, which consumer backlash has presumably kept in check in the past. In one op-ed for the Times, Ken Engelhart noted that the Madison River Telephone Company cut off access to Vonage to boost its own service in 2004, and AT&T limited access to FaceTime in 2012, but “the public blowback was fierce, scaring other providers from following suit.” He noted the lack of additional examples as proof that concerns are overblown.