Now, it's a thoughtful idea to not be blinded by the term "net neutrality", as it can be used to make reference to anything; as can any term. If by "net neutrality" we'd mean preserving anonimity on the internet, with nobody accessing or/and using our private information unless we directly and specifically let it happen with the option to go back on that decision without any penalty, as well as having no regulation, nor censorship of any kind regarding what we view, download, upload and generally access on the internet, then that's a convenient and efficient thing.

However, if the government or/and any other "official / establishment" entity is trying to push something they call "net neutrality", there is quite a bit of cause to assume that maybe their version of "net neutrality" barely implies any of what I mentioned above. Quite on the contrary, if any type of regulation is being forwarded on whatever excuse (like "protection" from cable company reduction of bandwidth, as I've heard here and there) then it's likely a scam and another way of enforcing chinese-style internet censorship and surveillance.

While I see all laws as a form of imposition and attempted enslavement, there are ways to exploit the system through its own methodology. For instance, if the "net neutrality" that was being forwarded targeted corporations and companies that sold internet services, banning them from collecting personal data from their clients and users without express approval from the individual, then it'd be something I'd see as positive. However, I've yet to find something that implies that that's what they're doing. Also, by express approval I mean actual, direct approval, not the contractual type, where most people just sign without actually looking over the terms themselves. In other words, no internet provider is to force their users to give them their personal information in any way (for example, by refusing to offer said services on the basis of them refusing the terms of the contract that included collection of personal data as a clause).

Also, to note, anyone can claim that "net neutrality" is about freedom of speech, anonimity, eliminating censorship and so on, but in order to see if they actually mean that, look through the documentation and see what their actual plans imply.

Of course, that would be a sort of short term solution, that would ease the way for the longer term solution, which is ending government outright. Trying to reform a system that is fundamentally set on the enslavement of the population isn't going to help. We need to end it. And we'll end it if we become conscious, thoughtful and loving, expressing what we've always have but merely forgotten.