Questionable, and to the extent that this is true, it is because of power given to governments to ensure those rights.
Corporations on the other hand are effectively vestigial 21st century monarchies, with all the cost and benefits that comes with that.
I've ran a few small ones and believe in private industry. I'm not anti corporation, but let's call a spade a spade here. Believing in bullshit never helps you in a competitive marketplace, don't do it.
It’s not libertarianism. It’s seeing the history of biased enforcement when it comes to the “War on Drugs” among other things but even with tech, we see the government would love to get access to data and in the case of the current administration “shut down Twitter”.
If the government had more control over the tech industry, who do you think they would go after?
They could easily raid the ICANN and IANA offices in playa vista and shut down global DNS in about an hour if they wanted. It's just a single floor, you could probably do it with 2 police officers.
The chains that bind them from doing so are those of public accountability.
A diligent public strangles the powers of a revanchist government.
Again I agree with you there are regrettable policies that should be addressed. Governance offers us that mechanism. That's why it's preferable as an institution in deciding public policy.
I'd rather have our imperfect government with their awful War on Drugs running the show than say Beyer, who marketed heroin to kids for mild ailments, or Purdue pharma which peddled opioids, you know, as late as last year, or the huxster Elizabeth Holmes or the price gouging Martin Shkreli or RJ Reynolds or any other profit seeking unaccountable entity.
Replacing the FDA with say a board of Shkreli, Holmes and Purdue? Yeah, I'm sure that'd go just great.