When Google tried to lay fiber in various municipalities, they failed because those municipalities would not permit it.

Those were all local municipalities, responsive to their electorate - if the surfers in a community wanted Google fiber huts, they could elect councils who would allow them.

I think it's reasonable that people should have local control over their city environs, even if it means a multinational like Google can't come in and build new infrastructure. It's not a "will of the people, unless Google wants to build fiber huts everywhere" kind of society. Maybe they should just go surfing instead.

>Those were all local municipalities, responsive to their electorate - if the surfers in a community wanted Google fiber huts, they could elect councils who would allow them

This is an idealistic line of thinking, but as a practical matter, is completely untrue. Essentially 0% of America understand their county commissioners' stance on ISP competition, myself included. No one campaigns on those things.

It's a lot like saying that electorates are responsible for police violence because sheriffs are elected officials after all.

Not doing your civic duty is not illegal, but the residents has to take ultimate responsibility for failing to do their civic duties.

Representation is an outdated system that was great in de pony express days.