Actually, I'd say that democracies should be able to but should decide not to.

I really wish people could draw a distinction between shouldn't be (or I don't want this to be) & should be illegal.

The comment you're replying to did make this distinction.

It's impossible for any form of government to legislate that gravity should only pull with half of its current force. Likewise, as technology progress, it will be equally impossible and laughable for a government to attempt to control any online speech.

I would not be so sure. The weak spot is that the internet runs on expensive pipes owned by governments and large companies.

The NY Atty General, under the guise of "saving the children", has effectively killed UseNet by suing ISPs who offer it. What good is a phone call when you can't... speak?

Yeah, I only covered the positive scenario. The alternative is that cryptography isn't enough to preserve the privacy of needles in the haystack, and that all communications will be tracked or blocked. In that case, technology only helps an ever shrinking group of people control all of society, and we're boned.

that line made me shiver a little...