>> I wonder when are we going to see a legal discussion if / when internet access is going to become a basic human right? Just like electricity became ubiquitous, I expect internet access (email, payment processing, etc) to also become a right.

Is electricity a right?

In a way, yes (even in the US). You still have to pay for it, but there is a litany of rules and procedures they must follow before they can cut you off. Kind of like the foreclosure process.

They can't cut a customer's power over his politics--especially paying customers!

Electricity is a public utility, not a right. A public utility is a regulated entity that must supply anyone in their region who follows the rules -- and, in general, if you break the rules but then fix your behavior, they must allow you service again. The existence of a public utility does not forbid a private competitor, but the scale advantage of a public utility is generally overwhelming unless you have specialized needs.

It is reasonable to suggest that Internet bandwidth should be a public utility.

It would be useful to clarify what "follow the rules" here means, in the USA (for us non-USA audiences). It probably varies in different countries, but in most cases doesn't it simply refer to fair usage? Make your payments in time and don't put excessive strain on the grid by powering your inter-dimensional portal. Does ideology or clandestine activity matter in how you use electricity? Of course, a court order could force the utility company to cut you off, but can the utility company simply cut you off based on their or society's _opinion_ of your activities?

If you consider an internet connection a public utility, which we should, then that would be ostracism. In terms of companies being able to successfully run their businesses, are we at the point where a "cloud provider" should be considered part of a country's infrastructure?

I can agree with the point being made about an internet connection, but Parler was still able to buy some servers and self-host. Unless there's an argument here to consider cloud providers a de-facto component of a nation's tech infrastructure. Seeing as we have no proper public regulation of the sector and no public player providing the service, I'm not sure how far that argument would go. It's still an interesting question to ponder on, I guess.

ISPs, CDNs, domain registrars, DNS, etc. have all cut off services to sites that they consider in violation of their user agreements (which mostly boil down to you've become a liability for us). If you've annoyed enough people, you can pretty much get booted off the Internet--especially if you need enough infrastructure, data, authentication, etc. that you can't easily just force people into a game of whack-a-mole.

iirc a county in california recently switched off some youtubers' electric because they were hosting big get togethers despite social distancing rules. which seems to go a bit beyond fair usage. not sure if it was 100% legally sound, but they probably had to be at least reasonably confident in the move, since they could reasonably expect PR

Not in the US, no.