As you point out, competition is better than monopoly because it provides a surplus that advantages consumers. But some things we do not want a surplus of, for

As you point out, competition is better than monopoly because it provides a surplus that advantages consumers. But some things we do not want a surplus of, for example river dams. Other things can not be competitive even in principle like surface streets. Likewise as was discovered with mass transit and utilities in the last century in a world that did it's absolute best to be laissez faire. So there are some rare cases where there must be monopolies and if you must have a monopoly, it is better to have one controlled by a democratic government than a self interested clique. At least then there is some possibility of working in the public interest on price and innovation. That ISPs must always be a monopoly seems unlikely to me. But if it's politically impossible to break them up, then nationalizing them is still far better than the current situation.