This is a really interesting argument you've advanced. The chart you describe is illustrative and the changes wrought on it certainly disturbing. Unfortunately

This is a really interesting argument you've advanced. The chart you describe is illustrative and the changes wrought on it certainly disturbing. Unfortunately, I think you have over-simplified a complex issue to a dichotomy (encrypt everything or nothing) that is perhaps more confusing than helpful. Encryption is a broad and diverse subject, as well as a field of expertise (not mine). I doubt parties in the debate have axioms that align here as there are so many interpretations and levels of detail to disagree about. Put more clearly I don't think any three people reading this would agree on what you mean by encryption in your post. If you instead said "protect" "everything" / all traffic / all data/ all browsing /... , and gave some details as to the threats you are concerned about, it might strengthen the argument you are making. EG : "protect" the "names of sites I visit" from sousveillance ... "protect" the "integrity of software packages I download" from "evilgrade" attacks ... protect "the pseudo-anonymity" of "journalists posting to social networks" from "state sponsored malware injection" ... and so on. Encryption techniques could be (are) used against all of these problems, but in different ways. There is a lot to discuss and try to understand in these issues. Thank you for contributing positively to the discussion ( and I hope I am as well).