Is Harassment of Public Figures Acceptable: Your Sincere Opinion

[Amarok]

When someone calls half of the electorate "deplorable" or "bitter clingers" it only reinforces the perception that that someone holds them in contempt. Building resentment against you isn't a good way to earn votes.

The reason your response means little to me is that (while I quoted Clinton), I was channeling Plato. Plato doesn't attribute much importance to "how one is perceived" or "how good one is at earning votes." And nor do I. These things are secondary to an actual ability to perform well in a given office. Democracy, for all its merits, does have the downside of being largely based on public illusion.

I think Plato's thoughts are pertinent here. Particularly "the ship of state" wherein the electorate is portrayed as a bumbling shipowner whose inability to perceive things clearly leads to the exaltation of people who can exploit his limited perceptive capacities. Individuals who can "capture the public imagination" find their way into power, while those who actually know what they're doing and can actually solve the problems at hand are pushed to the wayside because they aren't very good at manipulationg the public.

---

Conceive something of this kind happening either on many ships or one. Though the shipowner surpasses everyone on board in height and strength, he is rather deaf and likewise somewhat shortsighted, and his knowledge of seamanship is pretty much on the same level. The sailors are quarreling with one another about the piloting, each supposing he ought to pilot, although he has never learned the art and can't produce his teacher or prove there was a time when he was learning it. Besides this, they claim it isn't even teachable and are ready to cut to pieces the man who says it is teachable. And they are always crowded around the shipowner himself, begging and doing everything so that he'll turn the rudder over to them. And sometimes, if they fail at persuasion and other men succeed at it, they either kill the others or throw them out of the ship. Enchaining the noble shipowner with mandrake, drink, or something else, they rule the ship, using what's in it; and drinking and feasting, they sail as such men would be thought likely to sail. Besides this, they praise and call 'skilled sailor,' 'pilot,' and 'knower of the ship's business' the man who is clever at figuring out how they will get the rule, either by persuading or by forcing the shipowner, while the man who is not of this sort they blame as useless. They don't know that for the true pilot it is necessary to pay careful attention to year, seasons, heaven, stars, winds, and everything that's proper to the art, if he is really going to be skilled at ruling a ship. And they don't suppose it's possible to acquire the art and practice of how one can get hold of the helm whether the others wish it or not, and at the same time to acquire the pilot's skill.

---

My observation as well nice too see someone else sees it as well

---

• Primarily by electing someone else.
  Publicly advocating for your cause.
  Distributing literature.
  Petitioning officials.
  Assembling to organize and peaceably demonstrate.
  

Not by stalking individuals and their families and intimidating them in their private lives. When that becomes the norm then no one will want to be in public service. What goes around comes around.

The fewer ghouls like the ones you're carrying water for who want to be in public service...the better.

When the law has failed, and our shared ideology has been subverted...shame is the final recourse before violence.  What goes around comes around...indeed.

This is true

---

Holding someone in contempt is not harassment..and some people really are contemptuous.

Like you, for example.  Casting the assholes who set public policy as victims..rather than..oh, IDK, the public that the policy plays out in.

Especially when they deserve our contempt