"People will do bad things if we don't have net neutrality regulations. Let's show them how it's done by doing bad things ourselves."

In what whacky moral universe is this okay?

Most parents smack this out of their kids by the time they're 4.

I find it quite amazing that you question the morality of a temporary act of political demonstration against the agency responsible for setting rules directly related to the means of that political demonstration, and then suggest that parents should have violently abused their children to get any thoughts of such political demonstrations out of their heads.

Frankly, if my son suggested a means of demonstration as outlined here, I'd reward him for it. If he suggested violence against kids was ok, on the other hand? He'd never hear the end of it.

It's not like the expectation is that his internet will be slowed down forever.

I think it's perfectly fair, if legal under all current laws.

"This is the future you want" doesn't sink in until your kids are bitching every day that YouTube is buffering.

If activists are willing to intentionally make the world worse to prove a point, then reasonable people start to wonder:

"How much of the problem is real and how much of it is inflicted by activists who are willing to burn down the world in order to 'win'?"

But most protests make things a bit worse while they are happening, even in relatively benign ways as disrupting traffic. If they don't disrupt the status quo in some way then they are hardly going to be noticed.

Is smacking children a morally good thing? In a vacuum, I'd argue that hitting children is not a good thing, yet we do not live in a vacuum. I have a young daughter, and if she were ever to do something like run into the road I've already decided I would pick her up and smack her good in hopes that it might leave a strong impression on her that she should not run into a busy street. Is smacking a kid in this situation moral? You yourself seem to argue that smacking children is a good thing in certain circumstances.

Considering the wider circumstances of net neutrality and the consequences it will have, especially on the poor and less educated, I don't have any problem morally with Ajit Pai having a brief encounter with the negative consequences his actions will have upon millions.

In general, I don't think there's much to be gained by discussion morals here though, and we shouldn't expect our morals to align exactly.

Ugh. A really ugly attempt at straw-persons and lectures on "whacky" moral universes all wrapped up with advocating hitting kids....

Just to make it crystal clear for the morally-challenged: if you "smack something out of" your 1, 2, 3, or 4 year old, the police will be called, CPS will be called, you will go to jail, and you will appear before a judge to explain why you shouldn't lose custody of your own kids.