[iamthirsty]

‘Ordinary’ men and women don’t want to become politicians for many reasons, but because “it’s assumed to be OK to insult them” isn’t on that list.

You can insult anyone, for any reason—and people do all the time, regardless whether the person is a politician or not, a public figure or not, etc..

Sure, morally it might be unjust to insult a politician, or anyone for that matter. Yet the cool part about the United States is: it’s OK!

Although being a politician, and secondarily a public figure, makes the insults as public as the praises so much so that you, the observer, are more aware of them as a result, doesn’t mean that the same thing wouldn’t happen to anyone else.

[katbyte]

> Yet the cool part about the United States is: it’s OK!

Dude, no, no it’s not ok. It’s not ok to have a culture where insults are encounter and ok. Insults can quickly lead to threats. Are often lies and manipulation. Are often racial or sexist or homophobic. And we as a society shouldn’t just stand by and allow it. What is gained by allowing insults? Honest question. Why should we be ok with them?

Now i do have to say what consistories and insult is not the easiest to define. But calling a politician a “whore” is clearly an baseless insult and a lie that brings nothing to any discussion.

[tortasaur]

If you mean on a legal level, it's less about what is gained by allowing insults than it is what is lost by disallowing them. That is, it becomes trivial to ban criticism by labeling it an insult.

On a social level, there is something to be gained from insults: authenticity. Perhaps it comes down to personal preference, but I would rather live in a society where people can speak their mind (and potentially face social backlash for it) than a society where everything is artificially sanitized. Empathy is great to strive for on a personal level, but forcing the appearance of empathy just leads to strained smiles.

[mrkstu]

Agreed.

My father was the Mayor of a medium sized city and stirred controversy from time to time, and was a favorite target of the local press. He loved it- he took some of the cartoons most designed to poke at him and framed them and put them on the wall in his office.

The give and take is part of the vital breath of democracy- thin skin isn't a useful trait to have in the public square.

He is still beloved by many of the same press on a personal level due to his steady persona and good humor, regardless of the level of agreement with his political views, something sadly missing in the modern political firmament.

[wsy]

It is easy to say this as long as you are not the victim of insults.

[ejefz]

Thank the Lord you can't be jury and victim at the same time.

[iamthirsty]

You summed it up better than even I could. Thanks!

[iamthirsty]

> Dude, no, no it’s not ok.

I don’t think you understood my comment as a whole. Although it may be morally unjust, it is legal, and therefore “OK” to say whatever you want (bar a call-to-action). So, again, while it may be unjust, in the eyes of the law here, it’s OK. You can’t fordably control discourse—that leads to more negatives than positives. :)