Regarding the recent article “Faculty Room Controversy, the Height of Silliness”, I wish to make a few points.
Politics will always be a sensitive matter because ideas have consequences. Elected candidates eventually become legislators and regulators who impact each individual for good or ill. Therefore, minimizing and disrespecting concerns is a danger to the free market place of ideas.
Posting names and pictures of any candidates in public places is marketing. If marketing didn’t work, companies wouldn’t dump millions into its efforts. The posting of select candidates as occurred in this instance at a public elementary school, which is illegal, is an exertion of power and influence on behalf of those candidates.
Even the author indirectly indicates his personal belief on behalf of these candidates. If the tables were turned, it is reasonable to assume that the pen would have written a different piece.
Regarding the statement that the DEA endorses these candidates; does this render all other candidates moot? If so, when was voter sovereignty transferred to the bureaucratic organization that oversees the sought-for positions? The DEA does not speak for the people.
Finally, to the point of the article’s faux reasoning regarding the “silliness of others’ opinions” and the implicit shame directed their way, Saul Alinsky and Machiavelli would most certainly approve of such tactics. This is no small matter.