Seriously, this is just part of the "innovation" Ajit is promoting. There will be nothing to stop Comcast from throttling sites for political reasons. CloudFlare will not be the only one to shape internet traffic for personal gain.
In what whacky moral universe is this okay?
Most parents smack this out of their kids by the time they're 4.
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.
"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'?"
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.
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.
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.