Final answer:
Harrison is considered 'extremely dangerous' by the government because his actions and influence can disrupt social norms and weaken the government's control over the society. History is replete with examples of individuals who challenge the status quo being perceived as threats by those in power, as they can lead to significant social and political changes.
Step-by-step explanation:
Harrison is described as 'extremely dangerous' to the government because he is challenging socially accepted norms and poses a threat to the authority's control. A government might consider someone dangerous if they have the potential to disrupt the status quo or incite rebellion by influencing others. Harrison's actions directly confront the government's power and possibly the principle of law and order, which the government is perilously upholding. Historical examples illustrate that figures who rebel against accepted norms, such as those involved in civil rights movements or revolutions, are often deemed dangers by those in power because they challenge ingrained beliefs and could lead to societal change or transformation, which threatens the existing power structure. Previous instances in which influential individuals have been regarded as threats include the criticism of Booker T. Washington's philosophies by other African American leaders who sought a more confrontational approach to fighting racism and the views of George Washington on the dangers of political parties. Furthermore, accusations against political leaders like Andrew Jackson show how character assassination and fear-mongering are used to label someone as potentially tyrannical. In these historical contexts, individuals who deviate from social norms or threaten governmental authority often face severe opposition.