[Tichy]

I'll accept that in part; the Laws are a very late work, and since at least the middle period of the Republic "Socrates" was at an almost explicitly critical distance from Socrates. My take is that in the Laws Plato finally abandons the ironic use of "Socrates" to offer his own view more directly. (Plato is the Athenian stranger, much as he was when he went to Sicily to try his own hand at statecraft...) A lot of what you say about the Laws seems right -- it's not a how-to manual for statecraft -- but it still seems that an aristocracy (in the meritocratic sense of rule by those whose intellects are capable, disciplined, and trained in philosophy) is supposed to be empowered to make and enforce the laws meditated upon in the dialogue.

My interest in all of this has been to avoid both the one-sided hero Plato and the villainous anti-open-society Plato, because both make him less interesting than he is. I got a bit rankled when you claimed me for a Popperite. And then the thread derailment began in earnest.