I don't normally talk about how dirty fribbles, motivated by either statism or a desire to lead a tactless life, are eager to help your last post produce precisely the alienation and conflict needed to convict me without trial, jury, or reading one complete paragraph of this letter. However, in this case I'm going to make an exception. I figure it's okay because the depth of its disdain for the public and the height of its hubris are evident in its attempts to emphasize the negative in our lives instead of accentuating the positive. I guess I should start by saying that if you want truth, you have to struggle for it. This letter represents my struggle, my attempt at supplying the missing ingredient that could stop the worldwide slide into Comstockism. It is also my soapbox for informing the community at large that your last post has nothing but contempt for you, and you don't even know it. That's why I feel obligated to inform you that it says that it wants to make life better for everyone. Lacking a coherent ideology, however, it always ends up substituting pap for art.
It seems clear that your last post is driving under the influence of tribalism. But we ought to look at the matter in a broader framework before we draw final conclusions on the subject: We see that sometime in the future your last post will peddle fake fears to the public. Fortunately, that hasn't happened...yet. But it will decidedly happen if we don't purge the darkness from your last post's heart.
By my word, if I chose to do so I could write exclusively about your last post's profligate, gutless reports and never be lacking for material. Nonetheless, I'd rather spend some time discussing how your last post is neither morally nor intellectually consistent. If it were, it wouldn't first impose a narrow theological agenda on secular society then afterwards decry my observation that its toadies often reverse the normal process of interpretation. That is, they value the unsaid over the said, the obscure over the clear. When its orations are challenged, your last post stages an outpouring of phony emotion in order to look good to the public. A person could write a whole book on that topic alone. In order to be as brief as possible, though, I'll state simply that your last post would have us believe that five-crystal orgone generators can eliminate mind-control energies that are being radiated from secret, underground, government facilities. To be honest, it has never actually said that explicitly, but if you follow its logic—what little there is—you'll see that this is its real point.
Your last post's insane ipse dixits are an epiphenomenon of mumpish heathenism. That's just a fancy way of saying that it has been said that I believe that people who work with your last post's chargés d'affaires discredit themselves. I, in turn, aver that if we look beyond your last post's delusions of grandeur, we see that it claims that those who disagree with it should be cast into the outer darkness, should be shunned, should starve. Predictably, it cites no hard data for that claim. This is because no such data exist. Your last post thinks that the health effects of secondhand smoke are negligible. Of course, thinking so doesn't make it so.
Your last post is a proponent of "blackguardism"—a term it uses catachrestically in place of "narcissism". History offers innumerable examples for the truth of this assertion. Your last post honestly intends to mold the mind of virtually every citizen—young or old, rich or poor, simple or sophisticated. The direful sequence of that result, so flagrantly nit-picky and wicked in itself, is that perverted mouthpieces for insidious vigilantism will topple society some day. Here, I am merely trying to advance the opinion that your last post's coadjutors are easily manipulated. Let's be sure that I've made myself absolutely clear: Your last post presents one face to the public, a face that tells people what they want to hear. Then, in private, it devises new schemes to transform fear and its inculcation into the preeminent force ruling human existence.
Your last post is a vexatious calumniator. In fact, your last post is worse than a vexatious calumniator; it's also an impolitic crook. That's why it feels obligated to ransack people's homes. If I didn't think your last post would give me reason to fall prey to its rhetoric and obfuscation, I wouldn't say that I receive a great deal of correspondence from people all over the world. One of the things that impresses me about all of it is the massive number of people who realize that that which is built inextricably into the laws of the universe cannot be entirely merciless. That should serve as the final, ultimate, irrefutable proof that I act based on what I think is right, not who I think is right. That's why I try always to deliver new information about your last post's heartless, bad-tempered vituperations. It's also why I say that it contends that we should cast our lots with acrimonious bourgeoisie. What planet is it from? The planet Jealous? We already have our answer: As a respected journalist put it, "Your last post's bait-and-switch tactics will cause more harm than good". He probably could have added that knowledge and wisdom are your last post's enemies. It understands that by limiting education and enlightenment, it can fool more people into believing that terrorism is a noble goal. Sadly, those with the least education are those who would benefit most from the knowledge that by delivering an additional blow to dignity and self-worth, your last post is telegraphing its intentions to cause riots in the streets.
Assume for a moment that your last post's scribblings are nothing short of rabid. It therefore follows that if I seem a bit hidebound, it's only because I'm trying to communicate with your last post on its own level. Let no one say that everything your last post says is thoroughly and absolutely true. No, this is pathological antagonism and must be regarded as an attempt to shrink the so-called marketplace of ideas down to convenience-store size. Your last post either is or elects to be ignorant of scientific principles and methods. It even intentionally misuses scientific terminology to dupe people into believing that it is always being misrepresented and/or persecuted. Your last post used to maintain that if it kicks us in the teeth we'll then lick its toes and beg for another kick. When it realized that no one was falling for that claptrap, it changed its tune to say that character development is not a matter of "strength through adversity" but rather, "entitlement through victimization". Your last post is indisputably a bloody-minded liar, and shame on anyone who believes it.
Doesn't it strike you as odd that your last post exhibits a perverse talent for getting viscerally angry and staying angry long enough to embark on wholesale torture and slaughter of innocent civilians? When you reflect upon this, you'll realize that we need to do what needs to be done. Why? Because of what's at stake: literally everything. My general thesis is that your last post would have us believe that its activities are on the up-and-up. Such flummery can be quickly dissipated merely by skimming a few random pages from any book on the subject. I'll talk a lot more about that later, but first let me finish my general thesis: Your last post says that everyone would be a lot safer if it were to monitor all of our personal communications and financial transactions—even our library records. Why on Earth does your last post need to monitor our library records? Although I haven't yet been able to concoct an acceptable answer to that question, I can suggest a tentative hypothesis. My hypothesis is that your last post insists that it has no choice but to hijack the word "pseudoparenchymatous" and use it to resort to underhanded tactics. Its reasoning is that the most brassbound purveyors of malice and hatred you'll ever see should be fêted at wine-and-cheese fund-raisers. Yes, I realize that that argument makes no sense, but your last post's bedfellows have tried repeatedly to assure me that your last post will eventually tire of its plan to herald the death of intelligent discourse on college campuses and will then step aside and let us drive off and disperse the scornful proponents of masochism who destroy the heart and fabric of our nation. When that will happen is unclear—probably sometime between "don't hold your breath" and "beware of flying pigs".
In the strictest sense, your last post has been fairly successful in its efforts to spawn delusions of fanaticism's resplendence. That just goes to show what can be done with a little greed, a complete lack of scruples, and the help of a bunch of the most voluble varmints you'll ever see. Your last post's cock-and-bull stories represent a backward step of hundreds of years, a backward step into a chasm with no bottom save the endless darkness of death. Your last post likes to have difficult social issues presented to it in simple, black-and-white terms—and your last post knows it. While I don't question your last post's motives, and I certainly understand the frustrations of its hired goons, it likes to quote all of the saccharine, sticky moralisms about "human rights" and the evils of denominationalism. But as soon as we stop paying attention, your last post invariably instructs its apparatchiks to rally for a cause that is completely void of moral, ethical, or legal validity. Then, when someone notices, the pattern repeats from the beginning. Though this game may seem perverse beyond belief to any sane individual it makes perfect sense in light of your last post's snooty, complacent refrains.
I no longer believe that trends like family breakdown, promiscuity, and violence are random events. Not only are they explicitly glorified and promoted by your last post's irritating accusations, but if you ever ask it to do something, you can bet that your request will get lost in the shuffle, unaddressed, ignored, and rebuffed. Your last post's site is a repository of useless up-to-the-minute ephemera. This is all well and good, but I wish I didn't have to be the one to break the news that your last post frequently sprinkles its speech with the guttural argot of cold-blooded liars and cheats. Nevertheless, I cannot afford to pass by anything that may help me make my point. So let me just state that the absurdity of your last post's pranks requires no further comment. Excuse me; that's not entirely correct. What I meant to say is that if your last post doesn't realize that it's generally considered bad style to support hostile governments known for human rights abuses, wrongful imprisonment, and slavery, then it should read one of the many self-help books on the subject. I recommend it buy one with big print and lots of pictures. Maybe then your last post will grasp the concept that many recent controversies have been fueled by a whole-hearted embracing of deplorable, obdurate theories. That's the sort of statement that some people allege is foolish but which I believe is merely a statement of fact. And it's a statement that needs to be made because it says that it needs a little more time to clean up its act. As far as I'm concerned, its time has run out. This is far from all I have to say on the topic, but it's certainly enough for now. Just remember one thing: Your last post's devotees live not by rational discussion but by mindless slogans.
Topic: Ban the Person Above you (Read 76278 times)
Recent Posts