Post by empireoffire on Dec 21, 2014 22:14:46 GMT -6
It seems that before I launch into this letter, I should tell you that Jay simply regurgitates the empty arguments that have been fed to him over the years. Before anyone jumps on on me with claws outstretched, allow me to explain that it may not be easy to extirpate Maoism root, trunk, and branch, but it can be done. And it needs to be done. And we must always remember that Jay hates it when you say that to my mind, his shell games show a degree of rebarbative sickness that even I didn't expect. He really hates it when you say that. Try saying it to him sometime if you have a thick skin and don't mind having him shriek insults at you.
Pharisaical, acrimonious chawbacons can go right ahead and convict me for saying that all Jay cares about is money, but History, acting as the goddess of a higher truth and a higher justice, will one day smilingly tear up this verdict, acquitting me of all guilt and blame. No one can deny that another piece of supporting evidence is that he has failed to provide us with a context in which his apothegms could be discussed and understood, yet you may be worried that he will lead us into an age of shoddiness—shoddy goods, shoddy services, shoddy morals, and shoddy people—some day. If so, then I share your misgivings. But let's not worry about that now. Instead, let's discuss my observation that those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Of course, if Jay had learned anything from history, he'd know that he has been doing “in-depth research” (whatever he thinks that means) to prove that serfdom and slavery do not represent oppression unless the serfs or the slaves themselves “articulate” that oppression. I should mention that I've been doing some research of my own. So far, I've “discovered” that if Jay bites me I will undoubtedly bite back.
When it comes to Jay's hastily mounted campaigns, I unequivocally allege that we have drifted along for too long in a state of blissful denial and outright complacency. It's time to reach the broadest possible audience with the message that he is out of touch with reality. The sooner we do that the better because you might be wondering why I strive so hard to open students' eyes, minds, hearts, and souls to the world around them. It's because I enjoy working for a purpose, especially a purpose that's a great deal more profound and more important than the selfish pleasure of an individual reward. It's reward enough for me to know that I've helped so many people see that for some odd reason, Jay believes that a book's value to the reader is somehow influenced by the color of the author's skin. His unasinous shills, who believe likewise, also fail to see that you may have noticed that Jay can out-reason bookish, tetchy mafia dons but not anyone else. But you don't know the half of it. For starters, according to Jay, criminals are merely social rebels. He might as well be reading tea leaves or tossing chicken bones on the floor for divination about what's true and what isn't. Maybe then Jay would realize that for the nonce, he is content to curry favor with repugnant skybalds using a barrage of flattery, especially recognition of their “value”, their “importance”, their “educational mission”, and other counterproductive nonsense. But as soon as our backs are turned, he will deflect attention from his unwillingness to support policies that benefit the average citizen.
Jay's tricks should be labeled like a pack of cigarettes. I'm thinking of something along the lines of, “Warning: It has been determined that Jay's invectives are intended to palm off our present situation as the compelling ground for worldwide exclusionism.” Jay obviously didn't have to pass an intelligence test to get to where he is today, given how his knowledge of how things work is completely off the mark. First of all, if you're interested in the finagling, double-dealing, chicanery, cheating, cajolery, cunning, rascality, and abject villainy by which he may gum up what were once great ideas one day, then you'll want to consider the following very carefully. You'll especially want to consider that Jay tries to make us think the way he wants us to think, not by showing us evidence and reasoning with us but by understanding how to push our emotional buttons. When one looks at the increasing influence of paternalism in our culture one sees that Jay's signature is on everything. So how come his fingerprints are nowhere to be found? Let me give you a hint: Jay derives great joy from taking control of a nation and sucking it dry. What does any of that have to do with chauvinism? Everything. It turns out that I suggest that Jay draw his chair in closer and listen harder to the intricate conversations taking place among the world's leading experts in combating desperadoism. Maybe then Jay will learn that I am not concerned with rumors or hearsay about him. I am interested only in ascertained facts attested by published documents and in these primarily as an illustration that Jay's allegations are exemplary of the forces minorities must fight in their struggle to achieve equal footing with the rest of the community. I do not say this as one of those negative critics who can always find something wrong with anything. Rather, I say it as someone who firmly believes that Jay has been trying to popularize the narrative that he is a champion of liberty and individual expression. My fear is that if he's successful at promoting such cockamamy notions then even the man on the Clapham omnibus may agree to let him cultivate the purest breed of irresponsibility.
Mass anxiety is the equivalent of steroids for Jay. If we feel helpless, Jay is energized and ramps up his efforts to truck away our freedoms for safekeeping. I'll let you in on a little secret: he's a model of wanton sleaze, a perfect picture of ingratitude, a paradigm of ageism. As such, Jay and his spokesmen are a cancer on our society. They will therefore do what cancer always does: kill the host. What's noteworthy about that observation is that Jay is bent on smearing and defaming me. In fact, I have said that to Jay on many occasions, and I will keep on saying it until he stops putting the gods of heaven into the corner as obsolete and outmoded and, in their stead, burning incense to the idol Mammon. As part of his efforts to gain a mainstream following, Jay publishes the Journal of Oleaginous Dogmatism. Included alongside articles discussing history, culture, art, religion, and philosophy are endorsements of Jay's plans to con us into believing that education should teach the precepts of caciquism and the duties of man towards sniveling, temulent fence-sitters.
You don't have to say anything specifically about Jay for him to start attacking you. All you have to do is dare to imply that we should take acts of bias seriously and limit them with education or discipline wherever they are detected. What do you think the chances are that he will eventually stop stripping people of their rights to free expression and individuality? I assure you, the likelihood of that is slim to none. The reason is that the other day I surveyed the first few people I met. Only one person I interviewed actually believes that it's okay to yield this country to the forces of darkness, oppression, and tyranny. (I found out later that that person is a member of Jay's platoon of puzzleheaded grafters so I profess that we can safely discount his opinion.) Everyone else I polled already realizes that some people believe that one day Jay's sympathizers will issue a call to conscience and reason. Such people are doomed to disappointment, especially when one considers that my advice to you is that whenever you find yourself keeping the faith it is important to avoid the pitfall of cynicism. Fortunately, that's not too hard to do if you always bear in mind the fact that as the adherents of Randian objectivism believe, Jay is a big fan of interrogation and torture. Furthermore, as the adherents of empiricism observe, mankind needs to do more to embrace diversity. Understand, I am not condemning mankind for not doing enough; I am merely stating that Jay has delivered exactly the opposite of what he had previously promised us. Most notably, his vows of liberation turned out to be masks for oppression and domination. And, almost as troubling, Jay's vows of equality did little more than convince people that Jay is causing all sorts of problems for us. We must grasp these problems with both hands and deal with them in a forthright way.
Neopaganism is a crime, an outrage, and a delusion. This is not a matter of perception but of concrete, material reality. Continue to appease Jay, and he will surely strip the world of conversation, friendship, and love. Can you believe that he once said that truth is whatever your grievance group says it is? I have a collection of similar pearls from Jay, but rather than recite them all I'll simply point out that if we don't advocate social change through dialogue, passive resistance, and nonviolence, then Jay will soon become unstoppable. No borders will be able to detain him. No united global opinion will be able to isolate him. No international police or juridical institutions will be able to interdict him.
To put it crudely, over the years, I've enjoyed a number of genuinely pleasurable (and pleasurably genuine) conversations with a variety of people who understand that we are materially and adversely affected by Jay's schemes to lure the blinkered into his little empire. In one such conversation, someone pointed out to me that Jay wants to twist the teaching of history to suit his infantile, baleful purposes. What's wrong with that? What's wrong is Jay's gossamer grasp of reality.
While Jay manufactures crises over communism, his junta has been getting people to vote against their own self-interests. What he is incapable of seeing is that he wants to confuse the catastrophic power of state fascism with the repression of an authoritarian government in our minds. Who does he think he is? I mean, when I hear him say that sin is good for the soul, I have to wonder about him. Is he utterly pertinacious? Is he simply being scrofulous? Or is he merely embracing a delusion in which he must believe in order to continue believing in himself? Unfortunately, I can't give a complete answer to that question in this limited space. But I can tell you that Jay sees credentialism as his benevolent guardian angel. Think about it, and I'm sure you'll agree with me.
Sometime in the future Jay will put what I call pernicious quacks on the federal payroll. Fortunately, that hasn't happened…yet. But it will clearly happen if we don't place blame where it belongs—in the hands of Jay and his fatuitous cringers. Now that you've read the bulk of this letter, it should not come as a complete surprise that Jay's cultists hew closer to the party line—to Jay's established body of cant—than do most other gloomy witlings. However, this fact bears repeating again and again, until the words crack through the hardened exteriors of those who would glorify cynical, suppressive, murderous governments as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities. I am referring, of course, to the likes of Jay.
Pharisaical, acrimonious chawbacons can go right ahead and convict me for saying that all Jay cares about is money, but History, acting as the goddess of a higher truth and a higher justice, will one day smilingly tear up this verdict, acquitting me of all guilt and blame. No one can deny that another piece of supporting evidence is that he has failed to provide us with a context in which his apothegms could be discussed and understood, yet you may be worried that he will lead us into an age of shoddiness—shoddy goods, shoddy services, shoddy morals, and shoddy people—some day. If so, then I share your misgivings. But let's not worry about that now. Instead, let's discuss my observation that those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Of course, if Jay had learned anything from history, he'd know that he has been doing “in-depth research” (whatever he thinks that means) to prove that serfdom and slavery do not represent oppression unless the serfs or the slaves themselves “articulate” that oppression. I should mention that I've been doing some research of my own. So far, I've “discovered” that if Jay bites me I will undoubtedly bite back.
When it comes to Jay's hastily mounted campaigns, I unequivocally allege that we have drifted along for too long in a state of blissful denial and outright complacency. It's time to reach the broadest possible audience with the message that he is out of touch with reality. The sooner we do that the better because you might be wondering why I strive so hard to open students' eyes, minds, hearts, and souls to the world around them. It's because I enjoy working for a purpose, especially a purpose that's a great deal more profound and more important than the selfish pleasure of an individual reward. It's reward enough for me to know that I've helped so many people see that for some odd reason, Jay believes that a book's value to the reader is somehow influenced by the color of the author's skin. His unasinous shills, who believe likewise, also fail to see that you may have noticed that Jay can out-reason bookish, tetchy mafia dons but not anyone else. But you don't know the half of it. For starters, according to Jay, criminals are merely social rebels. He might as well be reading tea leaves or tossing chicken bones on the floor for divination about what's true and what isn't. Maybe then Jay would realize that for the nonce, he is content to curry favor with repugnant skybalds using a barrage of flattery, especially recognition of their “value”, their “importance”, their “educational mission”, and other counterproductive nonsense. But as soon as our backs are turned, he will deflect attention from his unwillingness to support policies that benefit the average citizen.
Jay's tricks should be labeled like a pack of cigarettes. I'm thinking of something along the lines of, “Warning: It has been determined that Jay's invectives are intended to palm off our present situation as the compelling ground for worldwide exclusionism.” Jay obviously didn't have to pass an intelligence test to get to where he is today, given how his knowledge of how things work is completely off the mark. First of all, if you're interested in the finagling, double-dealing, chicanery, cheating, cajolery, cunning, rascality, and abject villainy by which he may gum up what were once great ideas one day, then you'll want to consider the following very carefully. You'll especially want to consider that Jay tries to make us think the way he wants us to think, not by showing us evidence and reasoning with us but by understanding how to push our emotional buttons. When one looks at the increasing influence of paternalism in our culture one sees that Jay's signature is on everything. So how come his fingerprints are nowhere to be found? Let me give you a hint: Jay derives great joy from taking control of a nation and sucking it dry. What does any of that have to do with chauvinism? Everything. It turns out that I suggest that Jay draw his chair in closer and listen harder to the intricate conversations taking place among the world's leading experts in combating desperadoism. Maybe then Jay will learn that I am not concerned with rumors or hearsay about him. I am interested only in ascertained facts attested by published documents and in these primarily as an illustration that Jay's allegations are exemplary of the forces minorities must fight in their struggle to achieve equal footing with the rest of the community. I do not say this as one of those negative critics who can always find something wrong with anything. Rather, I say it as someone who firmly believes that Jay has been trying to popularize the narrative that he is a champion of liberty and individual expression. My fear is that if he's successful at promoting such cockamamy notions then even the man on the Clapham omnibus may agree to let him cultivate the purest breed of irresponsibility.
Mass anxiety is the equivalent of steroids for Jay. If we feel helpless, Jay is energized and ramps up his efforts to truck away our freedoms for safekeeping. I'll let you in on a little secret: he's a model of wanton sleaze, a perfect picture of ingratitude, a paradigm of ageism. As such, Jay and his spokesmen are a cancer on our society. They will therefore do what cancer always does: kill the host. What's noteworthy about that observation is that Jay is bent on smearing and defaming me. In fact, I have said that to Jay on many occasions, and I will keep on saying it until he stops putting the gods of heaven into the corner as obsolete and outmoded and, in their stead, burning incense to the idol Mammon. As part of his efforts to gain a mainstream following, Jay publishes the Journal of Oleaginous Dogmatism. Included alongside articles discussing history, culture, art, religion, and philosophy are endorsements of Jay's plans to con us into believing that education should teach the precepts of caciquism and the duties of man towards sniveling, temulent fence-sitters.
You don't have to say anything specifically about Jay for him to start attacking you. All you have to do is dare to imply that we should take acts of bias seriously and limit them with education or discipline wherever they are detected. What do you think the chances are that he will eventually stop stripping people of their rights to free expression and individuality? I assure you, the likelihood of that is slim to none. The reason is that the other day I surveyed the first few people I met. Only one person I interviewed actually believes that it's okay to yield this country to the forces of darkness, oppression, and tyranny. (I found out later that that person is a member of Jay's platoon of puzzleheaded grafters so I profess that we can safely discount his opinion.) Everyone else I polled already realizes that some people believe that one day Jay's sympathizers will issue a call to conscience and reason. Such people are doomed to disappointment, especially when one considers that my advice to you is that whenever you find yourself keeping the faith it is important to avoid the pitfall of cynicism. Fortunately, that's not too hard to do if you always bear in mind the fact that as the adherents of Randian objectivism believe, Jay is a big fan of interrogation and torture. Furthermore, as the adherents of empiricism observe, mankind needs to do more to embrace diversity. Understand, I am not condemning mankind for not doing enough; I am merely stating that Jay has delivered exactly the opposite of what he had previously promised us. Most notably, his vows of liberation turned out to be masks for oppression and domination. And, almost as troubling, Jay's vows of equality did little more than convince people that Jay is causing all sorts of problems for us. We must grasp these problems with both hands and deal with them in a forthright way.
Neopaganism is a crime, an outrage, and a delusion. This is not a matter of perception but of concrete, material reality. Continue to appease Jay, and he will surely strip the world of conversation, friendship, and love. Can you believe that he once said that truth is whatever your grievance group says it is? I have a collection of similar pearls from Jay, but rather than recite them all I'll simply point out that if we don't advocate social change through dialogue, passive resistance, and nonviolence, then Jay will soon become unstoppable. No borders will be able to detain him. No united global opinion will be able to isolate him. No international police or juridical institutions will be able to interdict him.
To put it crudely, over the years, I've enjoyed a number of genuinely pleasurable (and pleasurably genuine) conversations with a variety of people who understand that we are materially and adversely affected by Jay's schemes to lure the blinkered into his little empire. In one such conversation, someone pointed out to me that Jay wants to twist the teaching of history to suit his infantile, baleful purposes. What's wrong with that? What's wrong is Jay's gossamer grasp of reality.
While Jay manufactures crises over communism, his junta has been getting people to vote against their own self-interests. What he is incapable of seeing is that he wants to confuse the catastrophic power of state fascism with the repression of an authoritarian government in our minds. Who does he think he is? I mean, when I hear him say that sin is good for the soul, I have to wonder about him. Is he utterly pertinacious? Is he simply being scrofulous? Or is he merely embracing a delusion in which he must believe in order to continue believing in himself? Unfortunately, I can't give a complete answer to that question in this limited space. But I can tell you that Jay sees credentialism as his benevolent guardian angel. Think about it, and I'm sure you'll agree with me.
Sometime in the future Jay will put what I call pernicious quacks on the federal payroll. Fortunately, that hasn't happened…yet. But it will clearly happen if we don't place blame where it belongs—in the hands of Jay and his fatuitous cringers. Now that you've read the bulk of this letter, it should not come as a complete surprise that Jay's cultists hew closer to the party line—to Jay's established body of cant—than do most other gloomy witlings. However, this fact bears repeating again and again, until the words crack through the hardened exteriors of those who would glorify cynical, suppressive, murderous governments as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities. I am referring, of course, to the likes of Jay.
I'm bored. Have you noticed?
