A
Anonymous
Guest
cjdevito":19l324se said:I realize that everyone is entitled to his opinion, and I respect this. I also hope that you will all respect mine as you read this letter. Before I say anything else, let me remind Len's tank that it hates it when you say that in my effort to uncover its hidden prejudices, I will need to open minds instead of closing them. It really hates it when you say that. Try saying that to it sometime, if you have a thick skin and don't mind having it shriek insults at you. I and Len's tank part company when it comes to the issue of lexiphanicism. It feels that the majority of inhumane phonies are heroes, if not saints, while I aver that I, hardheaded cynic that I am, do not find demands that are brown-nosing, batty, and foul to be "funny". Maybe I lack a sense of humor, but maybe if you don't think that it is a standard-bearer for the unbearable, then you've missed the whole point of this letter. Len's tank believes that newspapers should report only on items it agrees with. Unfortunately, as long as it believes such absurdities, it will continue to commit atrocities. Still, I suppose it's predictable, though terribly sad, that gruesome troublemakers with stronger voices than minds would revert to sordid behavior. But Len's tank contends that it is the ultimate authority on what's right and what's wrong and that, therefore, there should be publicly financed centers of cannibalism. This bizarre pattern of thinking leads to strange conclusions. For example, it convinces indelicate lowbrows (as distinct from the delirious schemers who prefer to chirrup while hopping from cloud to cloud in Nephelococcygia) that the laws of nature don't apply to Len's tank. In reality, contrariwise, Len's tank has the nerve to call those of us who derail its wild little schemes "conspiracy theorists". No, we're "conspiracy revealers" because we reveal that Len's tank is not a responsible citizen. Responsible citizens lead the way to the future, not to the past. Responsible citizens undeniably do not demand that Earth submit to the dominion of simple-minded, footling flimflammers. I sometimes joke about how the whole thrust of Len's tank's hijinks bothers me. But seriously, we must dole out acerbic criticism of Len's tank and its phalanx of deluded apple-polishers. Only then can a society free of its evil, revolting ploys blossom forth from the roots of the past. And only then will people come to understand that whatever your age, you now have only one choice. That choice is between a democratic, peace-loving regime that, you hope, may oppose Len's tank and all it stands for and, as the alternative, the peevish and impolitic dirigisme currently being forced upon us by Len's tank. Choose carefully, because Len's tank maintains that people don't mind having their communities turned into war zones. Perhaps it would be best for it to awaken from its delusional narcoleptic fantasyland and observe that it has long been obvious to attentive observers that opposing its prissy, mad theatrics actively and earnestly is the moral duty of every good human being. But did you know that in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, many otherwise intelligent people continue to believe, thanks to Len's tank, that its proposed social programs enhance performance standards, productivity, and competitiveness? It doesn't want you to know that because if it is victorious in its quest to encourage people to leave their spouses, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become virulent galoots, then its crown will be the funeral wreath of humanity.
Do you understand the implications of what I have been telling you? Are you awake? Then you probably realize that Len's tank's quips are a parody of original thought. Well, that's a bit too general of a statement to have much meaning, I'm afraid. So let me instead explain my point as follows: Len's tank is not only immoral, but amoral.
The deconstructionism "debate" is not a debate. It is a harangue, a politically motivated, brilliantly publicized, yawping attack on progressive ideas. Len's tank cannot tolerate the world as it is. It needs to live in a world of fantasies. To be more specific, I, not being one of the many socially inept Luddites of this world, stand by what I've written before, that Len's tank keeps telling everyone within earshot that human beings should be appraised by the number of things and the amount of money they possess instead of by their internal value and achievements. I'm guessing that Len's tank read that on some Web site of dubious validity. More reliable sources generally indicate that it is not just damnable. It is unbelievably, astronomically damnable. "Len's tank" has now become part of my vocabulary. Whenever I see someone skewer me over a pit barbecue, I tell him or her to stop "Len's tank-ing". As for me, I have no bombs, no planes, no artillery, and no terrorist plots. But I do have weapons and tactics that are far more deadly: pure light and simple truth.
Len's tank says that its overweening gestapo is a benign and charitable agency. What balderdash! What impudence! What treachery!
In case you have any doubts, for Len's tank's baleful plans to succeed, it needs to "dumb down" our society. An uninformed populace is easier to control and manipulate than an educated populace. In the blink of an eye, schoolchildren will stop being required to learn the meanings of words like "scientificophilosophical" and "preterdiplomatically". They will be incapable of comprehending that there's something fishy about Len's tank's stances. I think it's up to something, something violent and perhaps even disorganized. I frequently talk about how Len's tank's op-ed pieces are worse than the Black Death of olden times. I would drop the subject, except that it is so confident in its own intellectual and cultural paradigm that it is blind to global realities. Of that I am certain, because it claims that genocide, slavery, racism, and the systematic oppression, degradation, and exploitation of most of the world's people are all entirely justified. That claim illustrates a serious reasoning fallacy, one that is pandemic in its scribblings. Then again, you should not ask, "Will the world ever be free of wrongheaded protestors like Len's tank?", but rather, "What happened to Len's tank's common sense?". The latter question is the better one to ask, because Len's tank thinks that all it takes to solve our social woes are shotgun marriages, heavy-handed divorce laws, and a return to some mythical 1950s Shangri-la. However, I find its undertakings highly insulting. I can reword my point as follows. Len's tank is a big fan of interrogation and torture. Len's tank's magic-bullet explanations are popular among disagreeable, purblind grizzlers, but that doesn't mean the rest of us have to accept them. I realize that negativism is a tremendous problem in our society, but does it constantly have to be thrown in our faces? To ask that question another way, what exactly is the principle that rationalizes Len's tank's infantile philippics? Whatever the answer, by refusing to act, by refusing to tell you things that Len's tank doesn't want you to know, we are giving Len's tank the power to abet a resurgence of hideous pessimism.
As will be discussed in more detail later in this letter, Len's tank's grand plan is to see to it that all patriotic endeavors are directed down blind alleys, where they end in frustration and discouragement. I'm sure Mao Tse Tung would approve. In any case, were he alive today, Hideki Tojo would be Len's tank's most trustworthy ally. I can see Tojo joining forces with Len's tank to help it make our country spiritually blind. Speaking of pigheaded fussbudgets, whenever Len's tank is blamed for conspiring to wiretap all of our telephones and computers, it blames its accomplices. Doing so reinforces their passivity and obedience and increases their guilt, shame, terror, and conformity, thereby making them far more willing to help Len's tank shrink the so-called marketplace of ideas down to convenience-store size. Len's tank appears to have found a new tool to use to help it reduce human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. That tool is metagrobolism, and if you watch it wield it, you'll indeed see why it says that coercion in the name of liberty is a valid use of state power. You know, it can lie as much as it wants but it can't change the facts. If it could, it'd honestly prevent anyone from hearing that just because it and its mercenaries don't like being labelled as "fatuous, nefarious palookas" or "unbridled, raucous meanies" doesn't mean the shoe doesn't fit. Having studied Len's tank's charges and finding them groundless, I must now tell the world that if we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to take steps toward creating an inclusive society free of attitudinal barriers.
Len's tank does, occasionally, make a valid point. But when it says that it is the most recent incarnation of the Buddha, that's where the facts end and the ludicrousness begins. There is an inherent contradiction between Len's tank's ribald form of sectarianism and basic human rights. Now that that's cleared up, I'll continue with what I was saying before, that most people don't realize that it has already revealed its plans to muzzle its critics. It revealed these plans in a manifesto bearing all of the hallmarks of having been written by a semi-intelligible cad. Not only is its manifesto entirely lacking in logic, relentlessly subjective, and completely anecdotal, but Len's tank likes to compare its perceptions to those that shaped this nation. The comparison, however, doesn't hold up beyond some uselessly broad, superficial similarities that are so vague and pointless, it's not even worth summarizing them. If we let Len's tank panic irrationally and overreact completely, who's going to protect us? The government? Our parents? Superman? Probably none of the above. That's why it's important to expose some of Len's tank's daft deeds.
Please let me explain that Len's tank has delivered exactly the opposite of what it had previously promised us. Most notably, its vows of liberation turned out to be masks for oppression and domination. And, almost as troubling, Len's tank's vows of equality did little more than convince people that Len's tank ignores a breathtaking number of facts, most notably:
Fact: Len's tank dances to the tune of vexatious pauperism.
Fact: The quest to make human life negligible and cheap is the true inner kernel of Len's tank's philosophy, insofar as this figment of a pugnacious brain can be designated a "philosophy".
Fact: Len's tank should have instructed its helpers not to operate on a criminal -- as opposed to a civil disobedience -- basis.
In addition, no one has a higher opinion of it than I, and I think it's a bloodthirsty, bumptious Luddite. Surely, you may have noticed that Len's tank needs to internalize the external truth that most imprudent misers lost interest in their own future long before they joined its coalition. But you don't know the half of it. For starters, Len's tank's a psychologically defective organization. It's what the psychiatrists call a constitutional psychopath or a sociopath. I am now in a position to define what I mean when I say that Len's tank is the most blatant enemy of peace, stability, and human progress the world has ever seen. What I mean is that I want to thank it for its warnings. They give me an excellent opportunity to illustrate just how merciless Len's tank can be. My dream is for tired eyes to open and see clearly, broken spirits to find new energy, and weary arms to find the strength to rouse people's indignation at Len's tank. In any case, there is something in the way of "natural law" that can be stated awkwardly as follows: "My observations are perhaps unique." Please do not quote me on that. Instead, work it into a better natural law and enunciate it in clearer and more concise terms. It is immaterial who is credited with the words; the objective is to anneal discourse with honesty, clear thinking, and a sense of moral good.
I have often maintained that reasonable people can reasonably disagree. Unfortunately, when dealing with Len's tank and its trucklers, that claim assumes facts not in evidence. So let me claim instead that to say that governments should have the right to lie to their own subjects or to other governments is homicidal nonsense and untrue to boot. Given the amount of misinformation that Len's tank is circulating, I must point out that if one dares to criticize even a single tenet of its diatribes, one is promptly condemned as stupid, sanctimonious, ornery, or whatever epithet it deems most appropriate, usually without much explanation. When I first realized that Len's tank should pay for its mistakes, a cold shudder ran down my back. What's my problem, then? Allow me to present it in the form of a question: Is Len's tank just trying to transform our whole society to suit its own asinine interests? If you need help in answering that question, you may note that if I were to compile a list of its forays into espionage, sabotage, and subversion, it would fill an entire page and perhaps even run over onto the following one. Such a list would surely make every sane person who has passed the age of six realize that in a rather infamous speech, Len's tank exclaimed that it is beyond reproach. (I edited out the rest of what it said because, well, it didn't really say anything.)
Len's tank's smear tactics are definitely despised by everyone but obdurate twerps. We can therefore extrapolate that I am not trying to save the world -- I gave up that pursuit a long time ago. But I am trying to strike at the heart of Len's tank's efforts to impinge upon our daily lives. If natural selection indeed works by removing the weakest and most genetically unfit members of a species, then Len's tank is clearly going to be the first to go. Whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to put an end to anal-retentive collectivism. One indication of this is the fact that Len's tank is locked into its present course of destruction. It does not have the interest or the will to change its fundamentally illiterate traducements. As I gaze into my crystal ball, I see that Len's tank's myrmidons, who are legion, will turn over our country to vitriolic deviants one of these days. Every time Len's tank tells its apparatchiks that we should avoid personal responsibility, their eyes roll into the backs of their heads as they become mindless receptacles of unsubstantiated information, which they accept without question. Unfortunately, I can already see the response to this letter. Someone, possibly Len's tank itself or one of its yes-men, will write a pudibund piece about how utterly contentious I am. If that's the case, then so be it. What I just wrote sorely needed to be written.
And they say the Sump is useless! :lol:
