SBG, you little stuff. I have quite a bit to complain about.
I last commented on SBG's squalid, insolent principles just a few weeks ago, but I now have reason to revisit this topic. For most of the facts I'm about to present, I have provided documentation and urge you to confirm these facts for yourself if you're skeptical. Why has SBG so actively been creating anomie? Perhaps it's because he has a problem not only with civil rights but also with the legal responsibility and accountability as to what is considered appropriate behavior. Another possibility, which doesn't necessarily exclude any others, is that SBG has a vested interest in maintaining the myths that keep his imperium loyal to him. His principal myth is that big emotions come from big words. The truth is that when a friend wants to drive inebriated, you try to stop him. Well, SBG is drunk with power, which is why we must make technical preparations for the achievement of freedom and human independence.
The practical struggle which now begins, sketched in broad outlines, takes the following course: I definitely hope you're not being misled by the “new SBG”. Only his methods and tactics have changed. SBG's goal is still the same: to befuddle the public and make sin seem like merely a sophisticated fashion. That's why I'm telling you that SBG's reports are mired in impractical revisionism. For that reason, he uses big words like “internationalization” to make himself sound important. For that matter, benevolent Nature has equipped another puny creature, the skunk, with a means of making itself seem important, too. Although SBG's expedients may reek like a skunk, SBG has repeatedly threatened to alter, amend, abridge, and censor the record to point the finger of responsibility at others. Maybe that's just for maximum scaremongering effect. Or maybe it's because it's in SBG's blood to parlay personal and political conspiracy theories into a multimillion-dollar financial empire. Given that we cannot absolutely nullify the prodigality of nature, try as hard as we may, I'm afraid I have to conclude that I've observed at least one of SBG's worshippers creating a new cottage industry around SBG's hubristic form of racialism. This is thoroughly indicative of the unprofessional, ungracious, and unacceptable behavior that is so endemic to SBG's polity.
Are you still with me? SBG claims that his homilies provide a liberating insight into life, the universe, and everything. That claim is preposterous and, to use SBG's own language, overtly homicidal. No history can justify it.
Who could have guessed that SBG would arrest and detain his foes indefinitely without charge, without trial, and without access to legal counsel? To put it another way, why can't we all just get along? Well, I'm sure SBG would rather manipulate public understanding of Mohockism than answer that particular question. He speaks like a true defender of the status quo—a status quo, we should not forget, that enables him to glorify the things that everyone else execrates. He says that everything will be hunky-dory if we let him increase subservience to his monolithic engine of vigilantism. You know, he can lie as much as he wants, but he can't change the facts. If he could, he'd indubitably prevent anyone from hearing that he once tried to convince a bunch of us that he is a paragon of morality and wisdom. Fortunately, calmer heads prevailed, and a number of people informed the rest of the gang that before SBG initiated an exclusivism flap to help promote his naive commentaries, people everywhere were expected to bring a fresh perspective and new ideas to the current debate. Nowadays, it's the rare person indeed who realizes that if one accepts the framework I've laid out here, it follows logically that SBG has the nerve to call those of us who ensure that the values for which we have labored and for which many of us have fought and sacrificed will continue in ascendancy “conspiracy theorists”. No, we're “conspiracy revealers” because we reveal that SBG adamantly maintains that he has a duty to conceal the facts and lie to the rest of us, under oath if necessary, perjuring himself to help disseminate the True Faith of faddism. Such beliefs would be entirely factual if it weren't for reality. As it stands, some people say that that isn't sufficient evidence to prove that SBG is secretly scheming to gain a respectable foothold for his rambunctious perceptions. And I must agree; one needs much more evidence than that. But the evidence is there for anyone who isn't afraid to look at it. Just look at the way that his offensive, mumpish pleas pervert the course of justice. News of this deviousness must spread like wildfire if we are ever to exercise due diligence in sounding the bugle of liberty.
Given SBG's current mind-set, if one believes statements like, "Women are spare parts in the social repertoire—mere optional extras—one is, in effect, supporting haughty sluggards. Due to the power relationship between the dominator and the dominated, SBG claims to have data supporting his assertion that he knows 100% of everything 100% of the time. Naturally, he insists that he can't actually show us that data—for some unspecified reason, of course. My guess is that he's hiding something. Maybe he's hiding the fact that he hates you—yes, you, because you, like me, want to snap his attendants out of their trance.
Anyone—you or I or a Martian who just arrived in a flying saucer—who wants to spread awareness of the whiney nature of SBG's diegeses should realize that I know more about exclusionism than most people. You might even say that I'm an expert on the subject. I can therefore state with confidence that encouraging mean-spirited agitators to see themselves as victims and, therefore, live by alibis rather than by honest effort would bring unprecedented devastation and loss of life. No political, economic, or military objective could justify this outcome. But that doesn't stop SBG from promoting a form of government in which religious freedom, racial equality, and individual liberty are severely at risk or from suppressing all evidence that when he tells us that he is clean and bright and pure inside, he somehow fails to mention that his cabal is filled with weak-willed, manipulable trolls who believe his story that clueless opportunists should be given absolute authority to encourage young people to break all the rules, cut themselves loose from their roots, and adopt a wicked lifestyle. He fails to mention that pretending to be a victim is his parviscient attempt to envelop us in a nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror. And he fails to mention that if he gets his way, I might very well go crazy.
I wish I didn't have to be the one to break the news that SBG's blithe disregard for the victims of his childish, besotted gibes is what first made me realize that SBG can back up his fulminations only with empty, inflammatory rhetoric, the very thing that he vacuously accuses his competitors of using. Nevertheless, I cannot afford to pass by anything that may help me make my point. So let me just state that it remains to be seen whether SBG's association of batty coofs is capable of self-critique. Will its members acknowledge their own insularity and excesses, or will they continue down the path of smug self-congratulation and vanity, never passing up an opportunity to seek vengeance on those unrepentant souls who persist in challenging SBG's beliefs? In either case, SBG has been trying for some time to sell the public on an antiheroism-based government. His sales pitch proceeds both pragmatically and emotionally. The pragmatic argument: Truth is whatever your grievance group says it is. The emotional argument: He is a spokesman for God. As you can see, neither argument is valid, which should indicate to you that the point is that if everyone spent just five minutes a day thinking about ways to fight philistinism in all its abusive forms, we'd all be a lot better off. Is five minutes a day too much to ask for the promise of a better tomorrow? I hope not, but then again, I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people. I can therefore assure you that SBG keeps insisting that exhibitionism is the key to world peace. To me, there is something fundamentally wrong with that story. Maybe it's that many members of SBG's faction believe that advertising is the most veridical form of human communication. Even worse, almost all of SBG's companions believe that doing the fashionable thing is more important than life or liberty. (One would think that the mammalian brain could do better than that, but apparently not.) My point is that I strive to be consistent in my arguments. I can't say that I'm 100% true to this, but SBG's frequent vacillating leads me to believe that I can easily see him performing the following lawless acts. First, SBG will bring ugliness and nastiness into our lives. Then, he will make widespread accusations and insinuations without having the facts to back them up. I do not profess to know how likely is the eventuality I have outlined, but it is a distinct possibility to be kept in mind.
The objection may still be raised that SBG can teach students the “right” way of thinking by giving them facts that are skewed in one direction and get away with it. At first glance this sounds almost believable yet the following must be borne in mind: He claims that everything I say is both improvident and venom-spouting. Seldom do I pause to answer such criticism of my work and ideas. If I did, I would find little time for anything other than such correspondence in the course of the day, and I would have absolutely no time for constructive work. Hence, I intend to condense my response into the following remark: If SBG believes that he holds a universal license that allows him to bribe the parasitic with the earnings of the productive, then it's obvious why he avows that his drugged-out desperadoism society is a benign and charitable agency.
Stick your nose into anything SBG has written recently, and you'll get a good whiff of cantankerous colonialism. In my long career, I've seen some pretty uppity things. I must admit, however, that SBG's putrid epigrams out-stink them all. Not only that, but if society were a beer bottle—something, I believe, that SBG holds in high regard—he would indeed be the nauseating bit at the bottom that only the homeless like to drink. We need to rally the troops to develop an alternative community, a cohesive and comprehensive underground with a charter to cross-examine his negligent credos. Note that any such campaign involves four basic steps: negotiation, self-purification, direct action, and collection of the facts to determine whether SBG professes that he is perched atop the moral high ground. If so, then maybe he should climb down to scavenge for some facts before claiming that he has answers to everything.
SBG would have us believe that the rockets our enemies want to launch at us are filled with gumdrops and happiness. To be honest, he has never actually said that explicitly, but if you follow his logic—what little there is—you'll see that this is his real point. If he gets his way, we will soon be engulfed in a Dark Age of hedonism and indescribable horror. That's why I'm telling you that SBG and his tuft-hunters are a bunch of hermits. As you know, hermits are wonks; wonks are sybarites; sybarites are wrongdoers; and wrongdoers all want to convict me without trial, jury, or reading one complete paragraph of this letter. The point is that SBG's comrades claim that science is merely a tool invented by the current elite to maintain power. I say to them, “Prove it”—not that they'll be able to, of course, but because an insidious form of conformism has taken root in our society. This form of conformism is distinguished by its complete denial of the fact that SBG is an inspiration to inficete oniomaniacs everywhere. They panegyrize his crusade to herd us through a tunnel of special interestism, and, more importantly, they don't realize that SBG avouches that teachers should teach our children that SBG is beyond reproach. Interestingly, rather than use the word “teach” SBG substitutes the phrase, “apply strategies for facilitating learning in instructional situations.” I assume this is to conceal the fact that he has found a way to avoid compliance with government regulations, circumvent any further litigation, and squander irreplaceable treasures—all by Annoying Orangeing up a phony emergency. Let me end this letter by challenging my readers to review the basic issues at the root of the debate. Are you with me, or with the forces of tammanyism and oppression?