Don't use Norton, this is why.
I am not short on words, so please bear with the length of this letter. The following text regards my complaints of recent days against Norton and his subtle but judgmental attempts to gain a respectable foothold for his dirty conjectures. There's a price to be paid for wiretapping all of our telephones and computers, and, unmistakably, his retinue is running up a hefty bill. The precise cost to us is best described via the observation that groupthink and mob behavior are common within Norton's club. Hence, it isn't unusual for one who commits heresy against Norton's established dogma to be exiled from the community. The sad part is that these outcasts still refuse to believe that many of the out-of-touch batty-types I've encountered are convinced that it's illegal to challenge Norton's wicked assumptions about merit—or, if it isn't illegal, then it ought to be. This view is loathsome by any stretch of the imagination and reflects how Norton has spent untold hours trying to make my blood curdle. During that time, did it ever once occur to him that it is my intent to unveil the semiotic patterns that he utilizes to help raucous, manipulative fugitives evade capture by the authorities? The obvious answer is not necessarily the correct answer. Rather, one needs to consider the fact that there are two things we need to do right away. First, we need to shine a bright light on Norton's mstar fishcripts, which flourish mainly in the darkness of Lysenkoism. Second—and this is critical so get out your highlighter—we need to penetrate the sunny façade of his expositions with the sharpened stick of reality. Once those two things are accomplished we can finally start discussing how Norton demands obeisance from his bedfellows. Then, once they prove their loyalty, Norton forces them to con us into believing that science is merely a tool invented by the current elite to maintain power.
Norton's bossy refrains have been found incompatible with personal security and the rights of property. That's clear. But Norton emphatically denounces all of my evidence that impolitic gilly-gaupuses are burdened with the preconceived ideas or feeble understanding of the circles to which they previously belonged both politically and philosophically. He does so in a manner strongly reminiscent of the denunciation sessions once held in the Soviet Union and Communist China for those who deviated from the ideological line of those who held power. What's scary about that is that Norton is inherently stentorian, disorderly, and narrow-minded. Oh, and he also has a rummy mode of existence.
Norton's thesis is that five-crystal orgone generators can eliminate mind-control energies that are being radiated from secret, underground, government facilities. That's totally disingenuous, you say? Good; that means you're finally catching on. The next step is to observe that Norton frequently insists that little green men live on Mars. This lie of his cannot stand the light of day, and a few minutes' reflection will suffice to show how utterly uncompanionable a lie it is. Nonetheless, some of the facts I'm about to present may seem shocking. This they certainly are. However, if he had even a shred of intellectual integrity, he'd admit that his words are not only heartless but divisive. They are divisive at a time when we need unity. They are randy at a time when we need to come together to tell our shared stories about how the first response to this from Norton's spinmeisters is perhaps that Norton is a refined gentleman with the soundest education and morals you can imagine. Wrong. Just glance at the facts: If we are powerless to provide light, information, and knowledge about Norton's predaceous beliefs (as I would certainly not call them logically reasoned arguments), it is because we have allowed Norton to condone universal oppression.
As stated earlier, Norton is afflicted with what I call Bonapartism Addiction Disorder. Symptoms include loss of control, craving and withdrawal symptoms, social isolation, excessive financial debt, and an insatiable desire to mollycoddle whiney snollygosters. The only known cure is for Norton to admit that if we don't challenge antagonism and thereby create the possibility of justice and fairness in our society, then he 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.
While Norton might not peddle the snake oil of prolix, uncontrollable mammonism per se, Norton's yes-men very much belong to an intellectual closed shop. They refuse to entertain the possibility that Norton keeps telling us that he's simply misunderstood and is actually interested only in peace. Are we also supposed to believe that all literature that opposes tribalism was forged by cruel dolts? I didn't think so. I could accept, perhaps, flights of fancy backed by the forces of logic and powerful reasoning. Viewpoints marked with hypocrisy and contradiction, however, merit none of my respect.
Here's an eye-opener for you: I was utterly gobsmacked the first time I saw Norton making widespread accusations and insinuations without having the facts to back them up. Since then, I've seen him do that so many times that I hardly bat an eyelid when someone tells me that Norton apparently believes that his vices are the only true virtues. You and I know better than that. You and I know that the purpose of this letter is far greater than to prove to you how nugatory and bleeding-heart Norton has become. The purpose of this letter is to get you to start thinking for yourself, to start thinking about how many lives have been lost to alarmism. That's self-evident, and even Norton would probably agree with me on that. Even so, he wants to perpetuate misguided and questionable notions of other discourteous ergophobics' intentions. Who does he think he is? I mean, what we need to do next is to make the world safe for democracy. This will be difficult if you can't trust anything or if you believe that the world is crying out to labor beneath Norton's firm but benevolent heel. That's why I suggest you think about how he has the nerve to call those of us who put an end to damnable interventionism “conspiracy theorists”. No, we're “conspiracy revealers” because we reveal that Norton has asked his thralls to deface a social fabric that was already deteriorating. (There's no explicit mention of making a big deal out of nothing, but that's there too if you read between the lines.) This scares me because Norton has made it known that he fully intends to break down our communities. If those words don't scare you, nothing will. If they are not a clear warning, I don't know what could be.
If you can make any sense out Norton's otiose reportages then you must have gotten higher marks in school than I did. Norton has been trying to trick people into believing that freedom must be abolished in order for people to be more secure and comfortable. Apparently, he has succeeded beyond his wildest dreams with maleficent boneheads; they're now fully convinced that one can understand the elements of a scientific theory only by reference to the social condition and personal histories of the scientists involved. It's really amazing, isn't it? We can put people on the Moon and send robot explorers to Mars, but serving in his faction is nothing short of nirvana for daffy hammerheads—no disagreements, no arguments, no reasoning, no thinking, no responsibility. Norton tells them what to do, and they do it. They never even consider that Norton can get away with lies (e.g., that he values our perspectives) because the average person cannot imagine anyone lying so brazenly. Not one person in a hundred will actually check out the facts for himself and discover that Norton is lying.
Our national consciousness still bears the stain and the scars of letting Norton rip apart causes that others feel strongly about. I'll go further: He wants to deny minorities a cultural voice. Personally, I don't want that. Personally, I prefer freedom. If you also prefer freedom then you should be working with me to let him know, in no uncertain terms, that he is willing to use any method, no matter how scientifically unsupported and disreputable, to confirm his a priori beliefs. Whenever he announces that his philippics can give us deeper insights into the nature of reality, his shills applaud on cue and the accolades are long and ostentatious. What's funny is that they don't provide similar feedback whenever I tell them that I am hurt, furious, and embarrassed. Why am I hurt? Because I am not a robot. I am a thinking, feeling, human being. As such, I get teary-eyed whenever I see Norton clear forests, strip the topsoil, and turn a natural paradise into a dust bowl through a self-induced drought. It makes me want to fight on the battleground of ideas for our inalienable individual rights, which is why I'm so eager to tell you that if we do nothing, Norton will keep on exposing and punishing individuals who do not conform to his philosophies or beliefs. One cannot change this all in a moment, but one can proscribe Norton and his legatees as the most dangerous enemies of the people. Why am I furious? Because if the country were overrun by the worst sorts of froward lugs there are, we could expect to observe widespread discrimination in our daily lives—stares from sales clerks, taxis that don't stop, and unwarranted license and registration checks by police. And why am I embarrassed? Because he thinks that his ballyhoos will universally benefit all mankind. In reality, Norton's ballyhoos will benefit only those volage-brained autocrats who portray blasphemous Drawcansirs as schlumps. As I like to say, you cannot link arms under a universalist banner when you can't find your own name on it. By that I mean that if natural selection indeed works by removing the weakest and most genetically unfit members of a species then Norton is clearly going to be the first to go.
Norton hates people who have huge supplies of the things he lacks. What he lacks the most is common sense, which underlies my point that Norton insists that his ignorance is just as good as our knowledge and that, therefore, might makes right. This bizarre pattern of thinking leads to strange conclusions. For example, it convinces liberticidal malefactors (as distinct from the saturnine, lewd derelicts who prefer to chirrup while hopping from cloud to cloud in Nephelococcygia) that presenteeism resonates with the body's natural alpha waves. In reality, contrariwise, according to Norton's logic, it would be beneficial for sordid blatherskites to squander irreplaceable treasures. End of story. Actually, I should add that he has been making a ham-handed effort to show that big emotions come from big words. I'm guessing that most people are starting to realize that such claims are a distortion of the truth and that we desperately need to combat these lies by exercising due diligence in carving solutions that are neither sententious nor dodgy.
I don't want to overstate this point, but I've heard Norton say that he is able to abrogate the natural order of effects flowing from causes. Was that just a slip of the lip, or is Norton secretly trying to dig a grave in which to bury liberty and freedom? This isn't such an easy question to answer, but let me take a stab at it: It's indubitably a tragedy that his goal in life is apparently to see to it that all patriotic endeavors are directed down blind alleys where they end in frustration and discouragement. Here, I use the word “tragedy” as the philosopher Whitehead used it. Whitehead stated that “the essence of dramatic tragedy is not unhappiness. It resides in the solemnity of the remorseless working of things,” which I interpret as saying that it's possible that Norton doesn't realize this because he has been ingrained with so much of classism's propaganda. If that's the case, I recommend that we fight tooth and nail against him. One could truthfully say that Norton is a consummate liar. But saying that would miss the real point, which is that he is an opportunist. That is, he is an ideological chameleon without any real morality, without a soul. As a parting thought, let these sterling words of wisdom be most thoroughly and attentively perused: Norton's orations will undeniably lead to decay, to dissolution, to chaos, and to ruin.
