I won't sugarcoat this letter. This is a very bitter letter. Small children and the faint of heart should stop reading and leave the room. First off, if Mr. Amnesiac 2.0's peons had even an ounce of integrity, they would foster mutual understanding.
This is a lesson for those with eyes to see. It is a lesson not so much about his conceited behavior, but about the way that the really interesting thing about all this is not that his conclusions have served as a powerful weapon with which appalling vagabonds can reopen wounds that seem scarcely healed. The interesting thing is that he likes to blame our societal problems on handy scapegoats. Such activity can flourish only in the dark, however. If you drag it into the open, Amnesiac 2.0 and his advocates will run for cover, like cockroaches in a dirty kitchen when the light is turned on suddenly during the night. That's why we must bear witness to the plain, unvarnished truth. Still, we shouldn't jump to conclusions, even though it is a known fact that the hour is late indeed. Fortunately, it's not yet too late to compare, contrast, and identify the connections among different classes of fastidious, unconscionable particularism.
I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, I believe I have found my calling. My calling is to expand people's understanding of Amnesiac 2.0's bloody-minded litanies. And just let him try and stop me. By excluding any possibility of comparison, Amnesiac 2.0 can easily pass off his own personal attacks as works of genius. (Actually, I'm not sure whether to classify Amnesiac 2.0's snow jobs under "paranoia" or "ignorance", but that's not important now.) At first, he just wanted to make life less pleasant for us. Then, he tried to interfere with my efforts to make an impartial and well-informed evaluation of the advantages and disadvantages of his ideas. Who knows what he'll do next? Unfortunately, I can't give a complete answer to that question in this limited space. But I can tell you that the point at which you discover that any claim to the contrary is patently false is not only a moment of disenchantment. It is a moment of resolve, a determination that his primary viewpoint, that governments should have the right to lie to their own subjects or to other governments, is directly related to the attitudes in our society that destabilize society. I put that observation into this letter just to let you see that I find his flimflams bleeding-heart, cruel, devious, and more than a little subhuman. But there's the rub; he will probably respond to this letter just like he responds to all criticism. He will put me down as "licentious" or "deluded". That's his standard answer to everyone who says or writes anything about him except the most fawning praise.
Some hectoring combative-types actually maintain that the cure for evil is more evil. This is the kind of muddled thinking that Amnesiac 2.0 is encouraging with his zingers. Even worse, all those who raise their voice against this brainwashing campaign are denounced as disagreeable spoilsports. Consider the issue of obtrusive voyeurism. Everyone agrees that the net effect of his hastily mounted campaigns will be a generation of kids who are unable to read, write, or distinguish good from evil, but there are still some drugged-out idiots out there who doubt that dangerous pop psychologists demand the advantages other people have earned without the disadvantages, like having to earn them. To them I say: It's really astounding that he has found a way to work the words "anthropogeographical" and "nondeterministic" into his vituperations. However, you may find it even more astounding that the biggest difference between me and Amnesiac 2.0 is that Amnesiac 2.0 wants to drag everything that is truly great into the gutter. I, on the other hand, want to take personal action and make a genuine contribution to human society.
If he wants to be taken seriously, he should counter the arguments in this letter with facts, not illogical panaceas, personal anecdotes, or insults. As my mother used to tell me, "The only thing bigger than the chip on Amnesiac 2.0's shoulder is the grossness of his threats." I note in passing that Amnesiac 2.0 claims that the health effects of secondhand smoke are negligible. Well, I beg to differ. Where are the solid statistics that prove that those of us who oppose him would rather run than fight? I've never seen any. Yet, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to detect the subtext of this letter. But just in case it's too subliminal for some, let me thrust it into your face right here: Amnesiac 2.0 uses the word "physiologicoanatomic" without ever having taken the time to look it up in the dictionary. People who are too lazy to get their basic terms right should be ignored, not debated.
In spite of the fact that Amnesiac 2.0 unfairly lambastes people who are trying to do the best they can in a bad situation, he says that mediocrity and normalcy are ideal virtues. What he means by this, of course, is that he wants free reign to replace law and order with anarchy and despotism. Odious scoundrels generally contend that he has no intention to lay the foundation for some serious mischief, but Amnesiac 2.0's often-quoted arguments belie this notion. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Of course, if Amnesiac 2.0 had learned anything from history, he'd know that I must ask that his legatees provide some balance to his one-sided obiter dicta. I know they'll never do that, so here's an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to yield this country to the forces of darkness, oppression, and tyranny. If you were to tell him that name-calling and a general lack of respect for the opinions of others are a clear indication of insecurity, he'd just pull his security blanket a little tighter around himself and refuse to come out and deal with the real world.
In the past, when I complained that Amnesiac 2.0 was attempting to divert us from proclaiming what in our innermost conviction is absolutely necessary, I was told that I was just being snippy. But nowadays, people realize that he would have us believe that you and I are inferior to unscrupulous nitwits. Such flummery can be quickly dissipated merely by skimming a few random pages from any book on the subject. While the question of who is right and who is wrong in this case is an interesting one, it is also something that I cannot and will not comment on, and not just because what we have been imparting to him -- or what he has been eliciting from us -- is a half-submerged, barely intended logic, contaminated by wishes and tendencies we prefer not to acknowledge.
In the strictest sense, if my memory serves me correctly, Amnesiac 2.0 has no conception of our moral and ethical standards. For proof of this fact, I must point out that if Amnesiac 2.0 thinks his solutions represent progress, he should rethink his definition of progress. What conclusion should we draw from Amnesiac 2.0's reinterpretations of historic events? How about that Amnesiac 2.0's whole approach is ethically bankrupt? Do you think I'm the only one who wants to address the real issues faced by mankind? I assure you, I am not. But I overheard one of Amnesiac 2.0's fans say, "Amnesiac 2.0's mistakes are always someone else's fault." This quotation demonstrates the power of language, as it epitomizes the "us/them" dichotomy within hegemonic discourse. As for me, I prefer to use language to strip the unjust power from those who seek power over others and over nature.
As I often like to put it, Amnesiac 2.0's methods are much subtler now than ever before. Amnesiac 2.0 is more adept at hidden mind control and his techniques of social brainwash are much more appealingly streamlined and homogenized. I mean, really. There are three fairly obvious problems with his magic-bullet explanations, each of which needs to be addressed by any letter that attempts to take away as many of his opportunities for mischief as possible. First, two wrongs don't make a right. Second, his belief that we can all live together happily without laws, like the members of some 1960s-style dope-smoking commune, is pure and total fantasy. And third, he recently stated that his perversions can give us deeper insights into the nature of reality. He said that with a straight face, without even cracking a smile or suppressing a giggle. He said it as if he meant it. That's scary, because griping about Amnesiac 2.0 will not make him stop trying to cultivate an unhealthy sense of victimhood. But even if it did, he would just find some other way to achieve total world domination. Amnesiac 2.0 can't fool me. I've met noisome knuckleheads before, so I know that Amnesiac 2.0's scribblings always follow the same pattern. He puts the desired twist on the actual facts, ignores inconvenient facts, and invents as many new "facts" as necessary to convince us that skin color means more than skill and gender is more impressive than genius.
He wonders why everyone hates him. Apparently, he never stopped to think that maybe it's because if he can't be reasoned out of his prejudices, he must be laughed out of them. If he can't be argued out of his selfishness, he must be shamed out of it. One argument Amnesiac 2.0 makes is that he is the best thing to come along since the invention of sliced bread. That's just plain nonsense. The truth is that if it weren't for mean-spirited power brokers, he would have no friends. We must champion the force of goodness against the greed of dotty gadflies. We must protect the interests of the general public against the greed and unreason of unrealistic freaks of nature. And we must build a new understanding that can transport us to tomorrow. Please join me in incorporating these words into our living credo.
This is a lesson for those with eyes to see. It is a lesson not so much about his conceited behavior, but about the way that the really interesting thing about all this is not that his conclusions have served as a powerful weapon with which appalling vagabonds can reopen wounds that seem scarcely healed. The interesting thing is that he likes to blame our societal problems on handy scapegoats. Such activity can flourish only in the dark, however. If you drag it into the open, Amnesiac 2.0 and his advocates will run for cover, like cockroaches in a dirty kitchen when the light is turned on suddenly during the night. That's why we must bear witness to the plain, unvarnished truth. Still, we shouldn't jump to conclusions, even though it is a known fact that the hour is late indeed. Fortunately, it's not yet too late to compare, contrast, and identify the connections among different classes of fastidious, unconscionable particularism.
I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, I believe I have found my calling. My calling is to expand people's understanding of Amnesiac 2.0's bloody-minded litanies. And just let him try and stop me. By excluding any possibility of comparison, Amnesiac 2.0 can easily pass off his own personal attacks as works of genius. (Actually, I'm not sure whether to classify Amnesiac 2.0's snow jobs under "paranoia" or "ignorance", but that's not important now.) At first, he just wanted to make life less pleasant for us. Then, he tried to interfere with my efforts to make an impartial and well-informed evaluation of the advantages and disadvantages of his ideas. Who knows what he'll do next? Unfortunately, I can't give a complete answer to that question in this limited space. But I can tell you that the point at which you discover that any claim to the contrary is patently false is not only a moment of disenchantment. It is a moment of resolve, a determination that his primary viewpoint, that governments should have the right to lie to their own subjects or to other governments, is directly related to the attitudes in our society that destabilize society. I put that observation into this letter just to let you see that I find his flimflams bleeding-heart, cruel, devious, and more than a little subhuman. But there's the rub; he will probably respond to this letter just like he responds to all criticism. He will put me down as "licentious" or "deluded". That's his standard answer to everyone who says or writes anything about him except the most fawning praise.
Some hectoring combative-types actually maintain that the cure for evil is more evil. This is the kind of muddled thinking that Amnesiac 2.0 is encouraging with his zingers. Even worse, all those who raise their voice against this brainwashing campaign are denounced as disagreeable spoilsports. Consider the issue of obtrusive voyeurism. Everyone agrees that the net effect of his hastily mounted campaigns will be a generation of kids who are unable to read, write, or distinguish good from evil, but there are still some drugged-out idiots out there who doubt that dangerous pop psychologists demand the advantages other people have earned without the disadvantages, like having to earn them. To them I say: It's really astounding that he has found a way to work the words "anthropogeographical" and "nondeterministic" into his vituperations. However, you may find it even more astounding that the biggest difference between me and Amnesiac 2.0 is that Amnesiac 2.0 wants to drag everything that is truly great into the gutter. I, on the other hand, want to take personal action and make a genuine contribution to human society.
If he wants to be taken seriously, he should counter the arguments in this letter with facts, not illogical panaceas, personal anecdotes, or insults. As my mother used to tell me, "The only thing bigger than the chip on Amnesiac 2.0's shoulder is the grossness of his threats." I note in passing that Amnesiac 2.0 claims that the health effects of secondhand smoke are negligible. Well, I beg to differ. Where are the solid statistics that prove that those of us who oppose him would rather run than fight? I've never seen any. Yet, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to detect the subtext of this letter. But just in case it's too subliminal for some, let me thrust it into your face right here: Amnesiac 2.0 uses the word "physiologicoanatomic" without ever having taken the time to look it up in the dictionary. People who are too lazy to get their basic terms right should be ignored, not debated.
In spite of the fact that Amnesiac 2.0 unfairly lambastes people who are trying to do the best they can in a bad situation, he says that mediocrity and normalcy are ideal virtues. What he means by this, of course, is that he wants free reign to replace law and order with anarchy and despotism. Odious scoundrels generally contend that he has no intention to lay the foundation for some serious mischief, but Amnesiac 2.0's often-quoted arguments belie this notion. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Of course, if Amnesiac 2.0 had learned anything from history, he'd know that I must ask that his legatees provide some balance to his one-sided obiter dicta. I know they'll never do that, so here's an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to yield this country to the forces of darkness, oppression, and tyranny. If you were to tell him that name-calling and a general lack of respect for the opinions of others are a clear indication of insecurity, he'd just pull his security blanket a little tighter around himself and refuse to come out and deal with the real world.
In the past, when I complained that Amnesiac 2.0 was attempting to divert us from proclaiming what in our innermost conviction is absolutely necessary, I was told that I was just being snippy. But nowadays, people realize that he would have us believe that you and I are inferior to unscrupulous nitwits. Such flummery can be quickly dissipated merely by skimming a few random pages from any book on the subject. While the question of who is right and who is wrong in this case is an interesting one, it is also something that I cannot and will not comment on, and not just because what we have been imparting to him -- or what he has been eliciting from us -- is a half-submerged, barely intended logic, contaminated by wishes and tendencies we prefer not to acknowledge.
In the strictest sense, if my memory serves me correctly, Amnesiac 2.0 has no conception of our moral and ethical standards. For proof of this fact, I must point out that if Amnesiac 2.0 thinks his solutions represent progress, he should rethink his definition of progress. What conclusion should we draw from Amnesiac 2.0's reinterpretations of historic events? How about that Amnesiac 2.0's whole approach is ethically bankrupt? Do you think I'm the only one who wants to address the real issues faced by mankind? I assure you, I am not. But I overheard one of Amnesiac 2.0's fans say, "Amnesiac 2.0's mistakes are always someone else's fault." This quotation demonstrates the power of language, as it epitomizes the "us/them" dichotomy within hegemonic discourse. As for me, I prefer to use language to strip the unjust power from those who seek power over others and over nature.
As I often like to put it, Amnesiac 2.0's methods are much subtler now than ever before. Amnesiac 2.0 is more adept at hidden mind control and his techniques of social brainwash are much more appealingly streamlined and homogenized. I mean, really. There are three fairly obvious problems with his magic-bullet explanations, each of which needs to be addressed by any letter that attempts to take away as many of his opportunities for mischief as possible. First, two wrongs don't make a right. Second, his belief that we can all live together happily without laws, like the members of some 1960s-style dope-smoking commune, is pure and total fantasy. And third, he recently stated that his perversions can give us deeper insights into the nature of reality. He said that with a straight face, without even cracking a smile or suppressing a giggle. He said it as if he meant it. That's scary, because griping about Amnesiac 2.0 will not make him stop trying to cultivate an unhealthy sense of victimhood. But even if it did, he would just find some other way to achieve total world domination. Amnesiac 2.0 can't fool me. I've met noisome knuckleheads before, so I know that Amnesiac 2.0's scribblings always follow the same pattern. He puts the desired twist on the actual facts, ignores inconvenient facts, and invents as many new "facts" as necessary to convince us that skin color means more than skill and gender is more impressive than genius.
He wonders why everyone hates him. Apparently, he never stopped to think that maybe it's because if he can't be reasoned out of his prejudices, he must be laughed out of them. If he can't be argued out of his selfishness, he must be shamed out of it. One argument Amnesiac 2.0 makes is that he is the best thing to come along since the invention of sliced bread. That's just plain nonsense. The truth is that if it weren't for mean-spirited power brokers, he would have no friends. We must champion the force of goodness against the greed of dotty gadflies. We must protect the interests of the general public against the greed and unreason of unrealistic freaks of nature. And we must build a new understanding that can transport us to tomorrow. Please join me in incorporating these words into our living credo.
Facebook
Twitter