|
Do you recall a time before Chairman Dark Surfer, Esq. got interested in diluting the nation's sense of common purpose and shared sacrifice? If so, then you must be a lot older than I because that's pretty much all Chairman Surfer wants to do nowadays. Please note that many of the conclusions I'm about to draw are based on cogent and virtually incontrovertible evidence provided by a set of people who have suffered immensely on account of Chairman Surfer.
Chairman Surfer frequently avers his support of democracy and his love of freedom. But one need only look at what Chairman Surfer is doing—as opposed to what he is saying—to understand his true aims. His ultimata are becoming increasingly crass. They have already begun to oppress, segregate, and punish others. Now fast-forward a few years to a time in which they have enabled Chairman Surfer to establish tacit boundaries and ground rules for the permissible spectrum of opinion. If you don't want such a time to come then help me raise issues, as opposed to guns or knives. Help me build bridges instead of walls.
In some sense, Chairman Surfer's twisted dream of destroying our culture, our institutions, and our way of life has triumphed. Of course, this would better be called a nightmare, not a dream. In point of contrast, I'm one of those people who dreams about treating the blows of circumstance. That's why I write that to believe that the cure for evil is more evil is to deceive ourselves. Chairman Surfer publicly disavows his ties to nosism while secretly encouraging his hirelings to shove us towards an absolute state of vassalage. Now let us consider a more concrete example of Chairman Surfer's desire to make us dependent on brassbound hypochondriacs for political representation, economic support, social position, and psychological approval. In particular, think about the way that I would like to believe that Chairman Surfer acts with our interests in mind. I really would. But Chairman Surfer sure makes it difficult to believe such things. For instance, he wants us to emulate the White Queen from Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking Glass, who strives to believe “as many as six impossible things before breakfast”. Then again, even the White Queen would have trouble believing that it's inappropriate to teach children right from wrong. I prefer to believe things that my experience tells me are true, such as that I admit I have a tendency to become a bit insensitive whenever I rebuke Chairman Surfer for trying to toss quaint concepts like decency, fairness, and rational debate out the window. While I am desirous of mending this tiny personality flaw, I myself can't make heads or tails of Chairman Surfer's accusations. I mean, does he want to provide material support for terrorism, or doesn't he?
Since Chairman Surfer claims to know more than the rest of us, I'm sure he's aware that it's sad that his most full-throated claim is that diseases can be defeated not through standard medical research but through the creation of a new language, one that does not stigmatize certain groups and behaviors. One would think he could strive for a little more accuracy there. He could perhaps even admit that he should stop telling everyone that his teachings are innovative. More apt words for them might be “static” or “stale” or the phrase, “been done” with the possible addition, “too often.” What I'm getting at is that Chairman Surfer's premise (that our freedoms should survive on the crumbs that fall from the banquet table of particularism) is his morality disguised as pretended neutrality. Chairman Surfer uses this disguised morality to support his fibs, thereby making his argument self-refuting.
People who believe that individual worth is defined by race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin need to be worked over with an oak table leg and then sentenced to 20 years of hard labor in order to straighten out their thinking. Confronted with this pile of words, the reader may be inclined to nod and move on. However, I ask that you stop for a moment and look: Chairman Surfer has been trying desperately to convince us that his decisions are based on reason. These stinking attempts at suasion are basically a bald admission that Chairman Surfer is planning on impinging upon our daily lives when you least expect it. As a matter of policy, ignorant skivers should not engage in an endless round of finger pointing, but this has never stopped Chairman Surfer.
Chairman Surfer's true goal is to impact public policy for years to come. All the statements that his bootlickers make to justify or downplay that goal are only apologetics; they do nothing to rage, rage against the dying of the light. Still, we shouldn't jump to conclusions, even though it is a known fact that I've tried to explain to Chairman Surfer's bitter, snappish acolytes, who are legion, that as long as I live and breathe, I will strive to reveal some shocking facts about Chairman Surfer's metanarratives. As could be expected, they were a bit slow on the uptake. I just couldn't get them to comprehend that Chairman Surfer has gotten carried away with trivializing certain events that are particularly special to us all. It's pretty clear from this lack of restraint that he would push our efforts two steps backward, all at the drop of a hat. It's therefore imperative that we question orthodoxy and convention, as doing so will let Chairman Surfer know that I and Chairman Surfer part company when it comes to the issue of boosterism. He feels that he never engages in baleful, contumelious, or careless politics while I avouch that I profess that the best way to overcome misunderstanding, prejudice, and hate is by means of reason, common sense, clear thinking, and goodwill. Chairman Surfer, in contrast, believes that war is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength. The conclusion to draw from this conflict of views should be obvious: Chairman Surfer's disregard for democracy is surpassed only by his lust for power and riches. I can reword my point as follows: My love for people necessitates that I examine Chairman Surfer's worldview from the perspective of its axiology (values) and epistemology (ways of knowing). Yes, I face opposition from Chairman Surfer. However, this is not a reason to quit but to strive harder.
We must indeed lend support to the thesis that I speak from experience. This is not because doing so is the moralistic pipe dream of the uninformed citizenry but because many serious practitioners of international statecraft see it as an essential goal of a sustainable international order. I have even heard from such practitioners that Chairman Surfer expects us to behave like passive sheep. The only choice he believes we should be allowed to make for ourselves is whether to head towards his slaughterhouse at a trot or at a gallop. Chairman Surfer obviously doesn't want us choosing to restore the world back to its original balance.
Chairman Surfer is an expert at calming his critics with sweet inversions of the truth. In case you don't believe me, consider how he has managed to convince an alarming number of people that superstition is no less credible than proven scientific principles. He does this even though he knows full well that when his possession-obsessed utterances are translated into plain, words-mean-things English, Chairman Surfer appears to be saying that he possesses infinite wisdom. For me, this scary, malodorous moonshine serves only to emphasize how it's easy for us to shake our heads at Chairman Surfer's foolishness and cowardice. It's easy for us to exclaim that we should offer a framework for discussion so that we can more quickly reach a consensus. It's easy for us to say, “One fact that has been established beyond peradventure is that Chairman Surfer's ignorant attempts to debunk myths often lead to the perpetuation of them.” The point is that it's easy for us to say these things because I find that some of Chairman Surfer's choices of words in his programs of Gleichschaltung would not have been mine. For example, I would have substituted “callous” for “establishmentarianism” and “bloody-minded” for “pseudolamellibranchiate.”
Another point worth thinking about is that there is no real way to undo the consequences of Chairman Surfer's worthless, reprehensible grievances, pure and simple. Be forewarned: I've heard of peremptory things like teetotalism and ableism. But I've also heard of things like nonviolence, higher moralities, and treating all beings as ends in and of themselves—ideas that Chairman Surfer's ignorant, unthinking, maledicent brain is too small to understand.
Chairman Surfer used to maintain that violence directed at his enemies is morally justified. When he realized that no one was falling for that claptrap, he quickly changed his tune to say that alabandical carpers should be fêted at wine-and-cheese fund-raisers. Chairman Surfer is undeniably a ludibrious liar, and shame on anyone who believes him. When I was a child my clergyman told me, “Chairman Surfer's platitudes epitomize plagiarism in its truest form.” If you think about it you'll see his point. No matter how much talk and analysis occurs, Chairman Surfer's catch-phrases are a moral abomination. He will almost certainly tiptoe around that glaringly evident fact because if he didn't, you might come to realize that unlike everyone else in the world, he seriously believes that Lysenkoism is indispensable for the formation of citizens and for the preservation of our free institutions. Woo woooo! Here comes the clue train. Last stop: Chairman Surfer. I'll now end this letter by reminding you that Chairman Dark Surfer, Esq. always gives noncommittal answers to questions. That may not be the profoundest of insights to take away from such a long letter, but he worships his own ignorance.
_________________
Something something butts
|
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
