Sailingdog...I hate you...

[Giulietta]

Sailingdog, you double crosser....I hate you

In this post, I'm not going to argue that an axiom among Sailingdog's cat's-paws is that anyone who disagrees with Sailingdog is ultimately flighty. Nor am I going to argue that compared to fastidious bums like him, every pimp is a man of honor. I'm not going to argue those factors, because they're irrelevant. Instead, I will say only that opposing his snivelling, obstreperous bait-and-switch tactics actively and earnestly is the moral duty of every good human being. For practical reasons, I have to confine my discussion to areas that have received insufficient public attention or in which I have something new to say.

How dare Sailingdog saddle the economy with crippling debt? His superstitious opuscula can be quite educational. By studying them, students can observe firsthand the consequences of having a mind consumed with paranoia, fear, hatred, and ignorance.

When I say that Sailingdog's convictions are rabid, I mean it. I don't mean that they remind me of something rabid or that they have one or two rabid characteristics. I mean that they are rabid. In fact, the most rabid thing about them is the way that they prevent people from seeing that if I wanted to brainwash and manipulate a large segment of the population, I would convince them that Sailingdog is the most recent incarnation of the Buddha. In fact, that's exactly what Sailingdog does as part of his quest to show us a gross miscarriage of common judgment. Now for some parting advice: Look at the facts. Analyze the arguments. Think about the motives of the people who are telling you that the moon is made of green cheese. And have confidence in yourself. Remember, Sailingdog's seemingly egalitarian ideas lead only to results that are both intellectually challenged and unfair.

[Giulietta]

The theme of this letter is not "I know some licentious libertines who think they once overheard Sailingdog say, 'I want to spoil the whole Zen Buddhist New Age mystical rock-worshipping aura of our body chakras one of these days'." By now, you've already heard countless arguments running in that vein and are probably pretty sick of them. The theme of this letter is "Sailingdog is a wee bit overzealous in his defense of solecism." To get right down to it, if Sailingdog wanted to, he could encourage the acceptance of scapegoating and demonization. He could create an ideological climate that will enable him to undermine liberty in the name of liberty. And he could create catchy, new terms for boring, old issues. We must not allow Sailingdog to do any of these. I am not mistaken when I say that he says that his little empire is looking out for our best interests. What balderdash! What impudence! What treachery! Sailingdog's intimates believe that obscurity, evasiveness, incomprehensibility, indirectness, and ambiguity are marks of depth and brilliance. It should not be surprising that they believe this, however. As we all know, minds that have been so maimed that they believe that the average working-class person can't see through Sailingdog's chicanery can believe anything, especially if it's false.

Sailingdog is trying hard to convince a substantial number of insolent trolls to trade facts for fantasy, truth for myths, academics for collective socialization, and individual thinking for group manipulation. He presumably believes that the "hundredth-monkey phenomenon" will spontaneously incite obtuse dole-sucking parasites to behave likewise. The reality, however, is that we cannot afford to waste our time, resources, and energy by dwelling upon inequities of the past. Instead, we must act as a positive role model for younger people. Doing so would be significantly easier if more people were to understand that if we don't carry out this matter to the full extent of the law right now, then Sailingdog's op-ed pieces will soon start to metastasize until they dispense outright misinformation and flashlight-under-the-chin ghost stories. The term "idiot savant" comes to mind when thinking of Sailingdog. Admittedly, that term applies only halfway to him, which is why I suspect that it's astounding that Sailingdog has somehow found a way to work the words "cinematographical" and "anthropocentrical" into his ballyhoos. However, you may find it even more astounding that he acts as if he were King of the World. This hauteur is astonishing, staggering, and mind-boggling. To quote the prophet Isaiah, "Woe to ye who construct the spectre of a terrible armed threat". Sailingdog intends to create a new social class. Amoral jabberers, ethically bankrupt, contumelious cheapskates, and the worst types of mumpish, lawless undesirables I've ever seen will be given aristocratic status. The rest of us will be forced into serving as their proxies.

So far, this letter has merely identified the ways in which my message has always been that Sailingdog is leading us down the road of revisionism. Now, let me shift gears and start telling you about how our path is set. By this, I mean that in order to reverse the devolutionary course Sailingdog has set for us, we must give you some background information about him. I consider that requirement a small price to pay because Sailingdog ignores a breathtaking number of facts, most notably:

Fact: We are being insidiously, conspiratorially, and treasonously led by deception, by bribery, by coercion, and by fear to direct social activity toward philanthropic flimflam rather than toward the elimination of the basic deficiencies in the organization of our economic and cultural life.

Fact: There's always been suffering in the world, and wrongs have been and will continue to be committed.

Fact: Some of Sailingdog's rummy, intellectually challenged publicity stunts are so self-contradictory, they're their own refutation.

In addition, if I were elected Ruler of the World, my first act of business would be to build a better world, a cleaner world, a safer world, and a saner world. I would further use my position to inform certain segments of the Earth's population that Sailingdog's apostles consider his manifestos a breath of fresh air. I, however, find them more like the fetid odor of neopaganism. Sailingdog has always promoted the trendiest causes, the causes that all of the important people promote. (Actually, Sailingdog's diatribes are extensive and frequent and are laden with orchidaceous words like "counterintelligence" and "pharmacodynamic" but that's not important now.) For all of the foregoing reasons, I can confidently claim that the question that's on everyone's mind these days is, "Is his lack of intelligence genetic or the result of too much time spent with haughty, obstinate cockalorums?" Well, I asked the question, so I should answer it. Let me start by saying that before he initiated an irreligionism flap to help promote his blockish insinuations, people everywhere were expected to fight for our freedom of speech. Nowadays, it's the rare person indeed who realizes that he expects people to bow and scrape before him. Sailingdog's functionaries probably don't realize that, because it's not mentioned in the funny papers or in the movies. Nevertheless, those of us who are still sane, those of us who still have a firm grip on reality, those of us who still maintain that he should stop lying about how the Earth is flat, have an obligation to do more than just observe what he is doing from a safe distance. We have an obligation to help young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world. We have an obligation to change the world for the better. And we have an obligation to say "no" to his lethargic orations.

The sullen, craven obscurantism I've been writing about is not primarily the fault of judgmental ex-cons, nor of the unctuous swaggerers who subvert existing lines of power and information. It is the fault of Sailingdog. I repeat: If I were to compile a list of his 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 Sailingdog says that his mistakes are always someone else's fault. That's his unvarying story, and it's a lie: an extremely unsavory and mealymouthed lie. Unfortunately, it's a lie that is accepted unquestioningly, uncritically, by Sailingdog's buddies. A recent series of hearings, lawsuits, and media reports demonstrates that he never stops boasting about his generous contributions to charitable causes. As far as I can tell, however, Sailingdog's claimed magnanimousness is absolutely chimerical and, furthermore, ignorance is bliss. This may be why his stooges are generally all smiles.

Sailingdog's litanies are like an enormous heathenism-spewing machine. We must begin dismantling that structure. We must put a monkey wrench in its gears. And we must stop the Huns at the gate, because someone once said to me, "In this volatile political moment, we must cautiously guard against the dangers of sententious plagiarism." This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since. It's our responsibility to knock some sense into Sailingdog. That's the first step in trying to do something good for others, and it's the only way to combat the rash ideology of corporatism that has infected the minds of so many prissy porn stars. To be honest, documents written by his hangers-on typically include the line, "Sailingdog is a bearer and agent of the Creator's purpose", in large, 30-point type, as if the size of the font gives weight to the words. In reality, all that that fancy formatting really does is underscore the fact that Sailingdog indisputably believes that the ancient Egyptians used psychic powers to build the pyramids. What kind of Humpty-Dumpty world is he living in? My answer is, as always, a model of clarity and the soul of wit: I don't know. However, I do know that his desire to lead people towards iniquity and sin is the chief sign that he's an aberrant, vindictive skinhead. (The second sign is that Sailingdog feels obliged to use paid informants and provocateurs to engage in or goad others into engaging in illegal acts.)

Sailingdog talks a lot about exhibitionism and how wonderful it is. However, he's never actually defined what it means. How can he argue for something he's never defined? In classic sophist fashion, I ask another question in reply: What in perdition does he think he's doing? The most appealing theory has to do with the way that if he wants to silence critical debate and squelch creative brainstorming, let him wear the opprobrium of that decision. Is anyone else out there as struck as I am by his utter disregard for morality and humanity? The reason I ask is that the real question here is not, "Why doesn't he reveal the truth about himself?". The real question is rather, "Is it really his impression that space aliens are out to lay eggs in our innards or ooze their alien hell-slime all over us?" Well, we all know the answer to that question, don't we? But in case you don't, then you should note that he says that everything is happy and fine and good. That's a stupid thing to say. It's like saying that all any child needs is a big dose of television every day.

Although this may come as a surprise to some readers, I refuse to indulge Sailingdog's foibles. That's something you won't find in your local newspaper because it's the news that just doesn't fit. Although the proper definition of "ultracentrifugation" is hotly disputed, it seems that no one else is telling you that those who fight against Sailingdog's insincere bruta fulmina are inevitably branded as morbid and insipid by Sailingdog's forces. So, since the burden lies with me to tell you that, I suppose I should say a few words on the subject. To begin with, I find Sailingdog's demeanor and pomposity downright apalling. Yes, I could add that he flagrantly abuses rules and regulations and then complains vehemently when caught, but I wanted to keep my message simple and direct. I didn't want to distract you from the main thrust of my message, which is that Sailingdog often starts with a preconceived story and then plugs in supposed "information" in order to create a somewhat believable tale. In fact, I have said that to Sailingdog on many occasions and I will keep on saying it until he stops trying to toss quaint concepts like decency, fairness, and rational debate out the window. This theme has been struck before. I challenge him to move from his broad derogatory generalizations to specific instances to prove otherwise. As another disquieting tidbit, the following must be stated: Sailingdog pompously claims that we have too much freedom. That sort of nonsense impresses many people, unfortunately.

I'll try not to dwell on this, but everything I've said so far is by way of introduction to the key point I want to make in this letter. My key point is that some people don't seem to mind that Sailingdog likes to infiltrate the media with the express purpose of disseminating refractory information. What a rebarbative world we live in! It's quite easy for him to declaim my proposals. But when is Sailingdog going to provide an alternative proposal of his own? I once asked Sailingdog that question -- I am still waiting for an answer. In the meantime, let me point out that purblind numskulls are born, not made. That dictum is as unimpeachable as the "poeta nascitur, non fit" that it echoes and as irreproachable as the brocard that Sailingdog truly believes that every word that leaves his mouth is teeming with useful information. It is just such obdurate, diabolic megalomania, uncontrollable egoism, and intellectual aberrancy that stirs Sailingdog to start wars, ruin the environment, invent diseases, and routinely do a hundred other things that kill people. You've never heard that Sailingdog's intention is to represent heaven as hell and, conversely, the most wretched life as paradise? That's because his habitués have been staging a massive cover-up for quite some time now. But if you keep your eyes open, you'll notice that experience shows that his flunkies are cut from the same mold as vitriolic popinjays. So what's the connection between that and his sentiments? The connection is that someone has been giving Sailingdog's brain a very thorough washing, and now Sailingdog is trying to do the same to us.

Having studied Sailingdog's charges and finding them groundless, I must now tell the world that his victims have been speaking out for years. Unfortunately, their voices have long been silenced by the roar and thunder of Sailingdog's shock troops, who loudly proclaim that emotionalism is a noble goal. Regardless of those semi-intelligible proclamations, the truth is that he accuses me of being narrow-minded. Does he feel I'm narrow-minded because I refuse to accept his claim that violence and prejudice are funny? If so, then I guess I'm as narrow-minded as I could possibly be. On a personal note, I once told Sailingdog that I am chagrined but resigned when I witness the indifference to the fundamentals of language that he displays. How did he respond to that? He proceeded to curse me off using a number of colorful expletives not befitting this letter, which serves only to show that Sailingdog seeks scapegoats for his own shortcomings by blaming the easiest target he can find, that is, sinful, nefarious headcases. Now, I don't want to overwork the story about how he plans to sully a profession that's already held in low esteem, so let's just say that he doesn't want to acknowledge that he likes to put on a honest face to dissimulate his plans to break the mind and spirit, castrate the character, and kill the career of anyone whose ideas he deems to be intemperate. In fact, Sailingdog would rather block all discussion on the subject. I suppose that's because his philosophies need to be reassessed with his ulterior motives in mind. To top that off, his hired goons don't represent an ideology. They don't represent a legitimate political group of people. They're just flat passive-aggressive. Is there a chance that Sailingdog isn't crotchety, otiose, and salacious? From what I've seen, I doubt it.

I recently informed Sailingdog that his accomplices violate strongly held principles regarding deferral of current satisfaction for long-term gains. Sailingdog said he'd "look further into the matter." Well, not too much further; after all, I want to point out that the emperor has no clothes on. But first, let me pose an abstract question. In view of his disdainful imprecations, what does it make sense for us to do now? To ask that question another way, does his oversized ego demand that he twist my words six ways for Sunday? As you no doubt realize, that's a particulary timely question. In fact, just half an hour ago, I heard someone express the opinion that Sailingdog is driving me nuts. I can't take it anymore! If you think that this is humorous or exaggerated, you're wrong. Up to this point, we have explored some of the motivations and circumstances that make Sailingdog want to promote a culture of dependency and failure. However, we must look beyond both Sailingdog's motivations and history if we are truly to understand his hypnopompic insights. Let me end by saying that I know that what I have written in this letter will send many readers (especially any who are big fans of Sailingdog) into a tizzy or a tantrum. I am sorry, but I remind them that I, for one, challenge Sailingdog to tell me what, if anything, in this letter is not entirely truthful.

[Giulietta]

Sailingdog's lack of ethics has become so flagrant that it merits your complete attention. So let's begin, quite properly, with a brief look at the historical development of the problem, of its attempted solutions, and of the eternal argument about it. We'd all be in grave danger if Sailingdog continued to engage in his stuck-up, pesky behavior. So, Sailingdog, maybe the problem is not with hostile, hideous trolls, but with you. He ducks the issue of racism by using words and phrases so vague and subject to interpretation that they have no true meaning at all. Surprisingly, the courts and our elected officials are way ahead of him in embracing this simple fact. He can get away with lies (e.g., that university professors must conform their theses and conclusions to his lubricious, villainous prejudices if they want to publish papers and advance their careers) 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 Sailingdog is lying. In a nutshell, different people often see the same subject in different lights.

[sailingfool]

Alex,

what the heck...is business slow this month, or did you bang your head on the boom again? Yikes, it seems like four or five weeks of actual work is breaking you, must be time for another six months of sailing vacation...I hear Cote D'Azur is nice this time of year. I can make it next week, maybe SD should stay home this time..

Let me know the departure date. I'll bring some fine French wines (yea, yea I understand the Portugee have an inferiorty complex about France, but you can still enjoy their wines...).

[teshannon]

Giu,
Can you expand on that.

[AjariBonten]

Wow Alex, which paint thinner were you using this morning???

[Giulietta]

Originally Posted by sailingfool

Let me know the departure date. I'll bring some fine French wines (yea, yea I understand the Portugee have an inferiorty complex about France, but you can still enjoy their wines...).

Ahhh another player...well for you, Mr. Sailing fool...


I've reached a point where I feel the need to express my disappointment with Mr. Sailingfool. Without going into all the gory details, let's just say that Sailingfool is trying hard to convince a substantial number of callow poseurs to instill a subconscious feeling of guilt in those of us who disagree with his jokes. He presumably believes that the "hundredth-monkey phenomenon" will spontaneously incite the worst sorts of ruthless scrubs there are to behave likewise. The reality, however, is that you don't know how tempted I am to slap the stuffing out of Sailingfool. Period, finis, and Q.E.D. We wouldn't have a problem with Marxism if it weren't for him. Although Sailingfool created the problem, aggravated the problem, and escalated the problem, he insists that he can solve the problem if we just grant him more power. How naïve does Sailingfool think we are? Truly, he recently stated that the only way to expand one's mind is with drugs -- or maybe even chocolate. 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 we must deal with him appropriately. To do anything else, and I do mean anything else, is a complete waste of time.

You know, it strikes me that the concepts underlying Sailingfool's deceitful memoirs are like the Ptolemaic astronomy, which could not have been saved by positing more epicycles or eliminating some of the more glaring discrepancies. The fundamental idea -- that the heavens revolve around the Earth -- was wrong, just as Sailingfool's idea that a plausible excuse is a satisfactory substitute for performance is wrong. Sailingfool does not tolerate any view that differs from his own. Rather, he discredits and discards those people who contradict him along with the ideas that they represent. Like a verbal magician, he knows how to lie without appearing to be lying, how to bury secrets in mountains of garbage-speak. The problem with Sailingfool is not that he's silly. It's that he wants to spawn a society in which those with the most deviant lifestyle, contemptuous behavior, or personal failures are given the most by the government. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

[Giulietta]

And if you think I am done with you....here's a few more thoughts...

While you're probably sick of hearing about Mr. Sailingfool, it is crucial that you read this letter. Note that some of the facts I plan to use in this letter were provided to me by a highly educated person who managed to escape Sailingfool's crapulous, illaudable indoctrination and is consequently believable. I hope I don't need to remind you that he has become so morally and ideologically degraded, so acclimated to interdenominationalism and fogyism, that he wants to up the ante considerably, but it's still true, and we must do something about it.

For proof of this ongoing tragedy, one has only to realize that I don't care what others say about Sailingfool. He's still frowzy, feckless, and he intends to distract people from serious analysis of the situation. The fact that his communications are filled with a number of very clear-cut and blatant lies -- lies of both omission and commission -- is particularly striking, since his dissertations do not represent progress. They represent insanity masquerading as progress.

I don't object to Sailingfool's ideas because my prime directive is to focus on the major economic, social, and political forces that provide the setting for the expression of a subhuman agenda. I object because his occasional demonstrations of benevolence are not genuine. Nor are Sailingfool's promises. In fact, we find among narrow and uneducated minds the belief that Man's eternal search for Truth is a challenge to be avoided at all costs. This belief is due to a basic confusion, which can be cleared up simply by stating that I've tried explaining to Sailingfool's acolytes that you should think of this letter as a clarion call for us to analyze Sailingfool's effusions in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. Unfortunately, it is clear to me in talking to them that they have no comprehension of what I'm saying. I might as well be talking to creatures from Mars. In fact, I'd bet Martians would be more likely to discern that Sailingfool claims to have turned over a new leaf shortly after getting caught trying to sully a profession that's already held in low esteem. This claim is an outright lie that is still being circulated by Sailingfool's intimates. The truth is that I have a score to settle with Sailingfool. But let's not lose sight of the larger, more important issue here: Sailingfool's insane epigrams. Let's be realistic: Sailingfool is totally mistaken if he believes that university professors must conform their theses and conclusions to his dangerous prejudices if they want to publish papers and advance their careers.

Even if I agreed that Sailingfool's delusional double standards were of paramount importance, it would still be the case that in a rather infamous speech, Sailingfool exclaimed that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape. (I edited out the rest of what he said because, well, it didn't really say anything.) Sure, he may have a right to mold your mind and have you see the world not as it is, but as he wants you to see it, but we certainly don't have to stand idly by while he exercises that right. The really interesting thing about all this is not that every time he attempts to institutionalize alarmism through systematic violence, distorted religion, and dubious science, I feel a surge of pure, unadulterated hatred flow through my body. The interesting thing is that his catch-phrases are based on two fundamental errors. They assume that the best way to reduce cognitive dissonance and restore homeostasis to one's psyche is to twist my words six ways for Sunday. And they promote the mistaken idea that an open party with unlimited access to alcohol can't possibly outgrow the host's ability to manage the crowd. Some of us have an opportunity to come in contact with wishy-washy present-day robber barons on a regular basis at work or in school. We, therefore, may be able to gain some insight into the way they think, into their values; we may be able to understand why they want to deny minorities a cultural voice.

I indeed want to talk about the big picture: Sailingfool's idiotic claim that he can walk on water is just that, an idiotic claim. Sailingfool promises that if we give him and his helpers additional powers, he'll guard us from benighted dummkopfs. My question, however is, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? -- Who will guard the guards? The reasons that he gives for his philippics clearly do not correspond with his real motives. And while we're on the subject, that fact is simply inescapable to any thinking man or woman. "Thinking" is the key word in the previous sentence. Finally, any mistakes in this letter are strictly my fault. But if you find any factual error or have more updated information on the subject of Mr. Sailingfool, Sailingfool-inspired versions of quislingism, etc., please tell me, so I can write an even stronger letter next time.

[Giulietta]

Originally Posted by teshannon

Giu,
Can you expand on that.

Ahhh for you....this what I expand on....

I know surprisingly little about Teshannon. I know nothing about his background or lineage. I do not know where Teshannon was educated or what he has done besides convince others that counter-productive wankers are the "chosen people" of scriptural prophecy. Nevertheless, I can tell you all that you need to know about him. Here's a quick review: If one could get a Ph.D. in Vigilantism, he would be the first in line to have one.

The more I think about presumptuous, invidious schmoes, the more troubled I become by Teshannon's indiscretions. There are some truths that are so obvious that for this very reason they are not seen, or at least not recognized, by ordinary people. One noteworthy example is the truism that if Teshannon thinks that merit is adequately measured by his methods and qualifications, then he's sadly mistaken.

Teshannon should just face the facts. Okay, that's a slight exaggeration, but you get the drift. He argues that unfounded attacks on character, loads of hyperbole, and fallacious information are the best way to make a point. To maintain this thesis, Teshannon naturally has had to shovel away a mountain of evidence, which he does by the desperate expedient of claiming that trees cause more pollution than automobiles do. Nothing offends him more than the truth. Excuse me; that's not entirely correct. What I meant to say is that Teshannon is not just oleaginous. He is unbelievably, astronomically oleaginous.

I once told Teshannon that thanks to him, our national and individual sovereignty is fluttering precariously in the wind. How did he respond to that? He proceeded to curse me off using a number of colorful expletives not befitting this letter, which serves only to show that Teshannon and his sycophants are loud, intellectually challenged ideologues. This is not set down in complaint against them, but merely as analysis. Even the most rigorous theoretical framework he could put forward would not leave him in the position of generalizing with the certainty to which he is prone in his monographs. I wish I could put it more delicately, but that would miss the point. Those of us who are still sane, those of us who still have a firm grip on reality, those of us who still feel that Teshannon joins the most sordid avarice and the most detestable superstition to the most invincible hatred of all people, have an obligation to do more than just observe what Teshannon is doing from a safe distance. We have an obligation to provide a positive, confident, and assertive vision of humanity's future and our role in it. We have an obligation to disabuse him of the notion that we should be grateful for the precious freedom to be robbed and kicked in the face by such a noble creature as him. And we have an obligation to purge the darkness from his heart.

Teshannon once tried convincing me that the cure for evil is more evil. Does he think I was born yesterday? I mean, it seems pretty obvious that I wonder if Teshannon really believes the things he says. He knows they're not true, doesn't he? It is bootless to speculate on the matter, but it should be noted that honor means nothing to Teshannon. Principles mean nothing to Teshannon. All he cares about is how to extinguish the voices of opposition. Someone once said to me, "Any claim to the contrary is patently false." This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since. Sadly, in once sense, Teshannon is correct. If we let him add insult to injury, then I will definitely be forced to roll over and play dead. The bottom line is that I have put this letter before you, without any gain to myself, because I care.

[Giulietta]

Originally Posted by AjariBonten

Wow Alex, which paint thinner were you using this morning???

To respond to all of Prof. Ajaribonten's tirades would take up too much room and time. I would like to address the most grotty ones, though. For practical reasons, I have to confine my discussion to areas that have received insufficient public attention or in which I have something new to say.

If Ajaribonten is victorious in his quest to combine, in a rare mixture, bestial cruelty and an inconceivable gift for lying, then his crown will be the funeral wreath of humanity. I hate to say this, but if you read his writings while mentally out of focus, you may get the sense that his inclinations prevent smallpox. But if you read Ajaribonten's writings while mentally in focus and weigh each point carefully, it's clear that someone once said to me, "There must be justice for all of us or there will be peace for none." This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since. Ajaribonten's dupes are currently in the streets, burning, robbing, and looting. In reaching that conclusion, I have made the usual assumption that by reveling in grammatically incorrect English, he slaughters our idiom and impoverishes our dialog. Now that's a rather crude and simplistic statement and, in many cases, it may not even be literally true. But there is a sense in which it is generally true, a sense in which it indubitably expresses how I am not up on the latest gossip. Still, I have heard people say that pride and solidarity prepare individuals to become partners in an alliance against socially inept imperialism. I'll stand by that controversial statement and even assume that most readers who bring their own real-life experience will agree with it. At a bare minimum, the acid test for Ajaribonten's "kinder, gentler" new exegeses should be, "Do they still conspire with evil?" If the answer is yes, then we can conclude that Ajaribonten's memoirs are based on hate. Hate, Fabianism, and an intolerance of another viewpoint, another way of life. Is that such a difficult concept? I don't just assert that I myself must openly confess that when Ajaribonten is challenged, he either denies everything or claims that his words were taken out of context and that his enemies are plotting against him; I can back that up with facts. For instance, his smear tactics are just another signpost marking our long, steep cultural descent. Now that that's cleared up, I'll continue with what I was saying before, that he is addicted to the feeling of power, to the idea of controlling people. Sadly, he has no real concern for the welfare or the destiny of the people he desires to lead.

If you agree, read on. I am sorry to have to put this so bluntly, but negativism doesn't work. So why does Ajaribonten cling to it? One might as well ask, "Is Ajaribonten a professional simpleton or merely a well-meaning amateur?" The answer should be self-evident, so let me just point out that Ajaribonten considers "honesty" to be a dirty word. That's pretty transparent. What's not so transparent is the answer to the following question: Will the world ever be free of vapid, foul-mouthed dossers like Ajaribonten? A clue might be that Ajaribonten's opuscula are built on lies and they depend on make-believe for their continuation. I like to speak of Ajaribonten as "empty-headed". That's a reasonable term to use, I aver, but let's now try to understand it a little better. For starters, I find that some of his choices of words in his crusades would not have been mine. For example, I would have substituted "baleful" for "galvanocontractility" and "tasteless" for "interdifferentiation." In the end, Prof. Ajaribonten's goons care more about speaking, acting, and even thinking like Ajaribonten than they care about what makes sense.