john irons
16-04-06, 01:13
I occasionally receive inquiries from people who have read my previous letters and want to know why I contend that reakkator confuses entertainment with learning. I always try to answer such inquiries to the best of my ability and that's precisely what I'm about to do now. Before I start, however, I should state that to understand what reakkator's particularly nugatory form of masochism has encompassed as a movement and as a system of rule, we have to look at its historical context and development as a form of picayunish politics that first arose in early twentieth-century Europe in response to rapid social upheaval, the devastation of World War I, and the Bolshevik Revolution. Reakkator is capable of going berserk without notice. We can therefore extrapolate that many people respond to reakkator's phlegmatic, incoherent hariolations in the same way that they respond to television dramas. They watch them; they talk about them; but they feel no overwhelming compulsion to do anything about them. That's why I insist we provide you with vital information which reakkator has gone to great lengths to prevent you from discovering. Whenever reakkator is blamed for conspiring to exercise control through indirect coercion or through psychological pressure or manipulation, it blames its advocates, who are legion. Doing so reinforces their passivity and obedience and increases their guilt, shame, terror, and conformity, thereby making them far more willing to help reakkator kill the goose bearing the golden egg. As a matter of policy, raucous wastrels should not control your bank account, your employment, your personal safety, and your mind, but this has never stopped reakkator.
Reakkator's undertakings are a logical absurdity, a series of deductions from a premise that has been denied. Speaking of absurdities, reakkator contends that it can override nature and that, therefore, people are pawns to be used and manipulated. This bizarre pattern of thinking leads to strange conclusions. For example, it convinces simple-minded, power-drunk knuckle-draggers (as distinct from the paltry libertines who prefer to chirrup while hopping from cloud to cloud in Nephelococcygia) that sin is good for the soul. In reality, contrariwise, reakkator spouts a lot of numbers whenever it wants to make a point. It then subjectively interprets those numbers to support its principles while ignoring the fact that if you want to hide something from it, you just have to put it in a book. I used a phrase a few moments ago. I referred to reakkator's encomiasts as "delirious derelicts." You ought to memorize that phrase, because, frankly, if anything, reakkator says that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape. That's its unvarying story, and it's a lie: an extremely selfish and slatternly lie. Unfortunately, it's a lie that is accepted unquestioningly, uncritically, by reakkator's representatives. Reakkator insists that it is a bearer and agent of the Creator's purpose. Sorry, reakkator, but, with apologies to Gershwin, "it ain't necessarily so."
The simple ability to punish reakkator for its cranky activities is a pons asinorum that reakkator may never cross. That's self-evident, and even reakkator would probably agree with me on that. Even so, it can get away with lies (e.g., that there should be publicly financed centers of Dadaism) 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 reakkator is lying. Despite the fact that I find reakkator's fondness for inquisitions, witch hunts, star chambers, and kangaroo courts most yellow-bellied, in a recent essay, reakkator stated that the Queen of England heads up the international drug cartel. Since the arguments it made in the rest of its essay are based in part on that assumption, it should be aware that it just isn't true. Not only that, but it is currently limited to shrieking and spitting when it's confronted with inconvenient facts. Sometime soon, however, reakkator is likely to switch to some sort of "fuel the censorship-and-intolerance crowd" approach to draw our attention away from such facts.
While there's no use crying over spilled milk, reakkator wants to draw unsuspecting freaks of nature into the orbit of disingenuous gaberlunzies. It gets better: It actually believes that if it kicks us in the teeth, we'll then lick its toes and beg for another kick. I guess no one's ever told it that we must fight scurrility and slander. As mentioned above, however, that is not enough. It is necessary to do more. It is necessary to tell it where it can stick it. Reakkator keeps saying that it acts in the public interest. Isn't that claim getting a little shopworn? I mean, if we reveal the nature and activity of its apple-polishers and expose their inner contexts as well as their ultimate final aims, then the sea of denominationalism, on which it so heavily relies, will begin to dry up. And, more important, reakkator wants nothing less than to usher in the beginning of a capricious new era of Bonapartism, hence its repeated, almost hypnotic, insistence on the importance of its crude whinges. Really, if I hear reakkator's operatives say, "Mediocrity is a worthwhile goal" one more time, I'm certainly going to throw up.
Sometime in the future reakkator will abridge our basic civil liberties. Fortunately, that hasn't happened...yet. But it will sincerely happen if we don't answer the ethically bankrupt, unpleasant dummkopfs who ignite a maelstrom of Trotskyism. Reakkator's prank phone calls are based on a denial of reality, on the substitution of a deliberately falsified picture of the world in place of reality. And this dishonesty, this refusal to admit the truth, will have some very serious consequences for all of us by next weekend.
So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that reakkator's factotums tend to fall into the mistaken belief that one can understand the elements of a scientific theory only by reference to the social condition and personal histories of the scientists involved, mainly because they live inside a reakkator-generated illusion-world and talk only with each other. Reakkator's chums often reverse the normal process of interpretation. That is, they value the unsaid over the said, the obscure over the clear.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that I like to face facts. I like to look reality right in the eye and not pretend it's something else. And the reality of our present situation is this: Reakkator says that its debauches are the result of a high-minded urge to do sociological research. This is at best wrong. At worst, it is a lie. Reakkator used to complain about being persecuted. Now it is our primary persecutor. This reversal of roles reminds me that it's inaniloquent for reakkator to inject its lethal poison into our children's minds and souls. Or perhaps I should say, it's money-grubbing. Reakkator's maudlin preoccupation with antidisestablishmentarianism, usually sicklied over with such nonsense words as "protobasidiomycetous", would make sense if a person's honor were determined strictly by his or her ability to hurt others physically or emotionally. As that's not the case, we can conclude only that a great many of us don't want reakkator to instill a subconscious feeling of guilt in those of us who disagree with its inveracities. But we feel a prodigious pressure to smile, to be nice, and not to object to its violent cock-and-bull stories.
Does reakkator think its arguments through, or does it just chug along on its computer writing about whatever trite exegeses happen to suit its needs that day? I ask, because someone has to be willing to listen to others. Even if it's not polite to do so. Even if it hurts a lot of people's feelings. Even if everyone else is pretending that reakkator is forward-looking, open-minded, and creative. Although reakkator would rather I discuss the personality flaws of unwed, pregnant teenagers, this is the very source of the negativism of which I accuse it -- justly, as is now more clear than ever. No joke. If reakkator were to take us over the edge of the abyss of allotheism, social upheaval and violence would follow. It is therefore clear that there's something fishy about reakkator's suggestions. I think it's up to something, something testy and perhaps even belligerent. Although reakkator has managed to avoid indictment, or even a consensus that it did anything illegal, all it cares about is money. But what, you may ask, does any of that have to do with the theme of this letter, viz., that trying to cashier anyone who tries to debate the efficacy of its patronizing solutions is just as abhorrent as trying to fill our children's minds with high-handed and debasing superstitions? We must undoubtedly ask ourselves questions like that before it's too late, before reakkator gets the opportunity to doctor evidence and classification systems and make unpatriotic generalizations to support sadistic, preconceived views.
Reakkator's pals claim to have no choice but to provoke terrible, total, universal, and merciless destruction. I wish there were some way to help these miserable, rummy hippies. They are outcasts, lost in a world they didn't make and don't understand. Although I, hardheaded cynic that I am, consistently begin a course of careful, planned, and coordinated action, I do not countenance challenging reakkator through breaking the law -- to do so is self-centered, antisocial, and indefensible. I know some mealymouthed punks who actually believe that newspapers should report only on items reakkator agrees with. Incredible? Those same people have told me that a book of its writings would be a good addition to the Bible. With such people roaming about, it should come as no surprise to you that I want nothing more -- or less -- than to keep our courage up. To that task I have consecrated my life, and I invite you to do likewise. What a cunning coup on the part of reakkator's serfs, who set out to grasp at straws, trying to find increasingly feral ways to make our lives miserable and got as far as they did without anyone raising an eyebrow.
Something recently occurred to me that might occur to reakkator, as well, if it would just turn down the volume of its voice for a moment: Reakkator can't attack my ideas, so it attacks me. It could be worse, I suppose. It could toss quaint concepts like decency, fairness, and rational debate out the window. I don't object to reakkator's antics because reakkator's power is built on lies. I object because the moral devastations that accompany its sordid opuscula suffice to slowly but surely champion censorship in the name of free speech, intolerance in the name of tolerance, and oppression in the name of freedom. Sad, but true. And it'll only get worse if it finds a way to commit all sorts of mortal sins -- not to mention an uncountable number of venial ones. The entire premise of reakkator's scribblings is incredibly offensive to any self-respecting person. Enough said. We must issue a call to conscience and reason. We must punish those who lie or connive at half-truths. And we must show reakkator how it is as wrong as wrong can be. Please join me in incorporating these words into our living credo.
http://www.pakin.org/complaint
Reakkator's undertakings are a logical absurdity, a series of deductions from a premise that has been denied. Speaking of absurdities, reakkator contends that it can override nature and that, therefore, people are pawns to be used and manipulated. This bizarre pattern of thinking leads to strange conclusions. For example, it convinces simple-minded, power-drunk knuckle-draggers (as distinct from the paltry libertines who prefer to chirrup while hopping from cloud to cloud in Nephelococcygia) that sin is good for the soul. In reality, contrariwise, reakkator spouts a lot of numbers whenever it wants to make a point. It then subjectively interprets those numbers to support its principles while ignoring the fact that if you want to hide something from it, you just have to put it in a book. I used a phrase a few moments ago. I referred to reakkator's encomiasts as "delirious derelicts." You ought to memorize that phrase, because, frankly, if anything, reakkator says that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape. That's its unvarying story, and it's a lie: an extremely selfish and slatternly lie. Unfortunately, it's a lie that is accepted unquestioningly, uncritically, by reakkator's representatives. Reakkator insists that it is a bearer and agent of the Creator's purpose. Sorry, reakkator, but, with apologies to Gershwin, "it ain't necessarily so."
The simple ability to punish reakkator for its cranky activities is a pons asinorum that reakkator may never cross. That's self-evident, and even reakkator would probably agree with me on that. Even so, it can get away with lies (e.g., that there should be publicly financed centers of Dadaism) 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 reakkator is lying. Despite the fact that I find reakkator's fondness for inquisitions, witch hunts, star chambers, and kangaroo courts most yellow-bellied, in a recent essay, reakkator stated that the Queen of England heads up the international drug cartel. Since the arguments it made in the rest of its essay are based in part on that assumption, it should be aware that it just isn't true. Not only that, but it is currently limited to shrieking and spitting when it's confronted with inconvenient facts. Sometime soon, however, reakkator is likely to switch to some sort of "fuel the censorship-and-intolerance crowd" approach to draw our attention away from such facts.
While there's no use crying over spilled milk, reakkator wants to draw unsuspecting freaks of nature into the orbit of disingenuous gaberlunzies. It gets better: It actually believes that if it kicks us in the teeth, we'll then lick its toes and beg for another kick. I guess no one's ever told it that we must fight scurrility and slander. As mentioned above, however, that is not enough. It is necessary to do more. It is necessary to tell it where it can stick it. Reakkator keeps saying that it acts in the public interest. Isn't that claim getting a little shopworn? I mean, if we reveal the nature and activity of its apple-polishers and expose their inner contexts as well as their ultimate final aims, then the sea of denominationalism, on which it so heavily relies, will begin to dry up. And, more important, reakkator wants nothing less than to usher in the beginning of a capricious new era of Bonapartism, hence its repeated, almost hypnotic, insistence on the importance of its crude whinges. Really, if I hear reakkator's operatives say, "Mediocrity is a worthwhile goal" one more time, I'm certainly going to throw up.
Sometime in the future reakkator will abridge our basic civil liberties. Fortunately, that hasn't happened...yet. But it will sincerely happen if we don't answer the ethically bankrupt, unpleasant dummkopfs who ignite a maelstrom of Trotskyism. Reakkator's prank phone calls are based on a denial of reality, on the substitution of a deliberately falsified picture of the world in place of reality. And this dishonesty, this refusal to admit the truth, will have some very serious consequences for all of us by next weekend.
So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that reakkator's factotums tend to fall into the mistaken belief that one can understand the elements of a scientific theory only by reference to the social condition and personal histories of the scientists involved, mainly because they live inside a reakkator-generated illusion-world and talk only with each other. Reakkator's chums often reverse the normal process of interpretation. That is, they value the unsaid over the said, the obscure over the clear.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that I like to face facts. I like to look reality right in the eye and not pretend it's something else. And the reality of our present situation is this: Reakkator says that its debauches are the result of a high-minded urge to do sociological research. This is at best wrong. At worst, it is a lie. Reakkator used to complain about being persecuted. Now it is our primary persecutor. This reversal of roles reminds me that it's inaniloquent for reakkator to inject its lethal poison into our children's minds and souls. Or perhaps I should say, it's money-grubbing. Reakkator's maudlin preoccupation with antidisestablishmentarianism, usually sicklied over with such nonsense words as "protobasidiomycetous", would make sense if a person's honor were determined strictly by his or her ability to hurt others physically or emotionally. As that's not the case, we can conclude only that a great many of us don't want reakkator to instill a subconscious feeling of guilt in those of us who disagree with its inveracities. But we feel a prodigious pressure to smile, to be nice, and not to object to its violent cock-and-bull stories.
Does reakkator think its arguments through, or does it just chug along on its computer writing about whatever trite exegeses happen to suit its needs that day? I ask, because someone has to be willing to listen to others. Even if it's not polite to do so. Even if it hurts a lot of people's feelings. Even if everyone else is pretending that reakkator is forward-looking, open-minded, and creative. Although reakkator would rather I discuss the personality flaws of unwed, pregnant teenagers, this is the very source of the negativism of which I accuse it -- justly, as is now more clear than ever. No joke. If reakkator were to take us over the edge of the abyss of allotheism, social upheaval and violence would follow. It is therefore clear that there's something fishy about reakkator's suggestions. I think it's up to something, something testy and perhaps even belligerent. Although reakkator has managed to avoid indictment, or even a consensus that it did anything illegal, all it cares about is money. But what, you may ask, does any of that have to do with the theme of this letter, viz., that trying to cashier anyone who tries to debate the efficacy of its patronizing solutions is just as abhorrent as trying to fill our children's minds with high-handed and debasing superstitions? We must undoubtedly ask ourselves questions like that before it's too late, before reakkator gets the opportunity to doctor evidence and classification systems and make unpatriotic generalizations to support sadistic, preconceived views.
Reakkator's pals claim to have no choice but to provoke terrible, total, universal, and merciless destruction. I wish there were some way to help these miserable, rummy hippies. They are outcasts, lost in a world they didn't make and don't understand. Although I, hardheaded cynic that I am, consistently begin a course of careful, planned, and coordinated action, I do not countenance challenging reakkator through breaking the law -- to do so is self-centered, antisocial, and indefensible. I know some mealymouthed punks who actually believe that newspapers should report only on items reakkator agrees with. Incredible? Those same people have told me that a book of its writings would be a good addition to the Bible. With such people roaming about, it should come as no surprise to you that I want nothing more -- or less -- than to keep our courage up. To that task I have consecrated my life, and I invite you to do likewise. What a cunning coup on the part of reakkator's serfs, who set out to grasp at straws, trying to find increasingly feral ways to make our lives miserable and got as far as they did without anyone raising an eyebrow.
Something recently occurred to me that might occur to reakkator, as well, if it would just turn down the volume of its voice for a moment: Reakkator can't attack my ideas, so it attacks me. It could be worse, I suppose. It could toss quaint concepts like decency, fairness, and rational debate out the window. I don't object to reakkator's antics because reakkator's power is built on lies. I object because the moral devastations that accompany its sordid opuscula suffice to slowly but surely champion censorship in the name of free speech, intolerance in the name of tolerance, and oppression in the name of freedom. Sad, but true. And it'll only get worse if it finds a way to commit all sorts of mortal sins -- not to mention an uncountable number of venial ones. The entire premise of reakkator's scribblings is incredibly offensive to any self-respecting person. Enough said. We must issue a call to conscience and reason. We must punish those who lie or connive at half-truths. And we must show reakkator how it is as wrong as wrong can be. Please join me in incorporating these words into our living credo.
http://www.pakin.org/complaint