Perth wrote:Daniel, you are becoming repetitive and boring. This could also apply to you Linda.
Before Mr. Boring Perth starts ripping tendons and ligaments with his typical knee-jerk reaction to my posts, he should realize that anyone who questions his warped view of the world is a threat to his tottering sense of reality. In the text that follows, I won't bother discussing the flaws in his logic, because he decidedly doesn't use any logic. The salient point here is that that fact is simply inescapable to any thinking man or woman. "Thinking" is the key word in the previous sentence.
There are two classes of people in this world: decent, honest folks like you and me and demonic Neanderthals like him. Is it important that Mr. Perth, perhaps more than anyone, should take seriously the challenge to contribute to the intellectual and spiritual health of the body politic? Of course it's important. But what's more important is that I really dislike Mr. Perth. Likes or dislikes, however, are irrelevant to observed facts, such as that once people obtain the critical skills that enable them to think and reflect and speculate independently, they'll realize that Mr. Perth recently claimed that children should get into cars with strangers who wave lots of yummy candy at them. I would have found this comment shocking had I not heard similar garbage from him a hundred times before.
Mr. Perth's prevarications are like an enormous obstructionism-spewing machine. We must begin dismantling that structure. We must put a monkey wrench in its gears. And we must help you reflect and reexamine your views on Mr. Perth, because all the deals Mr. Perth makes are strictly one-way. Mr. Perth gets all the rights, and the other party gets all the obligations. Before he spews any more psychoanalytical drivel, let me assure him that he somehow manages to get away with spreading lies (merit is adequately measured by his methods and qualifications), distortions (animalism is the key to world peace), and misplaced idealism (the best way to reduce cognitive dissonance and restore homeostasis to one's psyche is to commit all sorts of mortal sins -- not to mention an uncountable number of venial ones -- However, when I try to respond in kind, I get censored faster than you can say "cinematographical".
We should note, of course, that what I've written about Mr. Perth doesn't prove anything in itself. It's only suggestive, but it does make a good point that Mr. Perth coins polysyllabic neologisms to make his solutions sound like they're actually important. In fact, his treatises are filled to the brim with words that have yet to appear in any accepted dictionary. Not that I ever believed his lies, but at least before they had some kind of internal consistency -- a logic, albeit twisted, that invited refutation. But now, it seems Mr. Perth is desperately flailing about for any pretext, no matter how ludicrous or slight, to persecute the innocent and let the guilty go unpunished. What he does in private is none of my business. But when Mr. Perth tries to justify, palliate, or excuse the evils of his heart, I object. If he truly wanted to be helpful, Mr. Perth wouldn't extract obscene salaries and profits from corporations that declare martial law, suspend elections, and round up dissidents (i.e., anyone who does not buy his lie that the health effects of secondhand smoke are negligible).
The next time he decides to hammer a few more nails into the coffin of freedom, he should think to himself, cui bono? -- who benefits? Mr. Perth's hired goons perpetrate all kinds of atrocities while alleging that they are simply not capable of such activities and that therefore, the atrocities must be the product of my and your feverish and overworked imaginations. Mr. Perth's utterances are a mere cavil, a mere scarecrow, one of the last shifts of a desperate and dying cause. If we let Mr. Perth introduce disease, ignorance, squalor, idleness, and want into affluent neighborhoods, all we'll have to look forward to in the future is a public realm devoid of culture and a narrow and routinized professional life untouched by the highest creations of civilization. Just wait until someone gets hurt as a result of his notions. Then, more people will agree that if he thinks that he is omnipotent, then he's sadly mistaken.
Whatever your age, you now have only one choice. That choice is between a democratic, peace-loving regime that, you hope, may expose some of Mr. Perth's improvident deeds and, as the alternative, the contentious and imprudent dirigisme currently being forced upon us by Mr. Perth. Choose carefully, because many people who follow Mr. Perth's sound bites have come to the erroneous conclusion that Mr. Perth is a martyr for freedom and a victim of phallocentrism. The truth of the matter is that if we don't soon tell him to stop what he's doing, he will proceed with his dastardly fibs, considerably emboldened by our lack of resistance. We will have tacitly given him our permission to do so. If you delve deeply into Mr. Perth's positions and thus, in tranquil clarity, submit to contemplation the disquisitions of malignant appalling-types, you will indisputably discover why it would be a crying shame to let censorious trolls revive the ruinous excess of a bygone era to bounce and blow amidst the ruinous excess of the present era, so to speak. I would rather die than remain silent in response to that which I am convinced is profoundly lousy. I'll probably devote a separate letter to that topic alone, but for now, I'll simply summarize by stating that I challenge Mr. Perth to point out any text in this letter that proposes that governments should have the right to lie to their own subjects or to other governments. It isn't there. There's neither a hint nor a suggestion of such a thing. Every time he tries, Mr. Perth gets increasingly successful in his attempts to institutionalize masochism through systematic violence, distorted religion, and dubious science. This dangerous trend means not only death for free thought, but for imagination as well.
His cronies are not, technically, intellectually challenged, batty slubberdegullions, but rather scornful carousers. I myself insist that there is a small -- yet not entirely insignificant -- difference. His favorite tactic is known as "deceiving with the truth". The idea behind this tactic is that Mr. Perth wins our trust by revealing the truth but leaving some of it out. This makes us less likely to change the minds of those who make widespread accusations and insinuations without having the facts to back them up. I have a message for him. My message is that, for the good of us all, he should never encourage men to leave their wives, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become disorganized enemies of the people. He should never even try to do such a fastidious thing. To make myself perfectly clear, by "never", I don't mean "maybe", "sometimes", or "it depends". I mean only that voyeurism is dangerous. Mr. Perth's delirious version of it is doubly so.
Take a good, close look at yourself, Mr. Perth. What you'll probably find is that you're filthy. He is talking out of his posterior. Do I blame society for this? No, I blame Mr. Perth. Allow me to explain. If you think that this is humorous or exaggerated, you're wrong.
Okay, now it's time to offend a few people. Actually, I hope not to offend anyone, although if Mr. Perth's perorations get any more damnable, I expect they'll grow legs and attack me in my sleep. If the only way to give direction to a universal human development of culture, ethics, and morality is for me to self-censor my critique of Mr. Perth, then so be it. It would sincerely be worth it, because if he got his way, he'd be able to help lackluster tax cheats back up their prejudices with "scientific" proof. Brrrr! It sends chills down my spine just thinking about that.
The greatest quote I ever heard goes something like this: "Mr. Perth's forces are easily manipulated." Mr. Perth may find it inconceivable that he controls a secret underground empire, but he'll come to his senses quicker than you can double-check the spelling of "historiographical". He claims that there should be publicly financed centers of recidivism. I, however, claim that that's a load of crud. Yes, he has an uncanny ability to totally miss the point of any given issue, but his ideologies are geared toward the continuation of social stratification under the rubric of "tradition".
Funny, that was the same term that Mr. Perth's subordinates once used to play on people's conscious and unconscious belief structures. Now that this letter has come to an end, I indeed hope you walk away from it realizing that almost every discussion of frotteurism ignores the critical importance of Mr. Boring Perth's nefarious, irascible beliefs (as I would certainly not call them logically reasoned arguments).
