Cohen this Easter

[Daniel Harmisson]

Okay, let's do it. Let's take the initiative to fight scurrility and slander. Read on, gentle reader, and hear what I have to say. Either Mr. Leonard Cohen has no real conception of the sweep of religious history, or he is merely intent on winning some debating pin by trying to pierce a hole in my logic with "facts" that are taken out of context.

Tell him that it would be a mistake to believe that he is beyond reproach, and you'll hear a loud "clang!" as his mind slams shut. He doesn't want to hear that. He doesn't want to believe that he turns his back on those who have been the most loyal to him. Well, that's getting away from my main topic, which is that I cannot believe how many actual, physical, breathing, thinking people have fallen for Mr. Cohen's subterfuge. I'm utterly stunned that his Easter Story is swallowed as if Christ remained on the Cross to this very day.


There are some simple truths in this world. First, we have come full-circle. Second, we'll know soon enough just how sententious these classes of radicals can be. And finally, the theoretical fallacies in Mr. Cohen's revenge fantasies run deep. Yes, I could add that I have had enough of his waste, fraud, misfeasance, and malfeasance, 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 Mr. Cohen wants us to feel sorry for the tactless, filthy renegades who leave behind a legacy of perpetual indebtedness in developing countries, whose religious Gods range from primitive to medieval.

I believe we should instead feel sorry for their victims, all of whom know full well that if Mr. Cohen thinks his perorations represent progress, he should rethink his definition of progress. It's not that I have anything against jabberers in general. It's just that I hope that this sends a strong message to people across the nation that even Mr. Cohen's horoscope says he's lousy.

Mr. Cohen's idea of loathsome irrationalism is no political belief. It is a fierce and burning gospel of hatred and intolerance, of murder and destruction, and the unloosing of a silly blood-lust. It is, in every literal sense, a sniffish and pagan religion that incites its worshippers to an unpatriotic frenzy and then prompts them to depressurize the frail vessel of human hopes.

He has found a way to avoid compliance with government regulations, circumvent any further litigation, and corrupt our youth -- all by trumping up a phony emergency. Mr. Cohen talks a lot about jujuism and how wonderful it is. However, he's never actually defined what it means. How can he argue for something he's never defined? I could give you the answer now, but it would be more productive for me first to inform you that in his credos, antipluralism is witting and unremitting, wrongheaded and wily. He revels in it, rolls in it, and uses it to batten on the credulity of the ignorant.

If we let him institutionalize religious discrimination by requiring different standards of protection and behavior for Christian and Jew, who's going to protect us? The government? Our parents? Superman? Probably none of the above. That's why it's important to illustrate the virtues that Mr. Cohen lacks -- courage, truthfulness, courtesy, honesty, diligence, chivalry, loyalty, and industry.

If I were elected Ruler of the World, my first act of business would be to prevent the production of a new crop of self-deceiving, batty hell-raisers. I would further use my position to inform certain segments of the Earth's population that Mr. Cohen parrots whatever ideas are fashionable at the moment. When the fashions change, his ideas will change instantly, like a weathercock. One of the enduring effects of his agendas is surely the way they will abandon the idea of universal principles and focus illegitimately on the particular. Mr. Cohen would swear on a stack of Bibles that mediocrity and normalcy are ideal virtues. It's a pity.

I have a dream that my children will be able to live in a world filled with open spaces and beautiful wilderness -- not in a dark, narrow-minded world run by the worst kinds of temperamental, insipid fomenters of revolution I've ever seen. He wants to change the course of history. Is this so he can challenge all I stand for, or is it to lead us into an age of shoddiness -- shoddy goods, shoddy services, shoddy morals, and shoddy people? You be the judge. In either case, many of his orations have been criticized for being slanted in favor of a particular stance. Why do I tell you this? Because these days, no one else has the guts to.


Mr. Cohen's doctrines are popular among humorless pamphleteers, but that doesn't mean the rest of us have to accept them. No matter how close he's come to making me hang myself by the neck until dead, he won't be satisfied until he finds a way to funnel significant amounts of money to chauvinistic urban guerrillas. While others have also published information about shallow low-lifes, Mr. Cohen would have us believe that he has achieved sainthood. Yeah, right. He is the type of person that turns up his nose at people like you and me. I guess that's because we haven't the faintest notion about the things that really matter, such as why it would be good for Mr. Cohen to bowdlerize all unfavorable descriptions of his views.


He had promised us liberty, equality, and fraternity if only we find the right “Teacher”. Instead, Mr. Cohen gave us fetishism, snobbism, and stoicism. I suppose we should have seen that coming, especially since time cannot change Mr. Cohen's behavior. Time merely enlarges the field in which Mr. Cohen can, with ever-increasing intensity and thoroughness, suborn the most wild galoots I've ever seen to deprive people of dignity and autonomy. If I didn't think he would put an ungrateful spin on important issues, I wouldn't say that I and Mr. Cohen part company when it comes to the issue of animalism. He feels that everything is happy and fine and good, while I feel that he uses the very intellectual tools he criticizes, namely consequentialist arguments rather than arguments about truth or falsity.

Now, I'm no fan of Mr. Cohen's, but still, I am intellectually honest enough to admit my own previous ignorance in that matter. I only wish that Mr. Cohen had the same intellectual honesty. He can get away with lies (e.g., that the ideas of "freedom" and "insurrectionism" are Siamese twins), 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 Mr. Cohen is lying.

We must publicly distance ourselves from xenophobic, offensive serpents. But the problems with his imprecations don't end there. While Mr. Cohen might not promote the lie of terrorism per se, if I were to compile a list of Mr. Cohen's 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 it would be wrong to imply that Mr. Cohen is involved in some kind of conspiracy to outrage the very sensibilities of those who value freedom and fairness.

It would be wrong because his scare tactics are far beyond the conspiracy stage!! Not only that, but the reason he wants to present a false image to the world by hiding unpleasant but vitally important realities about his fulminations is that he's totally neurotic. If you believe you have another explanation for his inarticulate behavior, then please write and tell me about it.


We should make some changes here. (Goodness knows, our elected officials aren't going to.) Mr. Cohen wants to use lethal violence as a source of humor. But what if the tables were turned? How would Mr. Cohen like that? Listen carefully: His forces tend to fall into the mistaken belief that he can absorb mana by devouring his nemeses' brains, mainly because they live inside a Mr. Cohen-generated illusion-world and talk only with each other.


It's easy for him to declaim my proposals. But when is Mr. Cohen going to provide an alternative proposal of his own? A complete answer to that question would take more space than I can afford, so I'll have to give you a simplified answer. For starters, Mr. Cohen claims to be fighting for equality, “Democracy is coming” etc.

What he's really fighting for, however, is equality in degradation, by which I mean that one of Mr. Cohen's minions once said, "Mr. Cohen would sooner give up money, fame, power, and happiness than perform a dissolute act." Now that's pretty funny, of course, but I didn't include that quote just to make you laugh. I included it to convince you that there is something grievously wrong with those detestable insurrectionists who inject even more fear and divisiveness into political campaigns. Shame on the lot of them! Mr. Cohen's apologists believe that public opinion is a reliable indicator of what's true and what isn't.

Although it is perhaps impossible to change the perspective of those who have such beliefs, I wish nevertheless to make Mr. Cohen's scummy treatises understood, resisted, and made the object of deserved contempt by young and old alike. Today, as yesterday, Mr. Cohen's intent is to prevent us from asking questions. He doesn't want the details checked. He doesn't want anyone looking for any facts other than the official facts he presents to us. I wonder if this is because most of his "facts" are false. We have a dilemma of leviathan proportions on our hands: Should we beat Mr. Cohen at his own game, or is it sufficient to make plans and carry them out? The complete answer to that question is a long, sad story. I've answered parts of that question in several of my previous letters, and I'll answer other parts in future ones.

For now, I'll just say that Mr. Cohen truly believes that the best way to serve one's country is to smear people of impeccable character and reputation. It is just such complacent megalomania, intellectually challenged egoism, and intellectual aberrancy that stirs Mr. Cohen to pull the levers of deconstructionism and oil the gears of philistinism. So he thinks that we should avoid personal responsibility? Interesting viewpoint. Here's another: He represents a new breed of crass, sullen goofballs. But let's not lose sight of the larger, more important issue here: his laughable catch-phrases, “la la la”.

Okay, then, let's move onto the really good part of this post, the part in which I get to tell you that Mr. Cohen should not plague our minds. Not now, not ever. He has two imperatives. The first is to undermine the foundations of society until a single thrust suffices to make the entire edifice collapse. The second imperative is to pigeonhole people into predetermined categories. In closing, all that I ask is that you join me to stop Mr. Leonard Cohen and take off the kid gloves and vent some real anger at him.

[Critic2]

Daniel, do you have any views about Barnet FC?

[Daniel Harmisson]

What I offer here is an involved yet detached look at Mr. Critic2's wisecracks. Perhaps time, further study, and more reflection will either modify or enrich the analysis offered here, but Mr. Critic2 will fail if we unite. And that's why I feel compelled to say something about contentious bums. From what I know of his witticisms, he is saying essentially three things:
1. Laws are meant to be broken.
2. The government should take more and more of our hard-earned money and more and more of our hard-won rights.
3. A book of his writings would be a good addition to the Bible.



Obviously, all three of these are unequivocally drugged-out.
In spite of all he has done, I must admit I really like the guy. No, just kidding. It has long been obvious to attentive observers that I undeniably hope that his punishment fits his crime. But did you know that Mr. Critic2 frequently writes self-contradictory, nonsensical "sentences" that are actually just phrases or sentence fragments filled with grammatical, spelling, capitalization, and punctuation errors? Mr. Critic2 doesn't want you to know that, because as our society continues to unravel, more and more people will be grasping for straws, grasping for something to hold onto, grasping for something that promises to give them the sense of security and certainty that they so desperately need. These are the classes of people Mr. Critic2 preys upon. You might have heard the story that he once agreed to help us justify condemnation, constructive criticism, and ridicule of him and his insidious philosophies. No one has located the document in which Mr. Critic2 said that. No one has identified when or where Mr. Critic2 said that. That's because he never said it. As you might have suspected, Mr. Critic2's allegations cannot stand on their own merit. That's why they're dependent on elaborate artifices and explanatory stories to convince us that Mr. Critic2 never engages in froward, malign, or sinister politics.




Just wait until someone gets hurt as a result of his claims. Then, more people will agree that if we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to rage, rage against the dying of the light. Finally, this has been a good deal of reading, and sincerely difficult reading at that. Still, I hope you walk away from it with the new knowledge that Mr. Critic2 has a deep conviction that lawless, nasty so-called experts should be fêted at wine-and-cheese fund-raisers.