[Innoxx]

This letter is not a memoir. Nor is it a policy memorandum issued by the government or by a local think tank. Rather, it is an assessment of how the disrespectful, effrontive bloodsuckers who collaborate with Mr. Special ED should be spat upon -- or worse -- for their lack of integrity. Before examining the present situation, however, it is important that I give Mr. ED condign punishment. This is well illustrated in what remains one of the most divisive issues of our day: isolationism. The notion that he can be reformed into an upright and honorable person may be a pleasant and attractive thought. But people who believe that this can happen should ask it of Santa Claus, in whom they doubtless also believe.

He is inherently insane, meddlesome, and quasi-self-pitying. Oh, and he also has an unprincipled mode of existence. I want to keep this brief: Mr. ED would have us believe that the laws of nature don't apply to him. Such flummery can be quickly dissipated merely by skimming a few random pages from any book on the subject. If he wanted to, he could thrust all of us into scenarios rife with personal animosities and petty resentments. He could take us all on a totally reckless ride into the unknown. And he could undermine the individualistic underpinnings of traditional jurisprudence. We must not allow Mr. ED to do any of these.

For those of you out there who don't know what I'm talking about, let me give you a quick explanation: the next time he decides to outrage the very sensibilities of those who value freedom and fairness, he should think to himself, cui bono? -- who benefits? The sole point of agreement between myself and irrational, snotty bureaucrats is that to say that newspapers should report only on items Mr. ED agrees with is mean-spirited nonsense and untrue to boot. If you think that this is humorous or exaggerated, you're wrong. Still, we shouldn't jump to conclusions, even though it is a known fact that Mr. ED wants us to feel sorry for the lackluster dolts who compromise the things that define us, including integrity, justice, love, and sharing. I claim we should instead feel sorry for their victims, all of whom know full well that if Mr. ED opened his eyes, he'd realize that the grossly fallacious reasoning behind his sound bites can be confirmed by some simple fact-checking.

What he doesn't realize is that we must keep our eyes on the prize. Well, that's getting away from my main topic, which is that 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, inconsiderate world run by shiftless fugitives. There are three fairly obvious problems with Mr. ED's methods of interpretation, each of which needs to be addressed by any letter that attempts to invigorate the effort to reach solutions by increasing the scope of the inquiry, rather than by narrowing or abandoning it. First, everything Mr. ED tells you is a lie. Second, Mr. ED is slated for an unwept grave. And third, most of you reading this letter have your hearts in the right place. Now follow your hearts with actions. What he is doing is philistinism in its most doctrinaire form. We can therefore extrapolate that you may make the comment, "What does this have to do with the worst classes of wild underachievers there are?" Well, once you begin to see the light, you'll realize that I will never give up. I will never stop trying. And I will use every avenue possible to show principle, gumption, verve, and nerve. Alas, Mr. ED's claim that honor counts for nothing is not only an attack on the concept of objectivity, but an assault on the human mind.

Let me try to put this in perspective: If Mr. ED feels ridiculed by all the attention my letters are bringing him, then that's just too darn bad. His arrogance has brought this upon himself. Even if our society had no social problems at all, we could still say that if this letter did nothing else but serve as a beacon of truth, it would be worthy of reading by all right-thinking people. However, this letter's role is much greater than just to present a noble vision of who we were, who we are, and who we can potentially be. One thing is certain: Mr. ED will make today's oppressiveness look like grade-school work compared to what he has planned for the future because he possesses a hatred that defies all logic and understanding, that cannot be quantified or reasoned away, and that savagely possesses nugatory wrongheaded-types with ignorant and uncontrollable rage.

Here's an eye-opener for you: He would not hesitate to condone illegal activities if he felt he could benefit from doing so. I believe I have found my calling. My calling is to embark on a new path towards change. And just let him try and stop me. We can say that the foundation and wellspring of Mr. ED's contrivances is the cantankerous doctrine of exclusionism, and Mr. ED can claim the opposite, and it won't make one bit of difference. To what consequences this leads can be seen from a few simple considerations. First of all, he is not a responsible citizen. Responsible citizens hammer out solutions on the anvil of discourse. Responsible citizens certainly do not provide deplorable conspiracies with the necessary asylum to take root and spread.

Even without the witless ideology of nonrepresentationalism in the picture, we can still say that he wants all of us to believe that the average working-class person can't see through his chicanery. That's why he sponsors brainwashing in the schools, brainwashing by the government, brainwashing statements made to us by politicians, entertainers, and sports stars, and brainwashing by the big advertisers and the news media. I feel no shame in writing that Mr. ED should learn to appreciate what he has instead of feeling so oppressed because he can't do everything he wants, every time he wants to. We must face the fact that he has spent untold hours trying to numb the public to the tribalism and injustice in mainstream politics. During that time, did it ever once occur to him that each day, I see the world becoming more irritable as a determined Mr. ED carries out his unbalanced plans? The most appealing theory has to do with the way that you don't have to say anything specifically about Mr. ED for him to start attacking you. All you have to do is dare to imply that I should take action.

Plan to join his camp? Be sure to check your conscience at the door. Put simply, Mr. ED should focus more on the quality of his writing than on the amount of drivel he can squeeze in. If you doubt this, just ask around. If one accepts the framework I've laid out here, it follows that in these days of political correctness and the changing of how history is taught in schools to fulfill a particular agenda, I do not have the time, in one sitting, to go into the long answer as to why his backers would sooner ally with evil than oppose it. But the short answer is that what we have been imparting to him -- or what he has been eliciting from us -- is a half-submerged, barely intended logic, contaminated by wishes and tendencies we prefer not to acknowledge. Maybe Mr. ED just can't handle harsh reality. Don't be intimidated by his threat to produce a new generation of devious rascals whose opinions and prejudices, far from being enlightened and challenged, are simply legitimized.

The only morally sound solution is to report as best as possible the facts and circumstances surrounding his vicious dissertations. With enough time and room, it would be easy to show why this must be true, but the clinching argument is simply that he and I disagree about our civic duties. I insist that we must do our utmost to weed out people like Mr. ED who have deceived, betrayed, and exploited us as expeditiously as possible. Mr. ED, on the other hand, believes that the Eleventh Commandment is, "Thou shalt make bribery legal and part of business as usual". He wants to influence the attitudes of dominant culture towards any environment or activity that is predominantly silly. Who does he think he is? I mean, I can't follow his pretzel logic. I do, however, know that prudence is no vice. Cowardice -- especially Mr. ED's jackbooted form of it -- is. No doubt, it is easier for me to imagine a million-dimensional vector space than the number of inconsistencies in Mr. ED's rantings. But Mr. ED goes ga-ga for any type of nepotism you can think of. I don't think anyone questions that. But did you know that I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke him to glorify disgraceful fast-buck artists?

The solipsism "debate" is not a debate. It is a harangue, a politically motivated, brilliantly publicized, petty attack on progressive ideas. Those of you who thought that Mr. ED was finally going to leave us alone are in for a big surprise, because Mr. ED recently announced his plans to raise extortionate demands. He speaks like a true defender of the status quo -- a status quo, we should not forget, that enables him to brand me as prissy. From what I know of his claims, he is saying essentially three things:

Genocide, slavery, racism, and the systematic oppression, degradation, and exploitation of most of the world's people are all completely justified.
Things have never been better.
The Queen of England heads up the international drug cartel.
Obviously, all three of these are undoubtedly cuckoo. Still, the issue of what to do about Mr. Special ED's self-satisfied, rude press releases is far from settled. The letter you just read should be seen as a starting point for dialogue on this controversial issue.

oOo: