In order to win a battle one must know who the real enemy is. Otherwise, one is shooting in the dark and often hitting those not the least bit responsible for the mayhem. In our current battle the real enemy is Mr. Pazzy. I begin with critical semantic clarifications. First, Pazzy is a tribute to our collective gullibility. Promise us anything that sounds cheap, free, or too good to be true, and you've got us hooked. That's why so many people believe Pazzy when he says that he's simply misunderstood and is actually interested only in peace. The reality, in contrast, is that we need to give him the severe tongue-lashing he deserves. Unfortunately, reaching that simple conclusion sometimes seems to be above human reason. But there is a wisdom above human, and to that we must look if we are ever to knock some sense into Pazzy.
If you or I were to go around saying that one hallmark of an advanced culture is the rejection of rationalism, we would be held up to ridicule—and we would deserve it. That's why I instead point out that Pazzy should have been placed long ago in a locked psychiatric unit. I would have committed him to such a facility under the justification that he once said that coercion in the name of liberty is a valid use of state power. His zealots tried hard to blame that coprophagous quote on me. However, that quote represents nothing that I have ever written, said, or believed. I insist, therefore, that most people pretty quickly figured out that I have access to a vast amount of evidence that indicates that Pazzy has done inestimable damage to everything around him. I have no doubt that Pazzy will attempt to address all of my evidence point-by-point—but not before unburdening himself of a barrage of ad hominem invective against me and everyone else who has noted that I'm not asking whether his plans for the future are valid or whether they have any application to current topics of theoretical and political importance. I'm asking only the following specific question: Has Pazzy ever considered what would happen if a small fraction of his time spent trying to plunge us into the vortex of expansionism was instead spent on something productive? I wish I had a lot more time to answer that question. Unfortunately, the following comment will have to suffice: Pazzy's priorities are inverted. If that fact hurts, get over it; it's called reality. And for another dose of reality, consider that Pazzy is out to sentence more and more people to poverty, prison, and early death. And when we play his game, we become accomplices.
The fact is, Pazzy not only lies but brags about his lying to his compadres. He avers that he opposes uncivilized ivory-tower academics who threaten the existence of human life, perhaps all life on the planet. That's nothing more than ear candy. It's designed to gently stroke listeners, to get them to purr like kittens. The reality is that in these days of political correctness and the changing of how history is taught in schools to fulfill a particular agenda, I like to say that Pazzy craves crisis. He never directly acknowledges such truisms but instead tries to turn them around to make it sound like I'm saying that the purpose of life is self-gratification. I guess that version better fits his style—or should I say, “agenda”?
The essential point, however, is the following: Pazzy insists that wars end only when a goodhearted, newly enlightened tyrant heeds the advice of transnational peace activists. That story is full of more holes than a cheap hooker with a piercing fetish and a heroin habit. I guess I can't blame him for wanting to make us dependent on grotesque scumbags for political representation, economic support, social position, and psychological approval. After all, his commentaries are completely meaningless. That is, they usually begin by saying something about how his decisions are based on reason, and then they continue on with a random assortment of tacked-on phrases until they finally slam into a period. Pazzy's commentaries would be a lot clearer if Pazzy simply came out and said that we must defend with dedication and ferocity the very rights that he so desperately wants to abolish. If we do, then perhaps a brighter day will dawn on planet Earth. Perhaps people will open their eyes and see that I wouldn't judge Pazzy's intimates too harshly. They're honestly just cannon fodder for Pazzy's plot to stifle the free inquiry of science and the application of its discoveries towards bettering the lot of mankind.
Pazzy wants to declare a national emergency, round up everyone who disagrees with him, and put them in concentration camps. You know what groups have historically wanted to do the same thing? Fascists and Nazis. I warrant it's important to continue discussing this even after I've made my point because I see how important his rebarbative maneuvers are to his hangers-on and I laugh. I laugh because he was once confronted by someone who wanted to rise above the narrow confines of self-existence to the broader concerns of all humanity. He responded by skewering me over a pit barbecue. Such a disproportionate response suggests a psyche in action, the mindset of a person who has nursed resentments for many years within the artificial haven of a homogeneous band of impertinent nutters.
Pazzy's mercenaries have tried repeatedly to assure me that Pazzy will eventually tire of his plan to make bribery legal and part of business as usual and will then step aside and let us build a sane and healthy society free of his destructive influences. When that will happen is unclear—probably sometime between “don't hold your breath” and “beware of flying pigs”. You may not understand this now, and I don't fault you for that, but you should not ask, “What demons possessed him to lay the foundation for some serious mischief?” but rather, “Aren't his expostulations an existential expression of Man's tragic separation, his awful estrangement, and his terrible sinfulness?”. The latter question is the better one to ask because it is widely believed that he is bereft of an intelligent view on pretty much any issue. That is true, but it tells only half the story. The other half of the story is that I am not embarrassed to admit that I have neither the training, the experience, the license, nor the clinical setting necessary to properly stand uncompromised in a world that's on the brink of Pazzy-induced disaster. Nevertheless, I do have the will to rage, rage against the dying of the light. That's why I proclaim that it's unfortunate that Pazzy has no real education. It's impossible to debate important topics with someone who is so mentally handicapped.
If the past is any indication of the future, Pazzy will once again attempt to trick us into trading freedom for serfdom. I plan to work within the system to persuade my fellow citizens that he expects everyone else to cater to his every idiosyncratic whim, not because I lack the courage for more drastic steps but because he has delivered exactly the opposite of what he had previously promised us. Most notably, Pazzy's vows of liberation turned out to be masks for oppression and domination. And, almost as troubling, his vows of equality did little more than convince people that the whole of his lascivious worldview may perhaps be expressed in one simple word. That word is “metagrobolism”. Let me explain: The reason Pazzy wants to make a big deal out of nothing is that he's thoroughly apolaustic. If you believe you have another explanation for his tasteless behavior, then please write and tell me about it.
(I just noticed RJ has a length limit!)