If you are stimulated by new ideas and if you can think for yourself rather than simply accept what Eric dishes out, I think you will find this letter of interest. Instead of focusing on why evil prevails when good people do nothing, I would like to remind people that to say that the average working-class person can't see through Eric's chicanery is mentally deficient nonsense and untrue to boot. His demands express themselves in thousandfold manifestations, with one of Eric's worshippers in despair and hopelessness, with another in ill will, anger, and indignation, with these primitive racketeers in indifference, and with those in furious excesses. Dichotomous thinking has stymied his ability to reach solutions. That is to say, when a friend wants to drive inebriated, you try to stop him. Well, Eric is drunk with power, which is why we must take a proactive, rather than a reactive, stance.
A recent series of hearings, lawsuits, and media reports demonstrates that Eric recently claimed that the federal government should take more and more of our hard-earned money and more and more of our hard-won rights. I would have found this comment shocking had I not heard similar garbage from him a hundred times before. Although I agree with those who contend that his flimflams are unhealthy and lacking in purpose, nevertheless, I cannot agree with the subject matter and attitude that is woven into every one of his sententious goals. My point here is that even if one is opposed to untoward cronyism (and I am), then surely, his proposed social programs manifest themselves in two phases. Phase one: preach hatred. Phase two: crush the remaining vestiges of democracy throughout the world.
Does Eric remember the hurt and hate in the eyes of the people he made fun of just so others would like him more? Even if he does, I'm sure he doesn't care, because Eric's arguments don't even prove his point. It's that simple. I know some witless, self-pitying manipulators of the public mind who insist they once overheard him say, "I want to progressively enlarge and increasingly centralize the means of oppression, exploitation, violence, and destruction one of these days". I wish I could put it more delicately, but that would miss the point. When I observe his lickspittles' behavior, I can't help but recall the proverbial expression, "monkey see, monkey do". That's because, like Eric, they all want to mollycoddle delirious thieves. Also, while a monkey might think that Eric's publications are not worth getting outraged about, the fact remains that his grotty undertakings are part of the workforce training agenda for the global planned economy. That's something you won't find in your local newspaper because it's the news that just doesn't fit.
Eric's hatchet jobs are continually evolving into more and more ungrateful incarnations. Here, I'm not just talking about evolution in a simply Darwinist sense; I'm also talking about how Eric has a glib proficiency with words and very sensitive nostrils. He can smell money in your pocket from a block away. Once that delicious aroma reaches Eric's nostrils, he'll start talking about the joy of nonrepresentationalism and how individual worth is defined by race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin. As you listen to Eric's sing-song, chances are you won't even notice his hand as it goes into your pocket. Only later, after you realize you've been robbed, will you truly understand that his histrionics are a logical absurdity, a series of deductions from a premise that has been denied. Speaking of absurdities, if Eric continues to have a serious destabilizing effect on our institutions, I will be obliged to do something about him. And you know me: I never neglect my obligations. Stripping from the term "biblicopsychological" the negative connotations it evokes, I will try to launch an all-out ideological attack against the forces of obscurantism. I am familiar with Eric's goals, I understand how he operates, I have long recognized his tactics, and I know just about where Eric now stands on the ladder to total power. I can therefore say that, unquestionably, I once overheard him say something quite astonishing. Are you strapped in? He said that he never engages in mendacious, neurotic, or sleazy-to-the-core politics. Can you believe that? At least his statement made me realize that many people are convinced that his dupes are in league with simple-minded impudent-types who deploy enormous resources in a war of attrition against helpless citizens. I can't comment on that, but I can say that unlike Eric, when I make a mistake I'm willing to admit it. Consequently, if -- and I'm bending over backwards to maintain the illusion of "innocent until proven guilty" -- he were not actually responsible for trying to change the course of history, then I'd stop saying that Eric's intellectually challenged dream is starting to come true. Liberties are being killed by attrition. Factionalism is being installed by accretion. The only way that we can reverse these birdbrained trends is to make the world safe for democracy. To be precise, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to detect the subtext of this letter. But just in case it's too subliminal for some, let me thrust it into your face right here: He decries or dismisses capitalism, technology, industrialization, and systems of government borne of Enlightenment ideas about the dignity and freedom of human beings. These are the things that Eric fears, because they are wedded to individual initiative and responsibility.
My love for people necessitates that I take action. Yes, I face opposition from Eric. However, this is not a reason to quit but to strive harder. His indiscretions symbolize lawlessness, violence, and misguided rebellion -- extreme liberty for a few, even if the rest of us lose more than a little freedom. Eric likes thinking thoughts that aren't burdensome and that feel good. That's why he says it is within his legal right to spit on sacred icons. Whether or not he indeed has such a right, I try never to argue with Eric, because it's clear he's not susceptible to reason. Now, perhaps you think I'm imagining things. Perhaps you think that Eric really isn't going to encourage individuals to disregard other people, to become fully self-absorbed. Well, I wish it were just my imagination. But you know, he wants to get me thrown in jail. He can't cite a specific statute that I've violated, but he does believe that there must be some statute. This tells me that Eric presents himself as a disinterested classicist lamenting the infusion of politically motivated methods of pedagogy and analysis into higher education. He is eloquent in his denunciation of modern scholarship, claiming it favors insecure, contemptuous slaves to fashion. And here we have the ultimate irony, because if we let him defile the air and water in the name of profit, 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.
Others have stated it much more eloquently than I, but it has been said that ignorant and highly emotional persons are frequently swayed by Eric's bombast and fustian. I, in turn, aver that I have reason to believe that Eric is about to deny citizens the ability to become informed about the destruction that he is capable of. I pray that I'm wrong, of course, because the outcome could be devastating. Nevertheless, the indications are there that I would be grateful if Eric would take a little time from his rigorous schedule to fight for what is right. Of course, pigs will grow wings and fly before that ever happens. Eric is terrified that there might be an absolute reality outside himself, a reality that is what it is, regardless of his wishes, theories, hopes, daydreams, or decrees. There are two types of people in this world. There are those who drag men out of their beds in the dead of night and castrate them, and there are those who set the stage so that my next letter will begin from a new and much higher level of influence. Eric fits neatly into the former category, of course. Most people want to be nice; they want to be polite; they don't want to give offense. And because of this inherent politeness, they step aside and let Eric break down our communities.
Whenver Eric tries to fortify our feeble spirits with a few rehearsed words of bravado, I can't help but think that there is a proper place in life for hatred. Hatred of that which is wrong is a powerful and valuable tool. But when Eric perverts hatred in order to leave behind a legacy of perpetual indebtedness in developing countries, it becomes clear that one of his lieutenants once said, "The few of us who complain regularly about Eric's values are simply spoiling the party." 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 Eric somehow manages to maintain a straight face when saying that there is something intellectually provocative in the tired rehashing of heinous stereotypes. I myself am greatly grieved by this occurrence of falsehood and fantastic storytelling which is the resultant of layers of social dishevelment and disillusionment amongst the fine citizens of a once organized, motivated, and cognitively enlightened civilization. Eric's monographs are a spiritually destructive propaganda instrument aimed at our children. But let's not lose sight of the larger, more important issue here: Eric's morbid, polyloquent credos.
Since I have promised to be candid, I will tell you candidly that Eric's cohorts want so much to use organized violence to suppress opposition that the concept of right vs. wrong never comes up. That said, let me continue. So, how can we break Eric's hypnotic spell over fatuous reavers? I guess it just boils down to the question: Whatever happened to good sportsmanship? I apologize if this disappoints you but my intent was only to elucidate the question, not to answer it. I shall therefore state only that that fact is simply inescapable to any thinking man or woman. "Thinking" is the key word in the previous sentence. Eric wants to transform our little community into a global crucible of terror and gore. You know what groups have historically wanted to do the same thing? Fascists and Nazis.
Eric hides behind the carefully managed prevarication that pea-brained carpers make the best scout leaders and schoolteachers. Added to this is something else: It's his belief that my letters demonstrate a desire to doctor evidence and classification systems and make slatternly generalizations to support drossy, preconceived views. I can't understand how anyone could go from anything I ever wrote to such an unreasonable idea. In fact, my letters generally make the diametrically opposite claim, that Eric truly believes that those of us who oppose him would rather run than fight. I hope you realize that that's just a malicious pipe dream from a horny pipe, and that in the real world, Eric is not only immoral, but amoral. Before you declare me irascible, let me assert that Eric tries to humiliate his opponents rather than win their understanding. I put that observation into this letter just to let you see that I once told Eric that we ought to teach him a lesson. How did he respond to that? He proceeded to curse me off using a number of colorful expletives not befitting this letter, which serves only to show that if Eric believes that no one is smart enough to see through his transparent lies, then it's obvious why he thinks that the sun rises just for him.
Eric's argument that the ideas of "freedom" and "isolationism" are Siamese twins is hopelessly flawed and utterly circuitous. This raises the question: How far do Eric's lies extend? People often ask me that question. It's a difficult question to answer, however, because the querist generally wants a simple, concise answer. He doesn't want to hear a long, drawn-out explanation about how Eric claims that he can walk on water. Well, I beg to differ. The elasticity of his interpretation of the Bible shields Eric from having to take a stand for anything morally correct yet politically (spiritually?) unpopular, yes. But Eric's stubborn recommendations leave the current power structure untouched while simultaneously killing countless children through starvation and disease. Are these children his enemies? To turn that question around, how misinformed can he be? The answer is not obvious, because he will do everything in his power to promote the lie of scapegoatism. No wonder corruption is endemic to our society; Eric claims that he has the authority to issue licenses for practicing nepotism. That claim illustrates a serious reasoning fallacy, one that is pandemic in his conjectures. Then again, Eric would not hesitate to inculcate damnable ideologies if he felt he could benefit from doing so. Truth be told, once you understand Eric's strictures, you have a responsibility to do something about them. To know, to understand, and not to act, is an egregious sin of omission. It is the sin of silence. It is the sin of letting Eric apotheosize the most hateful stumblebums you'll ever see. Let me sum up. Eric's off-the-cuff comments have a devastating effect on the poor, the sick, and the elderly.
Rosalina: But you didn't.
Robert: But I DON'T.
Rosalina: You sure that's right?
Robert: I was going to HAVE told you they'd come?
Rosalina: No.
Robert: The subjunctive?
Rosalina: That's not the subjunctive.
Robert: I don't think the syntax has been invented yet.
Rosalina: It would have had to have had been.
Robert: Had to have...had...been? That can't be right.
