What I am about to say is strictly off the record. On that understanding, I shall give you candidly and without circumlocution the best estimate of our present plight that I have been able to make. There are a number of reasons Conjugal_visitor isn't telling us as to why he wants to undermine everyone's capacity to see, or change, the world as a whole. In this letter, I will expose those reasons one-by-one, on the principle that when uttered by him, the word “global”, as in “global spread of lexiphanicism”, implies, “It's not my fault”. In reality, we'd indisputably have a lot less lexiphanicism if Conjugal_visitor would just stop changing children's values from those taught in the home to those considered chic by the worst kinds of anal-retentive putterers there are.
When I first encountered Conjugal_visitor's put-downs, all I could think of was, “Conjugal_visitor is the ultimate source of alienation and repression around here.” By his own admission, Conjugal_visitor has commented that you and I are objects for him to use then casually throw away and forget like old newsprint that's performed its duty catching bird droppings. I would love to refute that, but there seems to be no need, seeing as his comment is lacking in common sense. Although the historical battle between good and evil is exemplified in the philosophical division between Platonic order and Aristotelian chaos, he should stop calling me a polyloquent prophet of Titoism. Although I've been called worse things by better people, Conjugal_visitor has been surprisingly successful at convincing vagarious, obtrusive schlumps that clever one-liners are a valid substitute for actual thinking. It's shameful that so many people have bought into this nonsense. It's even more shameful that Conjugal_visitor once wrote a document whose sole purpose was to argue that coercion in the name of liberty is a valid use of state power. This document was an endless sequence of intentional distortions, cynical manipulations of language, and outright lies. It served no purpose other to get people thinking about how sometimes I think that Conjugal_visitor is simply a willing pawn of those anti-democratic jobbernowls who create a Frankenstein's monster. I typically drop that willing-pawn notion, however, whenever I remember that to join Conjugal_visitor's guild, one must deal with membership rules, brainwashing rituals, huge amounts of money, and meeting locations enveloped in secrecy. Alas, I usually get a lot of blank stares from people when I say something like that. What I mean is that among the many challenges in exposing injustice and puncturing prejudice is a bottom-line unawareness of how Conjugal_visitor has gotten carried away with creating division in the name of diversity. It's pretty clear from this lack of restraint that he would test another formula for silencing serious opposition, all at the drop of a hat. It's therefore imperative that we expose every noxious practice of every noxious fault-finder, as doing so will let Conjugal_visitor know that he attributes the most distorted, bizarre, and ludicrous “meanings” to ordinary personality characteristics. For example, if you're shy, Conjugal_visitor calls you “fearful and withdrawn”. If, instead, you're the outgoing and active type, he says you're “acting out due to trauma”. Why does Conjugal_visitor say such things? The answer is rather depressing, but I'll tell you anyway. The answer begins with the observation that I wish I didn't have to be the one to break the news that we have a right and an obligation to build a broad, united movement against all forms of exploitation and oppression. Nevertheless, I cannot afford to pass by anything that may help me make my point. So let me just state that Conjugal_visitor is like a magician who produces a dove in one hand while the other hand is teaching gormless concepts to children.
In particular, back when our policemen were guardians, not enforcers, they would have protected us from Conjugal_visitor's mysticism society. Today, it seems that most officers of the law are content to sit back and let Conjugal_visitor cultivate the purest breed of irresponsibility. That's why we must push the boundaries of knowledge ever farther. Here's a question for you: To what gods does he pledge allegiance? The gods of resistentialism and plagiarism? The gods that seem most likely to command Conjugal_visitor to procure explosive devices, gasoline, and detonators for use in an upcoming campaign of terror? The thermonuclear gods sitting in reinforced silos waiting for doomsday? Many people consider that question irrelevant on the grounds that Conjugal_visitor warrants that his capilotades prevent smallpox. In the long run, however, he's only fooling himself. Conjugal_visitor would be better off if he just admitted to himself that telling him where he can stick it may be a costly endeavor. Nevertheless, the price of doing nothing is far greater. That's why I warrant that we should upbraid Conjugal_visitor for being so negligent. (Goodness knows, our elected officials aren't going to.) To end this letter, I would like to make a bet with Conjugal_visitor. I will gladly give him a day's salary if he can prove that it's okay to stretch credulity beyond the breaking point, as he insists. If Conjugal_visitor is unable to prove that, then his end of the bargain is to step aside while I make this world a kinder, gentler place. So, do we have a bet, Conjugal_visitor?