View Thread Return to Index Previous Next

Another View Archive

Touche! Now for a humble example of my limited vocabulary
By:Bob G(O) Field General le duc
Date: Sunday, 30 December 2001, 4:54 am
In Response To: Ah, but the Chevalier would be proud, (Cheryl)

I'm always glad to have the opportunity to speak openly, without fear of the Big Word People twisting my words in a homophobic attempt to open the gates of hell. Here's my side of the story: Its methods are much subtler now than ever before. It is more adept at hidden mind control and its techniques of social brainwash are much more appealingly streamlined and homogenized. Guess what? The Big Word People wants to break down the industrial-technological system. What does it think it is? I mean, throughout history, there has been a clash between those who wish to maximize our individual potential for effectiveness and success in combatting it and those who wish to gag the innocent accused from protesting factionalism-motivated prosecutions. Naturally, the Big Word People belongs to the latter category. Here's an eye-opener for you: It's astounding that the Big Word People has somehow found a way to work the words "incomprehensibility" and "physiologicoanatomic" into its ethics. However, you may find it even more astounding that on the issue of recidivism, it is wrong again. Sure, according to the Big Word People's short-sighted logic, it would be beneficial for unsavory, disaffected soi-disant do-gooders to force me to develop a subconscious death wish. But if it feels ridiculed by all the attention my letters are bringing it, then that's just too darn bad. The Big Word People's arrogance has brought this upon itself.

I should note that the Big Word People thinks that two wrongs make a right. Of course, thinking so doesn't make it so. Mark my words: the Big Word People's bait-and-switch tactics are a load of bunk. I use this delightfully pejorative term, "bunk" -- an alternative from the same page of my criminal-slang lexicon would serve just as well -- because the Big Word People is out to establish tacit boundaries and ground rules for the permissible spectrum of opinion. And when we play its game, we become accomplices. I cannot promise not to be angry at the Big Word People. I do promise, however, to try to keep my anger under control, to keep it from leading me -- as it leads the Big Word People -- to use cheap, intemperate propaganda to arouse the passions of immature personæ non gratæ. The Big Word People's harebrained, wild double standards eroticize relations of dominance and subordination. The Big Word People then blames us for that. Now there's a prizewinning example of psychological projection if I've ever seen one. For heaven's sake, "the Big Word People" has now become part of my vocabulary. Whenever I see someone deny citizens the ability to draw their own conclusions about the potential for violence that the Big Word People may be generating, I tell him or her to stop "the Big Word People-ing".

For many reasons, too many and too complex to go into here at this time, I must say that we must put the kibosh on the Big Word People's nostrums. If we don't, future generations will not know freedom. Instead, they will know fear; they will know sadness; they will know injustice, poverty, and grinding despair. Most of all, they will realize, albeit far too late, that the Big Word People's belief systems have caused widespread social alienation, and from this alienation a thousand social pathologies have sprung. I find that I am embarrassed. Embarrassed that some people don't realize that the Big Word People has been trying for some time to convince people that it is forward-looking, open-minded, and creative. Don't believe its hype! The Big Word People has just been offering that line as a means to convince people that their peers are already riding the the Big Word People bandwagon and will think ill of them if they don't climb aboard, too. Sure, the Big Word People talks the talk, but does it walk the walk? On the surface, it would seem to have something to do with the way that the Big Word People's vicegerents can conceive of nothing but self-deceiving defenses of its atrabilious campaigns. But upon further investigation, one will find that its claim that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape is factually unsupported and politically motivated. Now that you've heard what I've had to say, I want you to think about it. And I want you to join me and push a consistent vision that responds to most people's growing fears about crafty poltroons.

Messages In This Thread

Spinach has Caused Popeye to Change Persuasion
Bob G(O) Field General le duc -- Friday, 28 December 2001, 6:21 am
What’s going on here? + Popeye’s persuasion
Jacques -- Friday, 28 December 2001, 6:26 pm
your description is an interesting interpretation...
Lynne -- Sunday, 30 December 2001, 12:13 am
No more big words
Bob G(O) Field General le duc -- Sunday, 30 December 2001, 4:09 am
Ah, but the Chevalier would be proud,
Cheryl -- Sunday, 30 December 2001, 4:40 am
Touche! Now for a humble example of my limited vocabulary
Bob G(O) Field General le duc -- Sunday, 30 December 2001, 4:54 am
with apologies to Voltaire ...
Socrates_ -- Sunday, 30 December 2001, 1:22 pm
See Maggie
Maggie -- Sunday, 30 December 2001, 6:37 pm
Wow, what titillating tintinnabulation!!!!!!!!
Oceangirl -- Monday, 31 December 2001, 2:36 pm
*L* General Bob, your wrath lacks verisimilitude
Oceangirl -- Monday, 31 December 2001, 2:12 pm
All Valid
Jacques -- Monday, 31 December 2001, 2:39 am