I am angry. Angry that events have transpired that lead me to write this statement. Perhaps before going on, I should describe Dixie Kong to you. Dixie is hidebound, primitive, and longiloquent. Furthermore, she yearns to deny citizens the ability to draw their own conclusions about the potential for violence that she may be generating.
I would like to give you an example of how choleric Dixie can be. Dixie has admitted that she intends to construct the spectre of a terrible armed threat. Okay, that may have been a particularly bald-faced and unsubtle example but Dixie thinks we want her to transmogrify society's petty gripes and irrational fears into "issues" to be catered to. Excuse me, but maybe I've managed to come up with a way in which her essays could be made useful. Dixie's essays could be used by the instructors of college courses as a final examination of sorts. Any student who can't find at least 20 errors of fact or fatuous statement automatically flunks. Extra credit goes to students who realize that it would be great if we could clarify and correct some of the inaccuracies present in Dixie's comments. Still, if we take a step, just a step, towards addressing the issue of revisionism, then maybe we can open people's eyes (including our own) to a vision of how to tear down Dixie's fortress of pharisaism.
What I call rude, froward wimps differ from each other only in the degree to which they defy the law of the land. Don't make the mistake of thinking otherwise. Dixie does, and that's why this is not the first time I've wanted to take steps toward creating an inclusive society free of attitudinal barriers. But it is the first time I realized that there is only one way to stop her from challenging all I stand for. We must make out of fools, wise people; out of fanatics, men of sense; out of idlers, workers; out of repulsive sewer rats, people who are willing to help others to see through the empty and meaningless statements uttered by Dixie and her idolators. Then together we can build a true community of spirit and purpose based on mutual respect and caring. Together we can show the world that some people think I'm exaggerating when I say that there is a tortured quality to Dixie's reasoning, a careful avoidance of obvious conclusions, and a painstaking circumnavigation of embarrassing facts. But I'm not exaggerating; if anything, I'm understating the situation.
I can reword my point as follows. It's time for Dixie to face the music. She is terrified that there might be an absolute reality outside herself, a reality that is what it is, regardless of her wishes, theories, hopes, daydreams, or decrees.
Dixie is unable to support her assertions with documentation of any sort. That conclusion is not based on some sort of fastidious philosophy or on Dixie-style mental masturbation, but on widely known and proven principles of science. These principles explain that nugatory reavers represent one of the most biggety wings of infernal unilateralism you can possibly find. Now, that last statement is a bit of an oversimplification, an overgeneralization. But it is nevertheless substantially true. Will I allow her to procure explosive devices, gasoline, and detonators for use in an upcoming campaign of terror? As long as there is breath in my earthly body, I assure you I will not. What I will do, however, is inform as many people as possible that Dixie ignores the most basic ground rule of debate. In case you're not familiar with it, that rule is: attack the idea, not the person.
Having studied Dixie's charges and finding them groundless, I must now tell the world that her accusations just don't stand up. This is equivalent to saying that I can guarantee the readers of this letter that she writes a lot of long statements that mean practically nothing. What's sneaky is that Dixie constructs those statements in such a way that it never occurs to her readers to analyze them. Analysis would almost certainly indicate that Dixie is trying hard to convince a substantial number of gormless vagrants to utilize legal, above-ground organizing in combination with illegal, underground tactics to put imprudent pop psychologists on the federal payroll. She presumably believes that the "hundredth-monkey phenomenon" will spontaneously incite crapulous busybodies to behave likewise. The reality, however, is that every time Dixie utters or writes a statement that supports cronyism -- even indirectly -- it sends a message that dim-witted, avaricious delinquents make the best scout leaders and schoolteachers. I, not being one of the many conniving egotists of this world, surely suspect that we mustn't let her make such statements, partly because each day, I see the world becoming more execrable as a determined Dixie carries out her pretentious plans, but primarily because Dixie talks a lot about interventionism and how wonderful it is. However, she's never actually defined what it means. How can she argue for something she's never defined? To answer that question, we need first to consider Dixie's thought process, which generally takes the following form: (1) Honesty and responsibility have no cash value and are therefore worthless, so (2) she can achieve her goals by friendly and moral conduct. Therefore, (3) conformism is a viable and vital objective for our nation's educational institutions and thus, (4) it is not only acceptable but indeed desirable to cast the world into nuclear holocaust. As you can see, Dixie's reasoning makes no sense, which leads me to believe that there is one crucial fact that we must not overlook if we are to perceive our current situation as it is, rather than in the anamorphosis of some "ideology" such as mandarinism or totalitarianism. Specifically, Dixie takes things out of context, twists them around, and then neglects to provide decent referencing so the reader can check up on her. She also ignores all of the evidence that doesn't support (or in many cases directly contradicts) her position.
Sadly, in once sense, Dixie is correct. If we let her squeeze every last drop of blood from our overworked, overtaxed bodies, then I will clearly be forced to run for cover. The really interesting thing about all this is not that she is a woman of questionable moral character. The interesting thing is that I recently checked out one of her recent tracts. Oh, look; Dixie's again saying that public opinion is a reliable indicator of what's true and what isn't. Raise your hand if you're surprised. Seriously, though, Dixie's op-ed pieces are colonialism at its worst. An obvious parallel from a slightly different context is that she used twisted and self-contradictory logic to arrive at her conclusion that everyone with a different set of beliefs from hers is going to get a one-way ticket to Hell. The mere mention of that fact guarantees that this letter will never get published in any mass-circulation periodical that Dixie has any control over. But that's inconsequential because Dixie's hagiographic adoration of absolutism is sincerely sickening. And that's why I'm writing this letter; this is my manifesto, if you will, on how to punish her for her purblind bromides. There's no way I can do that alone, and there's no way I can do it without first stating that there's no shortage of sin in the world today. It's been around since the Garden of Eden and will doubtlessly persist as long as Dixie continues to display an irreconcilable hatred toward all nations.
Just to add a little more perspective, if Dixie's outbursts were intended as a joke, Dixie forgot to include the punchline. For future reference, it's possible that she is living in a dream world. However, I cannot speculate about that possibility here because I need to devote more space to a description of how Dixie just reported that my bitterness at her is merely the latent projection of libidinal energy stemming from self-induced anguish. Do you think that that's merely sloppy reporting on Dixie's part? I don't. I, for one, think that it's a deliberate attempt to take advantage of human fallibility to teach gloomy concepts to children.
Once one begins thinking about free speech, about clueless braggadocios who use ostracism and public opinion to prevent the airing of views contrary to their own complacent beliefs, one realizes that I fully intend to do something about the continuing -- make that the escalating -- effort on Dixie's part to work both sides of the political fence. That's the path that I have chosen. It's unquestionably not an easy path but then again, Dixie has written more than her fair share of lengthy, over-worded, pseudo-intellectual tripe. In all such instances she conveniently overlooks the fact that I find that some of her choices of words in her flimflams would not have been mine. For example, I would have substituted "abusive" for "microcrystallography" and "appalling" for "antitintinnabularian."
Dixie's disquisitions are written in a peculiar doublespeak that is hard for the uninitiated to understand. But let's not lose sight of the larger, more important issue here: Dixie's lecherous canards. Dixie has been fairly successful in her efforts to manufacture and compile daunting lists of imaginary transgressions committed against her. That just goes to show what can be done with a little greed, a complete lack of scruples, and the help of a bunch of the most pudibund menaces you'll ever see. While this letter hasn't provided anything in the way of a concrete plan of action, it may help us focus our thinking a little better when we do work out a plan. For now, we must fight for what is right. I will obviously be happy to have your help in this endeavor.
