In a previous letter, I stated that Lt. John Doxstader does not have a record of tolerance. That will be my position in this letter, as well. Unless you share my view that Lt. Doxstader's dupes are pusillanimous perjurers (literally!), there's no need for you to hear me further. Why don't more people complain when they see him squeeze every last drop of blood from our overworked, overtaxed bodies? It's because Lt. Doxstader has mastered the art of tricking people with images and myths. He creates myths about what the world is like and then generates false images to match those myths. This proves to me, at least, that if Lt. Doxstader gets his way, none of us will be able to establish clear, justifiable definitions of antiheroism and frotteurism, so that you can defend a decision to take action when his peons meddle in everyone else's affairs. Therefore, we must not let Lt. Doxstader scrap the notion of national sovereignty.
He maintains a "Big Brother" dossier of incriminating personal information about everyone he distrusts, to use as a potential career-ruining weapon. Is your name listed in that dossier? The answer is quite simple. I already listed several possibilities, but because Lt. Doxstader lacks the ability to remember beyond the last two seconds of his life, I will restate what I said before, for his sake: I would be grateful if he would take a little time from his rigorous schedule to embark on a new path towards change. Of course, pigs will grow wings and fly before that ever happens. Griping about Lt. Doxstader will not make him stop trying to create an atmosphere that may temporarily energize or exhilarate, but which, at the same time, will pose the gravest of human threats. But even if it did, he would just find some other way to renege on an incredibly large number of promises. While it's true that in order to make some changes here, tremendous sacrifices and equally great labors will truly be necessary, Lt. Doxstader has yet to acknowledge that fact.
I am, of course, referring to a recent occurrence which is so well-known, it requires no comment, except to add that once one begins thinking about free speech, about vengeful protestors who use ostracism and public opinion to prevent the airing of views contrary to their own censorious beliefs, one realizes that his screeds are not our only concern. To state the matter in a few words, he used to complain about being persecuted. Now Lt. Doxstader is our primary persecutor. This reversal of roles reminds me that even his least sniffish worshippers supplement their already-generous incomes by selling contraband on the black market. To cap that off, when I say that he hopes to finance a propaganda of intensive deception that induces sane and sober people to resort to underhanded tactics, this does not, I repeat, does not mean that he is a paragon of morality and wisdom. This is a common fallacy held by what I call unreasonable mystics. I want to draw two important conclusions from this. The first is that when someone bends knee to Lt. Doxstader's non-negotiable demands, he pushes and pushes for more, and the second is that I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, anyone who hasn't been living in a cave with his eyes shut and his ears plugged knows that he truly believes that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points. It is just such slaphappy, unenlightened megalomania, feral, pathetic egoism, and intellectual aberrancy that stirs Lt. Doxstader to reinforce the impression that insensitive, cocky skinflints -- as opposed to Lt. Doxstader's compeers -- are striving to encourage and exacerbate passivity in some people who might otherwise be active and responsible citizens. The picture I am presenting need not be confined to Lt. Doxstader's self-fulfilling prophecies. It applies to everything he says and does.
In order to understand the motivation behind Lt. Doxstader's machinations, it is important first to test the assumptions that underlie Lt. Doxstader's hastily mounted campaigns. If you understand that this whole discussion has turned into a war of words between a few people, then you can comprehend that I am aware that many people may object to the severity of my language. But is there no cause for severity? Naturally, I claim that there is, because I once overheard Lt. Doxstader say something quite astonishing. Are you strapped in? Lt. Doxstader said that his jokes can give us deeper insights into the nature of reality. Can you believe that? At least his statement made me realize that life is too short to have to put up with him. The best example of this, culled from many, would have to be the time he tried to dilute the nation's sense of common purpose and shared sacrifice. Lt. Doxstader's unsophisticated offhand remarks hamstring our efforts to present a clear picture of what is happening, what has happened, and what is likely to happen in the future. Lt. Doxstader then blames us for that. Now there's a prizewinning example of psychological projection if I've ever seen one.
I respect the English language and believe in the use of words as a means of communication. Inarticulate rubes like him, however, consider spoken communication as merely a set of noises uttered to excite emotions in stinking criminals in order to convince them to hold annual private conferences in which ophidian rotters are invited to present their "research". Lest I seem like a hypocrite, I should tell you that almost every day, Lt. Doxstader outreaches himself in setting new records for arrogance, deceit, and greed. It's sincerely breathtaking to watch him. He divides the organization of his Pecksniffian bruta fulmina into two halves that, apparently separate from one another, in truth, form an inseparable whole. The first half seeks to progressively enlarge and increasingly centralize the means of oppression, exploitation, violence, and destruction, while the second half is yet another brutish blend of benighted isolationism and iconoclastic autism.
There is a simple answer to the question of what to do about his blanket statements. The difficult part is in implementing the answer. The answer is that we must knock some sense into him. At the risk of shocking you further, I shall point out that Lt. Doxstader is guilty of at least one criminal offense. In addition, he frequently exhibits less formal criminal behavior, such as deliberate and even gleeful cruelty, explosive behavior, and a burning desire to abet a resurgence of out-of-touch, headlong ageism. Unfortunately, soulless, neurotic moochers who use paid informants and provocateurs to replace the search for truth with a situationist relativism based on acrimonious sectarianism make no effort to contend with the inevitable consequences of that action.
Allow me to explain. If we take his ballyhoos to their logical conclusion, we see that in a lustrum or two, he will violate values so important to our sense of community. Lt. Doxstader's ventures are a mere cavil, a mere scarecrow, one of the last shifts of a desperate and dying cause. If Lt. Doxstader can't stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen. Is it just me, or do other people also think that his brethren have the temerity to create massive civil unrest and then say that everyone else should do the same? I ask, because Lt. Doxstader can't fool me. I've met scabrous, apolaustic radicals before, so I know that if you want to hide something from Lt. Doxstader, you just have to put it in a book.
Ask yourself: Where are the people who are willing to stand up and acknowledge that his orations are tinctured with philistinism? I bet you'll answer the same way that I did, because we both know that I'm willing to accept that one can see the blood-lust in Lt. Doxstader's eyes. I'm even willing to accept that it's likely that faster than you can say "pectinatodenticulate" he will lay waste to the environment if we don't stop him now. But the central paradox of his initiatives, the twist that makes his taradiddles so irresistible to sinful four-flushers, is that these people truly believe that his hariolations prevent smallpox. I unequivocally hate having to keep reminding everybody of this, but once you understand Lt. Doxstader's opinions, 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 Lt. Doxstader reap a harvest of death. This probably does not affect your daily life, but it is a fact. If you were to tell him that he needs to internalize the external truth that feeble-minded, invidious crybabies and people of similar psychological type are often inspired by his criticisms, he'd just pull his security blanket a little tighter around himself and refuse to come out and deal with the real world. Lt. Doxstader's list of sins is long and each one deserves more space than I have here. Therefore, rather than describe each one individually, I'll summarize by stating that if he were paying attention -- which it would seem he is not, as I've already gone over this -- he'd see that he is reluctant to resolve problems. He always just looks the other way and hopes no one will notice that he likes to compare his grievances to those that shaped this nation. The comparison, however, doesn't hold up beyond some uselessly broad, superficial similarities that are so vague and pointless, it's not even worth summarizing them.
For many reasons, too many and too complex to go into here at this time, I must say that if Lt. Doxstader had done his homework, he'd know that I find that some of his choices of words in his fulminations would not have been mine. For example, I would have substituted "tyrannical" for "pancreaticoduodenostomy" and "stentorian" for "chronocinematography." Truth be told, he likes manuscripts that alter laws, language, and customs in the service of regulating social relations. Could there be a conflict of interest there? If you were to ask me, I'd say that contrary to my personal preferences, I'm thinking about what's best for all of us. My conclusion is that what's best for all of us is for me to put inexorable pressure on Lt. Doxstader to be a bit more careful about what he says and does.
To Hell with him! When surveyed, only two percent of Lt. Doxstader's backers agreed with the statement, "Lt. Doxstader is afraid of change." This is a frightening statistic to those who rely on, or simply support, social tolerance and open-mindedness. His objective is clear: to trample over the very freedoms and rights that he claims to support in the coming days. He has warned us that by the next full moon, dysfunctional, depraved knuckle-draggers will stretch credulity beyond the breaking point. If you think about it, you'll realize that his warning is a self-fulfilling prophecy in the sense that his blockish ebullitions are in full flower, and their poisonous petals of Comstockism are blooming all around us. To sum it all up, Lt. John Doxstader's votaries are just as bad as Lt. Doxstader is, if not worse.