2009-03-28, 02:44 PM
Allow me to introduce myself. I'm the founder of the Anti-Southperry Society. In this letter, I will tell you what made me form such an organization and how I plan to use it to tell you things that Southperry doesn't want you to know. With this letter, I hope to expose injustice and puncture prejudice. But first, I would like to make the following introductory remark: If Southperry's thinking were cerebral rather than glandular, it wouldn't consider it such a good idea to rip apart causes that others feel strongly about. It's easy for us to shake our heads at Southperry's foolishness and cowardice. It's easy for us to exclaim that we should put Southperry's self-satisfied stratagems out to pasture. It's easy for us to say, "Now is not the time to go wobbly on our opposition to Southperry's uncivilized effusions." The point is that it's easy for us to say these things because I indeed hope that Southperry's punishment fits its crime. The facts are indisputable, the arguments are impeccable, and the consequences are undeniable. So why does Southperry feel that it is a tireless protector of civil rights and civil liberties for all people? The complete answer to that question is a long, sad story. I've answered parts of that question in several of my previous letters, and I'll answer other parts in future ones. For now, I'll just say that I am not concerned with rumors or hearsay about it. I am interested only in ascertained facts attested by published documents and in these primarily as an illustration that Southperry has frequently been spotted making nicey-nice with unscrupulous, ruthless scoundrels. Is this because it needs their help to rot out the foundations of our religious, moral, and political values? I hardly know. But I will stake the immortality of my soul that only the impartial and unimpassioned mind will even consider that Southperry's fibs always follow the same pattern. It puts the desired twist on the actual facts, ignores inconvenient facts, and invents as many new "facts" as necessary to convince us that I'm some sort of cully who can be duped into believing that a plausible excuse is a satisfactory substitute for performance.
As part of its efforts to gain a mainstream following, Southperry publishes the Journal of Ill-bred Neocolonialism. Included alongside articles discussing history, culture, art, religion, and philosophy are endorsements of Southperry's plans to demonstrate an outright hostility to law enforcement. Southperry's a pretty good liar most of the time. However, it tells so many lies, it's bound to trip itself up someday. For brevity, I won't comment further on that but rather on the way that Southperry's desire to usher in the beginning of an ostentatious new era of radicalism is the chief sign that it's a deranged, merciless palooka. (The second sign is that Southperry feels obliged to promote group-think attitudes over individual insights.)
Let's play a little game. Deduct one point from your I.Q. if you fell for Southperry's ridiculous claim that it has mystical powers of divination and prophecy. Deduct another point if you failed to notice that Southperry plans to have a serious destabilizing effect on our institutions. It has instructed its lackeys not to discuss this or even admit to its plan's existence. Obviously, Southperry knows it has something to hide.
The greatest quote I ever heard goes something like this: "We must be fearless in confronting Southperry's caustic flock." Several things Southperry has said have brought me to the boiling point. The statement of its that made the strongest impression on me, however, was something to the effect of how it can change its soporific ways.
Now let's have some fun and examine a few of Southperry's more ridiculous statements. First, Southperry said that the average working-class person can't see through its chicanery. That's rather demented, isn't it? Later on, it claimed that the bogeyman is going to get us if we don't agree to its demands. What this really means is that it wants to hoodoo us. Southperry wants us to believe that we can solve all of our problems by giving it lots of money. We might as well toss that money down a well because we'll never see it again. What we will see, however, is that some people have indicated that Southperry's arrogance will lead it to tinker about with a lot of halfway prescriptions before you know it. I can neither confirm nor deny that statement, but I can say that time cannot change Southperry's behavior. Time merely enlarges the field in which Southperry can, with ever-increasing intensity and thoroughness, combine the most sordid avarice with the most invincible hatred of the very people who tolerate and enrich it.
Southperry wants to turn doomsday prophets loose against us good citizens. You know what groups have historically wanted to do the same thing? Fascists and Nazis.
Now, I hope Southperry was joking when it implied it was going to foist the most poisonously false and destructive myths imaginable upon us, but it sure didn't sound like it. Southperry's apparatchiks consider its utterances a breath of fresh air. I, however, find them more like the fetid odor of incendiarism. Southperry demands absolute and blind obedience from its emissaries. If it didn't, they might question its orders to fan the flames of nonrepresentationalism into a planet-spanning inferno. This unrelenting demand of obedience also implies that if you were to tell Southperry that it has a problem not only with civil rights but also with the legal responsibility and accountability as to what is considered appropriate behavior, it'd just pull its security blanket a little tighter around itself and refuse to come out and deal with the real world. I know that I'm emotional now, but Southperry has commented that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape. I would love to refute that but there seems to be no need, seeing as its comment is lacking in common sense.
I once had a nightmare in which Southperry was free to deface a social fabric that was already deteriorating. When I awoke, I realized that this nightmare was frighteningly close to reality. For instance, it is the case both in my nightmare and in reality that we must ask Southperry to rephrase its criticisms in a more reasoned way if we are ever to put to rest self-indulgent and blinkered precepts such as Southperry's. Yes, this is a bold, audacious, even unprecedented undertaking. Yes, it lacks any realistic guarantee of success. However, it is an undertaking that we must undeniably pursue because I, hardheaded cynic that I am, find Southperry's bons mots not only insalubrious but also frowzy. (The merits of Southperry's smears won't be discussed here because they lack merit.)
One wonders how Southperry can complain about pouty scofflaws given that its own cajoleries also aim to violate strongly held principles regarding deferral of current satisfaction for long-term gains. Most people don't realize this, but Southperry has, in fact, presented evidence in support of its claim that it is the one who will lead us to our great shining future. Of course, its evidence has been rather flimsy in the credibility department. It's generally a lot easier to find evidence that once you understand Southperry's roorbacks, 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 Southperry feature simplistic answers to complex problems.
For those of you who don't know, history has proven beyond any doubt that "Southperry" has become a byword for treachery and deceit. That fact may not be pleasant but it is a fact regardless of our wishes on the matter. Southperry operates on the basis of an unremitting hatred of civility and decency. I put that observation into this letter just to let you see that I'm no psychiatrist. Still, from the little I know about psychiatry I can sincerely say that Southperry seems to exhibit many of the symptoms of Asperger's syndrome. I don't say that to judge but merely to put Southperry's prodigal, bleeding-heart self-fulfilling prophecies into perspective. Anyway, I hope I've made my point, which is that Southperry should judge not lest it be judged.
As part of its efforts to gain a mainstream following, Southperry publishes the Journal of Ill-bred Neocolonialism. Included alongside articles discussing history, culture, art, religion, and philosophy are endorsements of Southperry's plans to demonstrate an outright hostility to law enforcement. Southperry's a pretty good liar most of the time. However, it tells so many lies, it's bound to trip itself up someday. For brevity, I won't comment further on that but rather on the way that Southperry's desire to usher in the beginning of an ostentatious new era of radicalism is the chief sign that it's a deranged, merciless palooka. (The second sign is that Southperry feels obliged to promote group-think attitudes over individual insights.)
Let's play a little game. Deduct one point from your I.Q. if you fell for Southperry's ridiculous claim that it has mystical powers of divination and prophecy. Deduct another point if you failed to notice that Southperry plans to have a serious destabilizing effect on our institutions. It has instructed its lackeys not to discuss this or even admit to its plan's existence. Obviously, Southperry knows it has something to hide.
The greatest quote I ever heard goes something like this: "We must be fearless in confronting Southperry's caustic flock." Several things Southperry has said have brought me to the boiling point. The statement of its that made the strongest impression on me, however, was something to the effect of how it can change its soporific ways.
Now let's have some fun and examine a few of Southperry's more ridiculous statements. First, Southperry said that the average working-class person can't see through its chicanery. That's rather demented, isn't it? Later on, it claimed that the bogeyman is going to get us if we don't agree to its demands. What this really means is that it wants to hoodoo us. Southperry wants us to believe that we can solve all of our problems by giving it lots of money. We might as well toss that money down a well because we'll never see it again. What we will see, however, is that some people have indicated that Southperry's arrogance will lead it to tinker about with a lot of halfway prescriptions before you know it. I can neither confirm nor deny that statement, but I can say that time cannot change Southperry's behavior. Time merely enlarges the field in which Southperry can, with ever-increasing intensity and thoroughness, combine the most sordid avarice with the most invincible hatred of the very people who tolerate and enrich it.
Southperry wants to turn doomsday prophets loose against us good citizens. You know what groups have historically wanted to do the same thing? Fascists and Nazis.
Now, I hope Southperry was joking when it implied it was going to foist the most poisonously false and destructive myths imaginable upon us, but it sure didn't sound like it. Southperry's apparatchiks consider its utterances a breath of fresh air. I, however, find them more like the fetid odor of incendiarism. Southperry demands absolute and blind obedience from its emissaries. If it didn't, they might question its orders to fan the flames of nonrepresentationalism into a planet-spanning inferno. This unrelenting demand of obedience also implies that if you were to tell Southperry that it has a problem not only with civil rights but also with the legal responsibility and accountability as to what is considered appropriate behavior, it'd just pull its security blanket a little tighter around itself and refuse to come out and deal with the real world. I know that I'm emotional now, but Southperry has commented that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape. I would love to refute that but there seems to be no need, seeing as its comment is lacking in common sense.
I once had a nightmare in which Southperry was free to deface a social fabric that was already deteriorating. When I awoke, I realized that this nightmare was frighteningly close to reality. For instance, it is the case both in my nightmare and in reality that we must ask Southperry to rephrase its criticisms in a more reasoned way if we are ever to put to rest self-indulgent and blinkered precepts such as Southperry's. Yes, this is a bold, audacious, even unprecedented undertaking. Yes, it lacks any realistic guarantee of success. However, it is an undertaking that we must undeniably pursue because I, hardheaded cynic that I am, find Southperry's bons mots not only insalubrious but also frowzy. (The merits of Southperry's smears won't be discussed here because they lack merit.)
One wonders how Southperry can complain about pouty scofflaws given that its own cajoleries also aim to violate strongly held principles regarding deferral of current satisfaction for long-term gains. Most people don't realize this, but Southperry has, in fact, presented evidence in support of its claim that it is the one who will lead us to our great shining future. Of course, its evidence has been rather flimsy in the credibility department. It's generally a lot easier to find evidence that once you understand Southperry's roorbacks, 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 Southperry feature simplistic answers to complex problems.
For those of you who don't know, history has proven beyond any doubt that "Southperry" has become a byword for treachery and deceit. That fact may not be pleasant but it is a fact regardless of our wishes on the matter. Southperry operates on the basis of an unremitting hatred of civility and decency. I put that observation into this letter just to let you see that I'm no psychiatrist. Still, from the little I know about psychiatry I can sincerely say that Southperry seems to exhibit many of the symptoms of Asperger's syndrome. I don't say that to judge but merely to put Southperry's prodigal, bleeding-heart self-fulfilling prophecies into perspective. Anyway, I hope I've made my point, which is that Southperry should judge not lest it be judged.