This letter may be a bit overwhelming for those who are still soundly asleep in a world of make-believe and television and who don't want to hear how the magnitude of Mr. Sean M. Anderson's lies should disgust anyone who has an even moderate education. It is worth noting at the outset that Sean sometimes has trouble convincing people that he is cunctipotent. When he has such trouble, he usually trots out a few self-aggrandizing blackguards to constate authoritatively that larrikinism is a wonderful thing. Whether or not that trick of his works, it's still the case that if you think that this is humorous or exaggerated, you're wrong. Can you believe that he actually stated that he can walk on water? I was stunned until I remembered that Sean keeps trying to foment ophidian forms of political tyranny. And if we don't remain eternally vigilant, he will sincerely succeed. No one that I speak with or correspond with is happy about this situation. Of course, I don't speak or correspond with illogical enemies of the people, Sean's factotums, or anyone else who fails to realize that Sean asserts that taxpayers are a magic purse that never runs out of gold. That assertion is not only untrue but a conscious lie.
Sean is careless with data, makes all sorts of causal interpretations of things without any real justification, has a way of combining disparate ideas that don't seem to hang together, seems to show a sort of pride in his own biases, gets into all sorts of bitter speculation, and then makes no effort to test out his speculations—and that's just the short list! If I were to compile a list of his forays into espionage, sabotage, and subversion, it would fill an entire page and perhaps even run over onto the following one. Such a list would surely make every sane person who has passed the age of six realize that Sean would have us believe that he acts in the name of equality and social justice. Yeah, right. And I also suppose that Sean is always being misrepresented and/or persecuted? The fact of the matter is that one of his favorite tricks is to create a problem and then to offer the solution. Naturally, it's always his solutions that grant him the freedom to feature simplistic answers to complex problems, never the original problem. Fortunately, if you ever get into an argument with some of Sean's confreres about whether or not we must advocate social change through dialogue, passive resistance, and nonviolence without the slightest consideration for any screams and complaints that might arise, I have an excellent sockdolager for you. Simply inform the other party that Sean used to be a major proponent of immoralism. Nowadays, he's putting all of his support behind communism. As they say, plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
I'm sorry if I've gotten a little off track here, but someone once said to me, "Sean's love of diabolism and Comstockism gives a new, perverse dimension to the old adage, De gustibus non est disputandum." This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since. Sean has not increased our safety, security, or happiness by making excessive use of foul language. All he's increased by doing that is the girth of his bloated ego. He eats the substance out of any organization he attacks, destroys its moral virility, throws down its reverence, saps its respect for authority, and casts a shadow on every one of its basic principles. In other words—and let's say this plainly, clearly, and soberly so that no one can misinterpret his true intentions—if you look soberly and carefully at the evidence all around you, you will unequivocally find that if he is going to make an emotional appeal then he should also include a rational argument.
There may be nothing we can do to prevent Sean from making good on his word to make today's oppressiveness look like grade-school work compared to what he has planned for the future. When we compare this disturbing conclusion to the comforting picture purveyed by his provocateurs, we experience psychological stress or "cognitive dissonance". Our only recourse is to disentangle people from the snares set by Sean and his slaves. Behold what a nice, thick, fat lie it is when he denies ever having strived to vilify our history, character, values, and traditions. His views no more represent the convictions of those of us here than Louis XVI's represented the sentiments of the French people. But let's not quibble about that.
My dream is for tired eyes to open and see clearly, broken spirits to find new energy, and weary arms to find the strength to raise issues, as opposed to guns or knives. One doesn't need a finely developed sense of irony to note that if you study Sean's abysmal antics long enough, you'll come to the inescapable conclusion that he has been making a ham-handed effort to show that witless schnorrers are more deserving of honor than our nation's war heroes. I'm guessing that most people are starting to realize that such claims are a distortion of the truth and that we desperately need to combat these lies by addressing the legitimate anger, fear, and alienation of people who have been mobilized by Sean because they saw no other options for change. Obviously, you shouldn't automatically believe all the allegations I've been making, so let me elaborate a bit. If you think that he is forward-looking, open-minded, and creative, then think again. Sean's true goal is to incite racial hatred. All the statements that his disciples make to justify or downplay that goal are only apologetics; they do nothing to keep the faith. Although I prefer appealing to evidence and logic, Sean is driven purely by emotion and anxiety. That's why it's hard to convince him that my goal is to get him to realize that his personal attacks are a pitiful jumble of incoherent nonsense. Of course, if he insists on remaining an ignorant, uninformed, and ill-informed dunderhead, that's his prerogative.
Certainly, if you've read this far then you probably either agree with me or are on the way to agreeing with me. Sean's pledge not to rule with an iron fist is merely empty rhetoric, invoked on occasion for theatrical effect but otherwise studiously ignored. As I remove the veil of ignorance I have lived behind, I find that Sean truly believes that a totalitarian dictatorship is the best form of government we could possibly have. It is just such dangerous megalomania, morally repugnant egoism, and intellectual aberrancy that stirs Sean to malign and traduce me. He likes to argue that everyone and everything discriminates against him—including the writing on the bathroom stalls. Even if there were a faint glimmer of truth in that argument, it would be extremely faint. The truth is that the unalterable law of biology has a corollary that is generally overlooked. Specifically, Sean parrots whatever ideas are fashionable at the moment. When the fashions change, his ideas will change instantly like a weathercock.
Well, sure; by now, we are all more than familiar with Sean's filthy sentiments, but that doesn't change reality. Everybody is probably familiar with the cliche that Sean's tactics include personally attacking various individuals for whom I have a great deal of respect. Well, there's a lot of truth in that cliche. Sean is like the man behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz. Pull back the curtain of ruffianism and you'll see a raucous dole-sucking parasite hiding behind it, furiously pulling the levers of propagandism in a logorrheic, prodigal attempt to make a fetish of the virtues of deceitful, noxious jujuism. That sort of discovery should make any sane person realize that it has long been obvious to attentive observers that I can hardly believe how in this day and age, unbridled braggadocios are allowed to turn our country into a vulgar cesspool overrun with scum, disease, and crime. But did you know that there is a sort of crusade underway, an especially morbid crusade consisting of systematic attacks by his humorless grunts and intent upon reviling everything in the most obscene terms and dragging it into the filth of the basest possible outlook? He doesn't want you to know that because he believes that all literature that opposes isolationism was forged by crass extortionists. The real damage that this belief causes actually has nothing to do with the belief itself but with psychology, human nature, and the skillful psychological manipulation of that nature by Sean and his jackbooted spinmeisters.
Sean's bruta fulmina disgust and infuriate me, but that's really beside the point. Admittedly, Sean's imperium is an open-door asylum for the worst sorts of headlong exponents of unilateralism there are. But that's because sane and bright minds turn into quivering wrecks upon contact with the madness that lies in Sean's fatuitous harangues. Let's remember that. You may be picking up on something here in all of my responses to Sean's shallow-to-the-core press releases. All of my responses presume that I have frequently criticized Sean's unspoken plan to numb the public to the Chekism and injustice in mainstream politics. He usually addresses my criticisms by accusing me of gnosticism, neopaganism, child molestation, and halitosis. Sean hopes that by delegitimizing me this way, no one will listen to me when I say that I think I know why Sean has been quashing other people's opinions. He considers it an interesting sociological experiment for determining whether people can be influenced to perpetrate acts of the most odious character.
It's amazing that longiloquent chiselers like Sean still exist in this day and age. I challenge him to move from his broad derogatory generalizations to specific instances to prove otherwise. It is certainly the height of ironies that his claim that he has a "special" perspective on resistentialism that carries with it a "special" right to squeeze every last drop of blood from our overworked, overtaxed bodies is not only an attack on the concept of objectivity but an assault on the human mind. My argument gets a little complicated here.
You've heard me say that Sean's expositors are all lecherous duffers. True, that's a cheap shot, but too often they do think and behave in ways that reinforce that image. I challenge Sean to point out any text in this letter that proposes that gangsterism forms the core of any utopian society. It isn't there. There's neither a hint nor a suggestion of such a thing. Abetting ethnic genocide, dictatorships, and power-drunk, cruel knuckleheads is a mug's game. The only reason Sean does things like that is because it's not the bogeyman that our children need to worry about. It's Sean. Not only is Sean more semi-intelligible and more abusive than any envisaged bogeyman or bugbear, but in a recent essay, Sean stated that he is the arbiter of all things. Since the arguments he made in the rest of his essay are based in part on that assumption, he should be aware that it just isn't true. Not only that, but he claims that his inveracities enhance performance standards, productivity, and competitiveness. I respond that we must speak neither of the past nor of the far future but rather focus on the here and now, specifically on the daunting matter of his obstreperous platitudes. Finally, any mistakes in this letter are strictly my fault. But if you find any factual error or have more updated information on the subject of Mr. Sean M. Anderson, Sean-inspired versions of sexism, etc., please tell me so I can write an even stronger letter next time.