my problem with this 'edgar' fella...
The Beet Man
<jfc4duspuf2kp2jem...@4ax.com>, tally.savalas.bahn
<spud-nospa...@mr-potatohead.com> wrote:
>I've seen a number of sordid and disagreeable things over the years,
>but Edgar's sentiments really take the cake. But first, I'm going to
>jump ahead a bit and talk in general terms about how you can chalk up
>incidents such as the ones I've described to the hypocritical,
>unprofessional nature of Edgar's agendas. Then, I'll back up and fill
>in some of the details. Okay, so to start with the general stuff, if
>this letter did nothing else but serve as a beacon of truth, it would
>be worthy of reading by all right-thinking people. However, this
>letter's role is much greater than just to point out that the emperor
>has no clothes on. Despite the obvious fact that I find his memoranda
>symptomatic of a dangerous but spreading mentality, Edgar 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.
>
>He is typical of offensive traitors in his wild invocations to the
>irrational, the magic, and the fantastic to dramatize his flimflams.
>When Edgar says that the sky is falling, that's just a load of
>spucatum tauri. You might object to my claim that violent, pestiferous
>lounge lizards suffer from a collective self-image that prefers
>victimization to success and imposes a suffocating group conformity
>that ostracizes nonconformists. But bear in mind that he wants nothing
>less than to dilute the nation's sense of common purpose and shared
>sacrifice. His spin doctors then wonder, "What's wrong with that?"
>Well, there's not much to be done with insufferable fiends who can't
>figure out what's wrong with that, but the rest of us can plainly see
>that Edgar has never gotten ahead because of his hard work or
>innovative ideas. Rather, all of Edgar's successes are due to
>kickbacks, bribes, black market double-dealing, outright thuggery, and
>unsavory political intrigue.
>
>When people say that bigotry and hate are alive and well, they're
>right. And Edgar is to blame. I hope I don't need to remind you that
>he has been a faithful servant of temperamental interests for as long
>as I can remember, but it's still true, and we must do something about
>it. Well, sure; his ability to develop mind-control technology is
>astounding, but that doesn't change reality. The unalterable law of
>biology has a corollary that is generally overlooked. Specifically,
>it's easy enough to hate Edgar any day of the week on general
>principles. But now I'll tell you about some very specific things that
>Edgar is up to, things that ought to make a real Edgar-hater out of
>you. First off, I, for one, have a problem with his use of the phrase,
>"We all know that...". With this phrase, Edgar doesn't need to prove
>his claim that his reports provide a liberating insight into life, the
>universe, and everything; he merely accepts it as fact. To put it
>another way, I am deliberately using colorful language in this letter.
>I am deliberately using provocative phrases that I hope will stick in
>the minds of my readers. I do ensure, however, that my words are
>always appropriate and accurate and clearly explain how I want to
>thank Edgar for his declamations. They give me an excellent
>opportunity to illustrate just how anti-democratic Edgar can be. More
>prosaically, I can say with absolute certitude that one of the most
>mind-numbing mysteries for those of us who don't like Edgar is trying
>to understand people who do. And here, I contend, lies a clue to the
>intellectual vacuum so gapingly apparent in Edgar's ballyhoos.
>
>I can assure you that it's really not bloody-mindedness that compels
>me to solve the problems that are important to most people. It's my
>sense of responsibility to you, the reader. Although it's easy to sit
>in the press box and criticize, I and Edgar part company when it comes
>to the issue of racism. He feels that his sound bites are a breath of
>fresh air amid our modern culture's toxic cloud of chaos, while I
>think that he tries to make us think the way he wants us to think, not
>by showing us evidence and reasoning with us, but by understanding how
>to push our emotional buttons. Everybody is probably familiar with the
>cliche that he has an uncanny ability to entirely miss the point of
>any given issue. Well, there's a lot of truth in that cliche.
>
>Never mind that Edgar's assertion that the only way to expand one's
>mind is with drugs -- or maybe even chocolate -- serves only to
>illustrate his ignorance and poorly hidden bigotry. What's really
>important is that I'm not writing this letter for your entertainment.
>I'm not even writing it for your education. I'm writing it for our
>very survival. The scantiness of Edgar's abstract knowledge directs
>his sentiments more to the world of plagiarism. May we never forget
>this if we are to deny Edgar and his stooges a chance to use cheap,
>intemperate propaganda to arouse the passions of contemptuous
>hooliganism enthusiasts.
>
>Before anyone takes umbrage at what I'm about to say, let me explain
>that it would please Edgar greatly to put unsavory braggarts on the
>federal payroll. Before I launch into my main topic, I want to make a
>few matters crystal clear: 1) his reinterpretations of historic events
>are filled with a number of very clear-cut and blatant lies -- lies of
>both omission and commission -- and 2) as a result of that, his views
>are antiquated, misguided, and mean-spirited. Now that you know where
>I stand on those issues, I can safely say that I, not being one of the
>many iconoclastic, gloomy authoritarians of this world, unquestionably
>don't believe that things have never been better. So when Edgar says
>that that's what I believe, I see how little he understands my
>position. While some information provided by his intimates, who are
>legion, may be factual, other material is unsubstantiated rumor or
>juvenile offhand remarks. Like I said, his inveracities are built on
>lies, and they depend on make-believe for their continuation.
>
>Statements like, "Edgar has failed to provide us with a context in
>which his deeds could be discussed and understood" accurately express
>the feelings of most of us here. He wants to add insult to injury. You
>know what groups have historically wanted to do the same thing?
>Fascists and Nazis.
>
>After I criticize Edgar's press releases publically for their
>formalistic categories, their spurious claims of neutrality, and their
>blindness to the abuse of private power, I know that everyone will
>come to the dismayed conclusion that I stated at the beginning of this
>discussion: Edgar's dupes often reverse the normal process of
>interpretation. That is, they value the unsaid over the said, the
>obscure over the clear. The simple, regrettable truth is that if Edgar
>bites me, I will bite back.
>
>When asked to mend his ways, he will give people a wink and a smile,
>but when the wheels begin to turn, it's business as usual. What I am
>getting at is this: He has nothing but contempt for you, and you don't
>even know it. That's why I feel obligated to inform you that the
>biggest difference between me and Edgar is that Edgar wants to deprive
>people of dignity and autonomy. I, on the other hand, want to draw a
>picture of what we conceive of under the word "anarchoindividualist".
>He is terrified that there might be an absolute reality outside
>himself, a reality that is what it is, regardless of his wishes,
>theories, hopes, daydreams, or decrees. Far too many people tolerate
>Edgar's perorations as long as they're presented in small, seemingly
>harmless doses. What these people fail to realize, however, is that I
>have a New Year's resolution for Edgar: He should pick up a book
>before he jumps to the unconscionable conclusion that those of us who
>oppose him would rather run than fight. He is always prating about how
>his mistakes are always someone else's fault. (He used to say that he
>is known for his sound judgment, unerring foresight, and sagacious
>adaptation of means to ends, but the evidence is too contrary, so he's
>given up on that score.)
>
>It would be bad enough if Edgar's compeers were merely trying to
>overthrow democratic political systems. But their attempts to attack
>everyone else's insinuations are just plain maladroit. I really feel
>that Edgar has insulted everyone with even the slightest moral
>commitment. He obviously has none, or he wouldn't waste everyone
>else's time. I'll try not to dwell on this, but even when the facts
>don't fit, he sometimes tries to use them anyway. He still maintains,
>for instance, that we ought to worship the most insufferable flakes
>I've ever seen as folk heroes.
>
>If Edgar would abandon his name-calling and false dichotomies, it
>would be much easier for me to convince nefarious, fastidious
>simpletons to stop supporting Edgar and tolerating his biases. Sticks
>and stones may break my bones, but the ethnocentrism "debate" is not a
>debate. It is a harangue, a politically motivated, brilliantly
>publicized, morally repugnant attack on progressive ideas. If we
>dispense justice, then the sea of jingoism, on which Edgar so heavily
>relies, will begin to dry up. His intolerance for those assumed to
>hold different value systems from his is so great, so mentally
>debilitating, so handicapping to Edgar's thought processes that
>Edgar's reasoning is circular and therefore invalid. In other words,
>he always begins an argument with his conclusion (e.g., that this is
>the best of all possible worlds and that he is the best of all
>possible people) and therefore -- not surprisingly -- he always
>arrives at that very conclusion. It's only rational to think, "Giving
>Edgar the means to palm off our present situation as the compelling
>ground for worldwide terrorism is like supplying the gun to your own
>robber". But it doesn't stop there.
>
>My purpose is to take personal action and hinder the power of impudent
>crooks like him. Most of the battles I fight along the way are
>exigencies, not long-range educational activities. Nevertheless, he
>has a strategy. His strategy is to acquire public acceptance of his
>demented perceptions. Wherever you encounter that strategy, you are
>dealing with Edgar. Speaking of muddleheaded shirkers, it can be
>distinguished only with difficulty which of his surrogates act out of
>inner stupidity or incompetence and which only pretend to for whatever
>lame-brained, superficial reason. Do I blame society for this? No, I
>blame Edgar.
>
>When was the last time you heard him mention that he can't, for the
>life of him, understand why anyone would prefer so much as one minute
>of solitude to the company of a truculent gang of cantankerous
>bureaucrats? Probably never. That's why his reason is not true reason.
>It does not seek the truth, but only mad answers, pea-brained
>resolutions to conflicts.
>
>Some people have compared imprudent ratbags to appalling nutcases. I
>would like to take the comparison one step further. From
>secret-handshake societies meeting at "the usual place" to back-door
>admissions committees, Edgar's drones have always found a way to
>spread dissolute views. We can't let laughable prophets of autism ram
>Edgar's teachings down our throats. Now that that's cleared up, I'll
>continue with what I was saying before, that I am aware that many
>people may object to the severity of my language. But is there no
>cause for severity? Naturally, I contend that there is, because his
>mind is hermetically sealed against fresh air from the real world. So
>what's the connection between that and his sound bites? The connection
>is that anyone who hasn't been living in a cave with his eyes shut and
>his ears plugged knows that if the past is any indication of the
>future, Edgar will once again attempt to twist our entire societal
>valuation of love and relationships beyond all insanity.
>
>Impolitic, audacious urban guerrillas are sharply focused on an
>immediate goal: to turn once-flourishing neighborhoods into zones of
>violence, decay, and moral disregard. It's easy to tell if Edgar is
>lying. If his lips are moving, he's lying. If the human race is to
>survive on this planet, we will have to enable all people to achieve
>their potential as human beings. Although the themes in Edgar's words
>are limited, Edgar's ultimata are simply the result of vested
>interests striking back at a group whose actions in support of
>religious freedom, social reform, and government accountability have
>cut through those vested interests. Let me rephrase that: If Edgar can
>one day tap into the national resurgence of overt corporatism, then
>the long descent into night is sure to follow. Trapped by the
>cognitive dissonance engendered by hard evidence and common sense, he
>feels obligated to fix blame for social stress, economic loss, or loss
>of political power on a target group whose constructed guilt provides
>a simplistic explanation in a revolting attempt to justify his ploys.
>Oddly enough, Edgar's worshippers compress Edgar's expedients into
>brief, highly reductive, definitive-sounding phrases, easily memorized
>and easily expressed. Stranger still, Edgar coins polysyllabic
>neologisms to make his ravings sound like they're actually important.
>In fact, his treatises are filled to the brim with words that have yet
>to appear in any accepted dictionary. In closing, all that I ask is
>that you join me to stop Edgar and perform noble deeds.
>
>Multifarious avenues of approach vie for attention as potential
>retorts to Edgar's abusive fairy tales. The following paragraphs are
>intended as an initial, open-ended sketch of how bad the current
>situation is. To those readers who believe that the best way to reduce
>cognitive dissonance and restore homeostasis to one's psyche is to
>trivialize the issue, you have not been paying attention. He wants to
>dump effluent into creeks, lakes, streams, and rivers. You know what
>groups have historically wanted to do the same thing? Fascists and
>Nazis.
>
>Edgar's intimations always follow the same pattern. He puts the
>desired twist on the actual facts, ignores inconvenient facts, and
>invents as many new "facts" as necessary to convince us that he is
>beyond reproach. If you look soberly and carefully at the evidence all
>around you, you will surely find that if we contradict Edgar, we are
>labelled blathering flakes. If we capitulate, however, we forfeit our
>freedoms. Without a doubt, however, we find among narrow and
>uneducated minds the belief that this is the best of all possible
>worlds and that he is the best of all possible people. This belief is
>due to a basic confusion, which can be cleared up simply by stating
>that you might say, "Mere association tends to lend credence to
>Edgar's drones because people assume they can't be that bad if a
>respected person is associated with them." Fine, I agree. But there
>are a series of options I could pursue, if necessary. The sooner he
>comes to grips with that reality, the better for all of us. Clearly,
>if Edgar is going to shower shiftless, fatuous flag burners with
>undeserved praise, then he should at least have the self-respect to
>remind himself of a few things: First, if we let him cause (or at
>least contribute to) a variety of social ills, civilization itself
>will fall. And second, I, hardheaded cynic that I am, can't follow his
>pretzel logic. I do, however, know that Edgar should know better than
>to sow the seeds of discord. So don't feed me any phony baloney about
>how foolhardy gits are more deserving of honor than our nation's war
>heroes. That's just not true. Given Edgar's current mind-set, Edgar
>has never gotten ahead because of his hard work or innovative ideas.
>Rather, all of Edgar's successes are due to kickbacks, bribes, black
>market double-dealing, outright thuggery, and unsavory political
>intrigue. Lastly, Edgar has managed to elude any direct ties to
>specific acts of negligence -- no small feat considering his history.
I had the same complaint about a guy named Biff.
--
This post brought to you courtesy of the Beet Man!
tally.savalas.bahn
<i-eat-beets-an...@juno.com> wrote:
>And second, I, hardheaded cynic that I am, can't follow his
>>pretzel logic. I do, however, know that Edgar should know better than
>>to sow the seeds of discord. So don't feed me any phony baloney about
>>how foolhardy gits are more deserving of honor than our nation's war
>>heroes. That's just not true. Given Edgar's current mind-set, Edgar
>>has never gotten ahead because of his hard work or innovative ideas.
>>Rather, all of Edgar's successes are due to kickbacks, bribes, black
>>market double-dealing, outright thuggery, and unsavory political
>>intrigue. Lastly, Edgar has managed to elude any direct ties to
>>specific acts of negligence -- no small feat considering his history.
>
>I had the same complaint about a guy named Biff.
>
biff??... biff MULLINS?!?!
The Beet Man
<lrq6dusc6b7ft38k7...@4ax.com>, tally.savalas.bahn
<spud-nospa...@mr-potatohead.com> wrote:
Biff Thomas. He's Biff Mullins' brother.