In this letter, I'm not going to argue that in a country like ours where fanaticism, triumphalism, and vigilantism run rampant, we need laws to help enforce behavior that ought to be performed out of common sense, decency, and tolerance. Nor am I going to argue that information about Pocket's chthonic treatises is there for those who seek it. I'm not going to argue those factors because they're irrelevant. Instead, I will say only that this kind of thing makes me wonder whether we've ever moved past foul caciquism at all. Let me start by stressing that I am not attempting to suppress anyone's opinions, nor do I intend to demean him personally for his beliefs or worldviews. But I, speaking as someone who is not a pusillanimous pococurante, do claim that I must stand together and push a consistent vision that responds to most people's growing fears about mawkish yo-yos.
It strikes me as amusing that Pocket complains about people who do nothing but complain. Well, news flash! He does nothing but complain. It's unstable for him to cause people to betray one another and hate one another. Or perhaps I should say, it's reprehensible. I don't get it: Will the world ever be free of volage-brained, mendacious paranoiacs like Pocket? I mean, if Pocket's helpers get their way, society as we know it will cease to exist. But you knew that already. So let me add that Pocket's invidious, combative epigrams often resemble an inverted fairy tale in that the triumph of innocence comes at the start and the ugly sisters of mercantalism and Machiavellianism enter on stage in triumph for the final curtain.
Although I can find only circumstantial evidence of misconduct and rule violations, Pocket keeps insisting that he should reinvent and manipulate words and criminalize ideas because "it's the right thing to do". To me, there is something fundamentally wrong with that story. Maybe it's that Pocket has created for himself premier victim status. He uses this status to shield himself from scrutiny whenever he's caught delivering an additional blow to dignity and self-worth. Pocket's victim status also means that Pocket's rivals have to be cautious when suggesting that I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, his equivocations are evil. They're evil because they cause global warming; they make your teeth fall out; they give you spots; they incite nuclear war. And, as if that weren't enough, Pocket has a natural talent for complaining. He can find any aspect of life and whine about it for hours upon hours.
There exists a concerted, well-funded, and aggressive anti-science campaign whose charter is to put the public peace perpetually in danger. Pocket supports this savage campaign's activities by putting increased disruptive powers in the hands of coprophagous, immature slanderers. If you're interested in the finagling, double-dealing, chicanery, cheating, cajolery, cunning, rascality, and abject villainy by which he may borrow money and spend it on programs that stir up one part of the population against another before the year is over, then you'll want to consider the following very carefully. You'll especially want to consider that Pocket's hatchet jobs manifest themselves in two phases. Phase one: propitiate the most mentally deficient deviationists I've ever seen for later eventualities. Phase two: prevent us from getting in touch with our feelings. Pocket's spokesmen have been trained, organized, and motivated to goad the most bumptious nutters you'll ever see into hurling epithets at Pocket's nemeses. The destruction of the Tower of Babel, be it a literal truth, an allegory, or a mere story based upon cultural archetypes, illustrates this truth plainly.
We mustn't let Pocket unfurl the flag of Tartuffism. That would be like letting the Mafia serve as a new national police force in Italy. If his plan to plague our minds is to be discouraged then the wisest course of action is to criticize the obvious incongruities presented by Pocket and his sympathizers. Before we start down that road I ought to remind you that he claims that the Scriptures are responsible for his morbid thoughts and fancies. This eisegetical fantasy is not only contemptible, but it fails to consider that Pocket's jackals have been running around recently trying to force us to adopt rigid social roles that compromise our inner code of ethics. Meanwhile, Pocket has been preparing to create a factitious demand for his dangerous opinions. The whole episode smacks of a carefully orchestrated operation. If you ask me, I have a tendency to report the more sensational things that Pocket is up to, the more shocking things, things like how he wants to subvert time-tested societal norms. And I realize the difficulty that the average person has in coming to grips with that, but he claims to have data supporting his assertion that he's above everyone else. Naturally, he insists that he can't actually show us that data—for some unspecified reason, of course. My guess is that he's hiding something. Maybe he's hiding the fact that prudence is no vice. Cowardice—especially his termagant form of it—is. I close this letter along the same lines it opened on: Pocket's plans for the future are often disregarded merely as yellow-bellied and are consequently not treated as the serious assaults on liberty and freedom that they undeniably are.
