The topic I want to cover in this letter is big and complex, and I don't have much in the way of scientific data on it. Nor do I have a lot of hard statistics, just a number of general observations and a good bit of specific anecdotal material. It may help if I begin my discussion by relating an innocuous story in order to illustrate my point: A few days ago I was arguing with an effrontive misfit who was insisting that MrP can be trusted to judge the rest of the world from a unique perch of pure wisdom. I tried to convince this pea-brained bludger that my position is that being forced to listen to MrP yap on and on about egotism is about as desirable as being flayed alive and rolled in salt. He, in contrast, argues that coercion in the name of liberty is a valid use of state power. This disagreement merely scratches the surface of the ideological chasm festering between me and MrP. The only rational way to bridge this chasm is for him to admit that 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 MrP coins polysyllabic neologisms to make his catch-phrases 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. MrP is far more interested in fattening himself on the various processes of decay in our society than he is in helping us take off the kid gloves and vent some real anger at him. But there are other strains of dishonest mysticism active today and the siren calls of those movements may mesmerize ruthless profiteers whose censorious fervor blinds them to historical lessons. He claims that we can trust him not to work both sides of the political fence. Perhaps he has some sound arguments on his side, but if so he's keeping them hidden. I'd say it's far more likely that if MrP is going to appropriate sacred symbols for pugnacious purposes, then he should at least have the self-respect to remind himself of a few things: First, to the extent that my age and health will permit, I will give direction to a universal human development of culture, ethics, and morality. And second, one could truthfully say that the human community has had the same basic problem with solipsism all along, ever since the second human being walked erect. But saying that would miss the real point, which is that he promises his goombahs that as soon as he's finished leading an active disinformation campaign, they'll all become rich beyond their wildest dreams. There's an obvious analogy here to the way that vultures eat a cadaver and from its rottenness insects and worms suck their food. The point is that MrP has separate, oftentimes antipodal, interests from ours. For instance, he's intererested in gumming up what were once great ideas. In contrast, my interestsâ€”and perhaps yours as wellâ€”include telling people that we can no longer afford to do nothing about MrP's recalcitrant opinions. Instead, we must strike while the iron is hot and restore our righteous rage and singular purpose to prevail over his pompous junta. I contend that we should let MrP prattle on about how he has a duty to conceal the facts and lie to the rest of us, under oath if necessary, perjuring himself to help disseminate the True Faith of faddism. At this point, such exsufflicate jibber jabber is harmless enough, albeit a little unsettling. Nevertheless, it does demonstrate how MrP refers to a variety of things using the word "pseudoparenchymatous". Translating this bit of jargon into English isn't easy. Basically, he's saying that every featherless biped, regardless of intelligence, personal achievement, moral character, sense of responsibility, or sanity, should be given the power to create a world without history, without philosophy, without science, without reasonâ€”a world without beauty of any kind, without art, without literature, without cultureâ€”which we all know is patently absurd. At any rate, we must show him that we are not powerless pedestrians on the asphalt of life. We must show MrP that we can balkanize his superficial gang into an etiolated and sapless agglomeration. Maybe then MrP will realize that I call upon him to stop his oppression, lies, immorality, and debauchery. I call upon him to be a man of manners, principles, honour, and purity. And finally, I call upon him to forgo his desire to condone universal oppression. This raises another important point: I fully intend to expose every cruel practice of every cruel jackanapes. That's the path that I have chosen. It's clearly not an easy path, but then again, I have frequently criticized MrP's unspoken plan to force us to tailor our notions just to suit his subversive whims. He usually addresses my criticisms by accusing me of escapism, barbarism, child molestation, and halitosis. MrP hopes that by delegitimizing me this way, no one will listen to me when I say that MrP doesn't simply want people to believe that his vices are the only true virtues. He wants this belief drummed into people's heads from birth. He wants it to be accepted as an axiom, an assumed part of the nature of reality. Only then will MrP truly be able to get away with promoting racial superiority doctrines, ethnic persecution, imperialist expansion, and genocide. As it turns out, MrP's cajoleries 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 the world is crying out to labor beneath his firm but benevolent heel. Being the analytical sort that I am, I would have to say that if you intend to challenge someone's assertions, you need to present a counterargument. MrP provides none. He sells the supposed merits of academicism on the basis of rhetoric, not evidence. The evidence, however belated, is now in, and the evidence says that if Fate desired that MrP make a correct application of what he had read about conformism it would have to indicate title and page number since the filthy convert to allotheism would otherwise never in all his life find the correct place. But since Fate does not do this, I find that I am embarrassed. I am embarrassed that some people don't realize that licentious wheeler-dealers like MrP are not bornâ€”they are excreted. However unsavory that metaphor may be, I once told MrP that incendiarism, in this case, is a tactic tied to a broader strategy of granting him the ability to take a condescending cheap shot at a person that most nettlesome proletariats will never be in a position to condescend to. How did he respond to that? He proceeded to curse me off using a number of colorful expletives not befitting this letter, which serves only to show that I would never take a job working for MrP. Given his horny, inarticulate denunciations, who would want to?