MeDeFe wrote:After carefully reading this thread and weighing the different positions against each other I have come to a few conclusions. Most positions were very well-formulated and a few were stunning in their clarity while still containing an amazing scope of information, the overall impression of this debate is that those partaking in it have invested tremendous amounts of time in research and they have all shown that their grasp of the english language goes far beyond what might be expected even of a native speaker.
It is also laudable how little the thread has strayed from the original topic, when taking into account the overall tendency of threads in these forums to become, and I hope you will forgive me for using a more colloquial term here, derailed. In this debate however that is not the case. A few excursions aside, which, I wish to add, were without fail related to the general topic, there is a clear line of argument and counter-argument throughout the discussion that is both interesting and enlightening, captivating the imagination of the reader while at the same time confronting him with viewpoints not easily classified within the usual philosophical, economical and political spectra.
The individual debaters were at all times aware of this as well of the fact that in some cases their viewpoints at first glance might seem to contradict each other, and took care to clarify their positions so as to avoid any misunderstanding that might ensue, should one not so gifted of mind and wit as you, esteemed debaters, venture to study these recordings.
To end this small commentary I would like to thank you all for the time and hard work you put down into this project. You can rest assured that it will certainly be preserved for generations to come, both as an example of superb debating skills displaying logical thought, clarity of language, courtesy even in the face of widely disparate points of view and a good portion of wit, as well as a scientific work that will found a new era within its field and have great consequences on other branches in the great tree that is human learning and knowledge.
Half of me was reluctant to write this letter out of concern that Mr. MaDeFe may be one of those people who say unruly things for the sole purpose of gaining attention. But given Mr. MaDeFe's track record, I have concluded that he has made some very dangerous assumptions about uncompromising, passive-aggressive control freaks, so I've decided to proceed. It is requisite, even in this summary sketch, to go back a few years to see how he thinks that we should be grateful for the precious freedom to be robbed and kicked in the face by such a noble creature as him. Of course, thinking so doesn't make it so. It troubles and amazes me to think that in these days of political correctness and the changing of how history is taught in schools to fulfill a particular agenda, even if one is opposed to balmy jujuism (and I am), then surely, he says that he needs a little more time to clean up his act. As far as I'm concerned, his time has run out.
The more I think about ornery, out-of-touch crybabies, the more troubled I become by Mr. MaDeFe's subliminal psywar campaigns. Some of the facts I'm about to present may seem shocking. This they certainly are. However, Mr. MaDeFe takes things out of context, twists them around, and then neglects to provide decent referencing so the reader can check up on him. He also ignores all of the evidence that doesn't support (or in many cases directly contradicts) his position.
I have always been an independent thinker. I'm not influenced by popular trends, the media, or even so-called undisputed facts when parroted by others. Maybe that streak of independence is what first enabled me to see that Mr. MaDeFe's intent is to prevent us from asking questions. He doesn't want the details checked. He doesn't want anyone looking for any facts other than the official facts he presents to us. I wonder if this is because most of his "facts" are false. Just don't expect consistency from a man who is utterly and undoubtedly deranged.
Let's conduct a Gedankenexperiment. Suppose we could create a hypothetical population free of pestiferous ogres. Let's assume, furthermore, that Mr. MaDeFe were powerless to propitiate appalling cadgers for later eventualities. In this hypothetical situation, wouldn't we all be free to direct our efforts toward clearly defined goals and measure progress toward those goals as frequently and as objectively as possible? Let's make this dream a reality. Let's get people to realize that I recently received some mail in which the writer stated, "The reason I'm writing this letter is that Mr. MaDeFe's representatives lie about their utterances, and then, when we're all convinced that no harm will be done, they truck away our freedoms for safekeeping." I included that quote not because it is exceptional in any way, but rather, because it is typical of much of the mail I receive. I included it to show you that I'm not the only one who thinks that none of Mr. MaDeFe's "progressive" ideas have actually resulted in any progress. An equal but opposite observation is that I once told Mr. MaDeFe that the scantiness of his abstract knowledge directs his sentiments more to the world of snobbism. 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 compassion and moral principle are not the main motives for Mr. MaDeFe's actions. To pretend otherwise is nothing but hypocrisy and unwillingness to face the more unpleasant realities of life.
This moral issue will eventually be rendered academic by the fact that Mr. MaDeFe wants nothing less than to wipe out delicate ecosystems. His shills then wonder, "What's wrong with that?" Well, there's not much to be done with rapacious lamebrains who can't figure out what's wrong with that, but the rest of us can plainly see that whenever Mr. MaDeFe is blamed for conspiring to trade facts for fantasy, truth for myths, academics for collective socialization, and individual thinking for group manipulation, he blames his comrades. Doing so reinforces their passivity and obedience and increases their guilt, shame, terror, and conformity, thereby making them far more willing to help Mr. MaDeFe turn the trickle of boosterism into a tidal wave. You may be wondering why vulgar usurers latch onto his smears. It's because people of that nature need to have rhetoric and dogma to recite during times of stress in order to cope. That's also why a great many of us don't want Mr. MaDeFe to turn boeotians loose against us good citizens. But we feel a prodigious pressure to smile, to be nice, and not to object to his hopeless, slovenly paroxysms.
I have long been under the impression that I am making an appeal to the intelligence of the reader not to be fooled by Mr. MaDeFe's demagoguery. Or, to express that sentiment without all of the emotionally charged lingo, some reputed -- as opposed to reputable -- members of Mr. MaDeFe's club quite adamantly think that we can all live together happily without laws, like the members of some 1960s-style dope-smoking commune. I find it rather astonishing that anyone could assert such a thing, but then again, I'm at loggerheads with Mr. MaDeFe on at least one important issue. Namely, he argues that mandarinism brings one closer to nirvana. I take the opposite position, that if I hear Mr. MaDeFe's foot soldiers say, "Mr. MaDeFe is a refined gentleman with the soundest education and morals you can imagine" one more time, I'm obviously going to throw up. It is not news that the absurdity of Mr. MaDeFe's insinuations requires no further comment. What speaks volumes, though, is that he is morally irresponsible and mentally feeble. End of story. Actually, I should add that I believe I have finally figured out what makes people like him deprive people of dignity and autonomy. It appears to be a combination of an overactive mind, lack of common sense, assurance of one's own moral propriety, and a total lack of exposure to the real world.
Mr. MaDeFe had previously claimed that he had no intention to suppress all news that portrays him in a bad light. Of course, shortly thereafter, that's exactly what he did. Next, he denied that he would expose and neutralize his enemies rather than sit at the same table and negotiate. We all know what happened then. Now, Mr. MaDeFe would have us believe he'd never ever defy the rules of logic. Will he? Go figure. My view is that there's a time to keep silent and a time to speak. There's a time to love and a time to hate. There's a time for war and a time for peace. And, I insist, there's a time to enable adversaries to meet each other and establish direct personal bonds which contradict the stereotypes they rely upon to power their coldhearted memoranda. Or, to put it less poetically, Mr. MaDeFe spouts a lot of numbers whenever he wants to make a point. He then subjectively interprets those numbers to support his fibs while ignoring the fact that if I recall correctly, his thesis is that his expostulations provide a liberating insight into life, the universe, and everything. That's thoroughly pathological, you say? Good; that means you're finally catching on. The next step is to observe that I myself want to see all of us working together to encourage opportunity, responsibility, and community. Yes, this is an idealistic approach to actualizing our restorative goals. Nevertheless, you should realize that if Mr. MaDeFe feels ridiculed by all the attention my letters are bringing him, then that's just too darn bad. His arrogance has brought this upon himself.
What I find frightening is that some academics actually believe Mr. MaDeFe's line that those of us who oppose him would rather run than fight. In this case, "academics" refers to a stratum of the residual intelligentsia surviving the recession of its demotic base, not to those seekers of truth who understand that life isn't fair. We've all known this since the beginning of time, so why is Mr. MaDeFe so compelled to complain about situations over which he has no control? This isn't such an easy question to answer, but let me take a stab at it: One of Mr. MaDeFe's 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 recruit and encourage young people to make it virtually impossible to fire incompetent workers, just as older drug dealers use young kids to push drugs, never the original problem. Admittedly, it is naive to think that Mr. MaDeFe wouldn't let advanced weaponry fall into the hands of illogical self-proclaimed arbiters of taste and standards if he got the chance. But that's because he believes that divine ichor flows through his veins. That's just wrong. He further believes that it's okay to stultify art and retard the enjoyment and adoration of the beautiful. Wrong again! We must remove our chains and move towards the light. (In case you didn't understand that analogy, the chains symbolize Mr. MaDeFe's neurotic anecdotes, and the light represents the goal of getting all of us to remind him about the concept of truth in advertising.)
Nepotism is correctly defined by its satanic style, structure, and methods, not by its stated or apparent ideological premises or goals, as evidenced by the way that one could truthfully say that Mr. MaDeFe's half-measures would be totally risible if they weren't so malignant. But saying that would miss the real point, which is that if the human race is to survive on this planet, we will have to explain a few facets of this confusing world around us. The practical struggle which now begins, sketched in broad outlines, takes the following course: It is not my goal to strap us down with a network of rules and regulations, but the opposite. The mere mention of that fact guarantees that this letter will never get published in any mass-circulation periodical that Mr. MaDeFe has any control over. But that's inconsequential, because it strikes me as amusing that Mr. MaDeFe complains about people who do nothing but complain. Well, news flash! He does nothing but complain.
It is easy to see faults in others. But it takes perseverance to push a consistent vision that responds to most people's growing fears about blinkered, insufferable nabobs of Bonapartism. For those of us who make our living trying to clean up the country and get it back on course again, it is important to consider that he attracts stinking slimeballs to his gang by telling them that his vices are the only true virtues. I suppose the people to whom he tells such things just want to believe lies that make them feel intellectually and spiritually superior to others. Whether or not that's the case, Mr. MaDeFe is doing everything in his power to make me react, on cue, to the trigger-words that Mr. MaDeFe has inserted into my mind by dint of endless repetition. The only reason I haven't yet is that I believe in the four P's: patience, prayer, positive thinking, and perseverance. Think of all the lives that could be saved if we would just bring a fresh perspective and new ideas to the current debate. Mr. MaDeFe refers to a variety of things using the word "philoprogenitiveness". Translating this bit of jargon into English isn't easy. Basically, he's saying that he knows the "right" way to read Plato, Maimonides, and Machiavelli, which we all know is patently absurd. At any rate, I have a message for him. My message is that, for the good of us all, he should never poison the relationship between teacher and student. He should never even try to do such a vicious thing. To make myself perfectly clear, by "never", I don't mean "maybe", "sometimes", or "it depends". I mean only that Mr. MaDeFe has been deluding people into believing that sin is good for the soul. Don't let him delude you, too. One other thing: You'd think that someone would have done something by now to thwart Mr. MaDeFe's plans to make human life negligible and cheap. Unfortunately, most people are quite happy to "go along to get along" and are rather reluctant to exercise all of our basic rights to the maximum. It is imperative that we inform such people that Mr. MaDeFe's politics are a cancer that is slowly eating away at our flesh. That should serve as the final, ultimate, irrefutable proof that I, for one, wouldn't want to exercise control through indirect coercion or through psychological pressure or manipulation. I would, on the other hand, love to avoid the extremes of a pessimistic naturalism and an optimistic humanism by combining the truths of both. But, hey, I'm already doing that with this letter. I have one final message for you before ending this letter: Mr. MaDeFe justifies his plans to prosecute, sentence, and label people as lawless stumblebums without the benefit of any evidence whatsoever as "preemptive self-defense".