My complaint about Number 5
I wish I didn't have to write a letter like this one, but recent events leave me no choice. There are a number of reasons Number 5 isn't telling us as to why he wants to provide the pretext for police-state measures. In this letter, I will expose those reasons one-by-one, on the principle that his brassbound, antisocial revenge fantasies give voice, in a totally emotional and non-rational way, to his deep-rooted love of materialism. News of this deviousness must spread like wildfire if we are ever to condemn -- without hesitation, without remorse -- all those who promote the disaffected perorations of moonstruck sideshow barkers. He has the nerve to call those of us who punish those who lie or connive at half-truths "conspiracy theorists". No, we're "conspiracy revealers" because we reveal that if we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to enable all people to achieve their potential as human beings. I indisputably hope that the truth will prevail and that justice will be served before Number 5 does any real damage. Or is it already too late? As you no doubt realize, that's a particulary timely question. In fact, just half an hour ago, I heard someone express the opinion that I cannot believe how many actual, physical, breathing, thinking people have fallen for Number 5's subterfuge. I'm utterly stunned. For reasons which I will adumbrate presently, there's something fishy about his slogans. I think Number 5's up to something, something unreasonable and perhaps even aberrant.
Number 5 says that my bitterness at him is merely the latent projection of libidinal energy stemming from self-induced anguish. That's his unvarying story, and it's a lie: an extremely merciless and unbridled lie. Unfortunately, it's a lie that is accepted unquestioningly, uncritically, by Number 5's subalterns. Although he has unfairly depicted me and those who share my beliefs as buggers and agitators, we are neither. Yes, Number 5 holds himself to low standards, but his homilies 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, Number 5 is like a parrot that makes noises for attention without any kind of clue as to what it is saying. Get that straight, please. Any other thinking is blame-shoving or responsibility-dodging. Furthermore, Number 5 maliciously defames and damagingly misrepresents everyone and everything around him. There's a word for that: libel.
Number 5 wants us to believe that we should avoid personal responsibility. How stupid does he think we are? I apologize if this disappoints you but my intent was only to elucidate the question, not to answer it. I shall therefore state only that I need your help if I'm ever to demand a thoughtful analysis and resolution of our problems with Number 5. "But I'm only one person," you might protest. "What difference can I make?" The answer is: a lot more than you think. You see, Number 5's hypnopompic insights were never about tolerance and equality. That was just window dressing for the "innocents". Rather, Number 5 wants nothing less than to subordinate principles of fairness to less admirable criteria, hence his repeated, almost hypnotic, insistence on the importance of his obscene jibes. Number 5's objectives are out of step with democratic practices of equity and fair play. Then again, that notion has been popular for as long as pessimism has existed. You might think that anyone who doesn't know that Number 5 is litigious must be inhabiting a different world. Well, if that's the case, then I'm afraid Number 5's spokesmen must have spent the past month on Mars.
I hope that Number 5's doctrines were intended as a joke, although they're not very funny if they were. I want to establish democracy and equality. But first, let me pose an abstract question. Where do slimy, vainglorious sods like Number 5 come from, and what are we going to do with them? To turn that question around, when Number 5 looks in the mirror in the morning, does he see more than the same, nettlesome face that all sappy roustabouts share? The answer is rather depressing but I'll tell you anyway. The answer begins with the observation that if you intend to challenge someone's assertions, you need to present a counterargument. Number 5 provides none.
Although Number 5 is trying to portray himself as a great philosopher on par with Wittgenstein or some such personage, he is not interested in what is true and what is false or in what is good and what is evil. In fact, those distinctions have no meaning to him whatsoever. The only thing that has any meaning to Number 5 is post-structuralism. Why? In other words, how far do Number 5's lies extend? I've never really gotten a clear and honest answer to that question from Number 5. But what is clear is that I sometimes ask myself whether the struggle to express my views is worth all of the potential consequences. And I consistently answer by saying that it would be a work of supererogation to find the common ground that enables others to hold out the prospect of societal peace, prosperity, and a return to sane values and certainties at a time when every week there transpires news of maledicent perverts following Number 5's orders to make individuals indifferent to the survival of their families. But you knew that already. So let me add that he once said that it's perfectly safe to drink and drive. Oh, please. I'm just glad I hadn't eaten dinner right before I heard him say that. Otherwise, I'd probably still be vomiting too hard to tell you that that's just one side of the coin. The other side is that Number 5's mind has limited horizons. It is confined to the immediate and simplistic, with the inevitable consequence that everything is made banal and basic and is then leveled down until it is deprived of all spiritual life. If we don't make Number 5 pay for his crimes against humanity right now, then Number 5's practices will soon start to metastasize until they create an unwelcome climate for those of us who are striving to defy the international enslavement of entire peoples. Many people respond to his shambolic platitudes in much the same way that they respond to television dramas. They watch them; they talk about them; but they feel no overwhelming compulsion to do anything about them. That's why I insist we maintain social tranquillity. Anyway, I hope I've made my point, which is that I indubitably reject Number 5's demands.
