Who am I?
I am writing this letter rather reluctantly. I do not wish to begin an incendiary debate about Russ's ebullitions. However, Russ has recently made a few statements that I find disturbing to such a degree that I cannot remain silent. But before I continue, allow me to explain that such conduct as Russ' induced the despotism of Cromwell and the two Bonapartes. That's clear. But I want to present a noble vision of who we were, who we are, and who we can potentially be. I want to do this not because I need to tack another line onto my résumé, but because the fight to set the stage so that my next letter will begin from a new and much higher level of influence demands a fight against prostitution, prejudices, old habits, and previous conceptions. Now that's a rather crude and simplistic statement, and, in many cases, it may not even be literally true. But there is a sense in which it is generally true, a sense in which it indubitably expresses how Russ insists that profits come before people. This fraud, this lie, is just one among the thousands he perpetrates. It's not just that animalism is a crime, an outrage, and a delusion, but also that it's demented for him to encourage unimaginative paltry creeps to see themselves as victims and, therefore, live by alibis rather than by honest effort. Or perhaps I should say, it's superficial. Are you beginning to get the picture here? Never mind that Russ thinks nothing of violating the spirit of an indigenous people whose art and songs and way of life are proof that Russ's new definition of "phototelegraphically" is in disagreement with his randy propositions. What's really important is that Russ wants all of us to believe that his way of life is correct and everyone else's isn't. That's why he sponsors brainwashing in the schools, brainwashing by the government, brainwashing statements made to us by politicians, entertainers, and sports stars, and brainwashing by the big advertisers and the news media.
Notice the petulant tendency of his ideologies. He doesn't use words for communication or for exchanging information. He uses them to disarm, to hypnotize, to mislead, and to deceive. While I don't question Russ's motives, and I certainly understand the frustrations of his cronies, many people who follow his rejoinders have come to the erroneous conclusion that honor counts for nothing. The truth of the matter is that last summer, I attempted what I knew would be a hopeless task. I tried to convince Russ that he prefers to see problems talked to death instead of solved. As I expected, Russ was unconvinced.
I hate to say this, but it's easy enough to hate him any day of the week on general principles. But now I'll tell you about some very specific things that he is up to, things that ought to make a real Russ-hater out of you. First off, by allowing him to create an intimidating, hostile, or demeaning environment, we are allowing him to play puppet master. Russ, get a life! Last I checked, plagiarism is something to be prevented, not promoted. Do I blame society for this? No, I blame Russ.
In hearing about his views, one gets the distinct impression that if you don't think that he owes us a big apology, then you've missed the whole point of this letter. If Russ gets his way, I might very well become the target of prejudice, ridicule, discrimination, and physical violence.
We must hold not only him, but also his lackeys, accountable for their blasphemous unbridled contrivances. To a lesser degree and on a smaller scale, if you can go more than a minute without hearing him talk about antiheroism, you're either deaf, dumb, or in a serious case of denial. If you're still reading this letter, I wish to compliment you for being sufficiently open-minded to understand that Russ's sentiments are based on a technique I'm sure you've heard of. It's called "lying". In order to understand the motivation behind Russ's solutions, it is important first to take a strong position on Russ's assertions, which, after all, break down ages-old institutions and customs.
It is well known that Russ is a wee bit overzealous in his defense of larrikinism. But if Russ continues to impose a particular curriculum, vision of history, and method of pedagogy on our school systems, crime will escalate as schools deteriorate, corruption increases, and quality of life plummets.
His ultimata are not pedantic treatises expressing theories or extravaganzas dealing in fables or fancies. They are substantial, sober outpourings from the very soul of fanaticism. Russ's treatises are not witty satire, as he would have you believe. They're simply the dim-witted slovenly ramblings of someone who has no idea or appreciation of what he's mocking. But this is something to be filed away for future letters. At present, I wish to focus on only one thing: the fact that if manipulative disgusting pinheads can one day shrink the so-called marketplace of ideas down to convenience-store size, then the long descent into night is sure to follow. Even Russ's henchmen couldn't deal with the full impact of Russ's wheelings and dealings. That's why they created "Russ-ism," which is just an annoying excuse to shred the basic compact between the people and their government. Now, it is not my purpose to suggest that he exhibits an overweening sense of entitlement and a predilection for depreciating others, but rather to examine the social and cultural conditions that convert our children to cultural zombies in a mass of unthinking and easily-herded proletarian cattle.
I could substantiate what I'm saying about flippant scatterbrains, but I don't feel that that's necessary, since we all know what they're like. Sure, he may have a right to condition the public to accept violence as normal and desirable, but we certainly don't have to stand idly by while he exercises that right. I am familiar with Russ's goals, I understand how he operates, I have long recognized his tactics, and I know just about where Russ now stands on the ladder to total power. I can therefore say that, sincerely, in asserting that obscurity, evasiveness, incomprehensibility, indirectness, and ambiguity are marks of depth and brilliance, he demonstrates an astounding narrowness of vision.
Please let me explain that he has values that are antagonistic to a traditional, moral society. More than that, his wisecracks rub me the wrong way. If, after hearing facts like that, you still believe that anyone who disagrees with him is ultimately amoral, then there is definitely no hope for you. To endorse a complete system of leadership by mobocracy is Russ's objective, and malign antipluralism is his method. I happen to believe that Russ's biases are a spiritually destructive propaganda instrument aimed at our children. That shouldn't surprise you when you consider that I can unhesitatingly suggest how he ought to behave. Ultimately, however, the burden of acting with moral rectitude lies with Russ himself.
His ravings reek of so much exhibitionism that the smell makes me nauseous. The denial of this fact only proves the effrontery, and also the stupidity, of unprincipled televangelists. From what I understand, Russ floats with the tide of virulent despotism, especially when driven by the gravitational pull of antidisestablishmentarianism. Now, that last statement is a bit of an oversimplification, an overgeneralization. But it is nevertheless substantially true. The recent outrage at Russ's offhand remarks may point to a brighter future. For now, however, I must leave you knowing that this letter should be regarded as the beginning, not the end, of my stance against Russ.