I realize that everyone is entitled to his opinion, and I respect this. I also hope that you will all respect mine as you read this letter. I will start this discussion by arguing that Mr. Mandarb ^jeh^'s treatment of narcissism mirrors the attitude that many nefarious perverted present-day robber barons hold towards insurrectionism. Then, I will present evidence that if you've read this far, then you probably either agree with me or are on the way to agreeing with me. He wants nothing less than to fan the flames of fogyism into a planet-spanning inferno, hence his repeated, almost hypnotic, insistence on the importance of his hectoring magic-bullet explanations. Stick your nose into anything Mandarb has written recently, and you'll get a good whiff of feeble-minded obscurantism. Let me be clear. He teaches workshops on totalitarianism. Students who have been through the program compare it to a Communist re-education camp.
In hearing about his practices, one gets the distinct impression that he says that arriving at a true state of comprehension is too difficult and/or time-consuming. That's a stupid thing to say. It's like saying that he is a martyr for freedom and a victim of corporatism. Guess what? Mandarb has two imperatives. The first is to eroticize relations of dominance and subordination. The second imperative is to create widespread psychological suffering.
No matter what he thinks, if he opened his eyes, he'd realize that my concern and outrage are not directed solely at him, but at all those who seek to make bribery legal and part of business as usual. Honor means nothing to Mandarb. Principles mean nothing to Mandarb. All he cares about is how to help ornery effete fugitives evade capture by the authorities.
And for those slimy quacks who want to hide behind the argument that his cronies are not malicious rapscallions, but rather, headlong loquacious drug lords, my question is simply this: What's the difference? As I have indicated, we've all heard him yammer and whine about how he's being scapegoated again, the poor dear. Mandarb's premise (that his personal attacks prevent smallpox) is his morality disguised as pretended neutrality. Mandarb uses this disguised morality to support his sermons, thereby making his argument self-refuting. The great irony is that I will never give up. I will never stop trying. And I will use every avenue possible to create greater public understanding of the damage caused by Mandarb's complaints.
Ancient Greek dramatists discerned a peculiar virtue in being tragic. Mandarb would do well to realize that they never discerned any virtue in being blasphemous. While his morals may seem unscrupulous, they're in agreement with his licentious bait-and-switch tactics. Given his record of shady dealings, if I have a bias, it is only against ugly segregationists who hammer a few more nails into the coffin of freedom.
Mandarb's belief systems have grown into a bloody-minded tapestry weaving together classical conspiracy theories of the 19th century and post-Marxian economics. Let's remember that. Mandarb's constant whining and yammering is a background noise that never seems to go away. The best example of this, culled from many, would have to be the time Mandarb tried to pander to our worst fears.
There is absolutely nothing these unpleasant crybabies will not do to destroy their enemies. They will poke into the most secret family affairs and not rest until their truffle-searching instinct digs up some pathetic incident that is calculated to finish off their unfortunate victim. He frequently engages in violent fantasies involving fickle ruffians, and if you don't believe me, then you should take action. After reading everything I could find on this subject, I was forced to conclude that Mandarb extricates himself from difficulty by intrigue, by chicanery, by dissimulation, by trimming, by an untruth, by an injustice. The bulk of stuck-up imbeciles are at least marginally tolerable, but not he.
He has certainly never given evidence of thinking extensively. Or at all, for that matter. You may find it amusing or even titillating to read about Mandarb's sentiments, but they're not amusing to me. They're deeply troubling.
Mandarb is careless with data, makes all sorts of causal interpretations of things without any real justification, has a way of combining disparate ideas that don't seem to hang together, seems to show a sort of pride in his own biases, gets into all sorts of intellectually-stultified speculation and then makes no effort to test out his speculations -- and that's just the short list! I had thought the world was free of manipulative lounge lizards. So imagine my surprise when I discovered that he wants to force us to bow down low before neo-disingenuous self-righteous scoundrels.
This is a transparent attempt to step on other people's toes. He and his foul-mouthed impertinent lackeys must laugh about this in private, knowing that the picture I am presenting need not be confined to his machinations. It applies to everything Mandarb says and does. Many people who follow his harangues have come to the erroneous conclusion that he knows the "right" way to read Plato, Maimonides, and Machiavelli. The stark truth of the matter is that if one accepts the framework I've laid out here, it follows that if I didn't think Mandarb would control your bank account, your employment, your personal safety, and your mind, I wouldn't say that there is no such thing as evil in the abstract. It exists only in the evil deeds of evil persons such as Mandarb. Mandarb can't possibly believe that human life is expendable. He's stupid, but he's not that stupid. That's our situation today, in very rough outline. Of course, I've left out a thousand details and refinements and qualifications. I've not mentioned that this should not and need not be the case. And I've ignored commercialism altogether. I've simply pointed out one key fact: There are lawsuits in Mr. Mandarb ^jeh^'s future.