A note on brevity

[KaptKaos]

"Brevity is the soul of wit."

[DARISC]

Originally Posted by KaptKaos

"Brevity is the soul of wit."

And the beauty of bikinis.

[Jagshund]

Dog made poo.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Large posts = large ________________.



Oh and BTW you're all poopyheads.

[ckissick]

42

[nostatic]

What would I do without brevity to provide me with a nonstop source of negligent arguments to complain about? For the sake of review, the confluence of Jacobinism and militarism in brevity's ideas ensures a swirling river of discontent upon which brevity so peremptorily rides. That conclusion is not based on some sort of frowsy philosophy or on brevity-style mental masturbation, but on widely known and proven principles of science. These principles explain that brevity has remarked that immoralism resonates with the body's natural alpha waves. This is a comment that should chill the spine of anyone with moral convictions. To make sure you understand I'll spell it out for you. For starters, I defy the stentorian Neanderthals who scapegoat easy, unpopular targets, thereby diverting responsibility from more culpable parties, and I defy the powers of darkness that they represent.

With all their sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, brevity's plans for the future are completely coldhearted. Yes, I could add that by rejecting its obstreperous epithets we spit in the devil's eye, but I wanted to keep my message simple and direct. I didn't want to distract you from the main thrust of my message, which is that if we do nothing, brevity will keep on turning slubberdegullions loose against us good citizens. One cannot change this all in a moment, but one can shine a light on brevity's efforts to incite racial hatred. If one believes statements like, "Brevity should be a given a direct pipeline to the National Treasury," one is, in effect, supporting rancorous, venom-spouting wantwits. Knowledge is the key that unlocks the shackles of bondage. That's why it's important for you to know that I have some of brevity's writings in front of me right now. In one of them, brevity maintains that truth is merely a social construct. If you don't find that shocking then consider that this is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Let me therefore state that there is one crucial fact that we must not overlook if we are to perceive our current situation as it is, rather than in the anamorphosis of some "ideology" such as solecism or fetishism. Specifically, there may be absolutely nothing we can do to prevent brevity from making good on its word to use threats of fiscal harm to coerce ignorant litterbugs into challenging all I stand for. When we compare this disturbing conclusion to the comforting picture purveyed by its coadjutors, we experience psychological stress or "cognitive dissonance". Our only recourse is to illustrate the virtues that brevity lacks—courage, truthfulness, courtesy, honesty, diligence, chivalry, loyalty, and industry.

Did you hear what brevity recently said about egotism? Never before has a loud semi-intelligible-type so cleverly hidden in plain sight its intention to promote Bonapartism's traits as normative values to be embraced. Authoritarianism can be deadly but brevity's communiqués are much worse. One of the things I find quite interesting is listening to other people's takes on things. For instance, I recently overheard some folks remark that brevity is absolutely determined to believe that our only chance of saving the planet is to accept unending regulations and straightjacket "reforms" from its winged monkeys, and it's not about to let facts or reason get in its way. What brevity is incapable of seeing is that it has been known to "prove" statistically that university professors must conform their theses and conclusions to its ethically bankrupt prejudices if they want to publish papers and advance their careers. As you might have suspected, its proof is flawed. The primary problem with it is that it replaces a legitimate claim of association with an illegitimate claim of causality. Consequently, brevity's "proof" demonstrates only that it demands obeisance from its confidants. Then, once they prove their loyalty, brevity forces them to gag the innocent accused from protesting anarchism-motivated prosecutions.

Brevity plans to force me to undergo "treatment" to cure my "problem". The result will be an amalgam of shabby animalism and malignant charlatanism, if such a monster can be imagined. I feel funny having to tell readers whom I presume are adults that brevity's lieutenants realize that if their aims were sufficiently revealed, an informed public would have the power to upset their well-laid plans. I bring that up solely to emphasize that we must plant markers that define the limits of what is untrustworthy and what is not. As mentioned above, however, that is not enough. It is necessary to do more. It is necessary to investigate the development of cameralism as a concept.

Brevity will probably respond to this letter just like it responds to all criticism. It will put me down as "savage" or "bitter". That's its standard answer to everyone who says or writes anything about it except the most fawning praise. Let brevity's pathetic bons mots stand as evidence that brevity says that its ultimata are Right with a capital R. Although brevity sincerely cut that statement out of whole cloth, I am hurt, furious, and embarrassed. Why am I hurt? Because I am a law-and-order kind of person. I hate to see crimes go unpunished. That's why I surely hope that brevity serves a long prison term for its illegal attempts to influence the attitudes of dominant culture towards any environment or activity that is predominantly iconoclastic. Why am I furious? Because brevity has been known to assuage the hungers of its secret police with servings of fresh scapegoats. That always spurs on its shock troops to achieve total world domination. That, in turn, encourages brevity to yield this country to the forces of darkness, oppression, and tyranny. This cycle inevitably, inexorably ratchets upwards and outwards until at last some dotty, intellectually challenged adolescent winds up stirring up trouble. And why am I embarrassed? Because brevity's shrewish form of Dadaism is like a forest fire. Once it is started, none can set bounds to the resulting conflagration. The only option is to study the impact of brevity's greed, stupidity, hubris, and outright corruption on society. While doing so won't put a stop to Dadaism, it will demonstrate decisively that even if one isn't completely conversant with current events, the evidence overwhelmingly indicates that brevity's detractors are correct in their observation that it makes perfect sense that brevity doesn't want me to throw down the gauntlet and challenge its intimates to exert a positive influence on the type of world that people will live in a thousand years from now. In view of that, it is not surprising that if it wants to be taken seriously, it should counter the arguments in this letter with facts, not illogical panaceas, personal anecdotes, or insults. A final word: Brevity has nothing but contempt for responsibility, duty, and honor.

[nostatic]

And while we're at it...

To those people who are outraged at Tabs's lazy, mischievous tirades, this letter will be of interest. People who are well-meaning yet misinformed might also profit by proceeding. For the remainder who are indifferent, faint of heart, or content to let Tabs sharpen intergroup tensions, I regret that there is little reason to read further. Instead of focusing on why it's about time he stopped claiming his raving manifestos were influenced by outside sources and just admitted he was wrong, I would like to remind people that he accuses me of being narrow-minded. Does he claim I'm narrow-minded because I refuse to accept his claim that mediocrity and normalcy are ideal virtues? If so, then I guess I'm as narrow-minded as I could possibly be.

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 Tabs twists every argument into some sort of "struggle" between two parties. Tabs unvaryingly constitutes the underdog party, which is what he claims gives him the right to stir up trouble. How can we trust a snarky lunatic who actively conceals his true intentions? We can't. And besides, he cannot be tamed by "tolerance" and "accommodation" but is actually spurred on by such gestures. Tabs sees such gestures as a sign of weakness on our part and is thereby encouraged to continue forcing me to shake in my boots from fear.

I have often maintained that reasonable people can reasonably disagree. Unfortunately, when dealing with Tabs and his deputies, that claim assumes facts not in evidence. So let me claim instead that if you were to try to tell Tabs's allies that small minds are little troubled by this, they'd close their eyes and put their hands over their ears. They are, as the psychologists say, in denial. They don't want to hear that Tabs has gotten away with so much for so long that he's lost all sense of caution, all sense of limits. If you think about it, only a man without any sense of limits could desire to inculcate feral scribblings.

This may be water under the bridge by now, but Tabs has played a key role in the labefaction of our society. Excuse me; that's not entirely correct. What I meant to say is that we must draw the line somewhere. I know you're wondering why I just wrote that. I'll explain shortly, but first, I should state that Tabs's underlings are a bunch of misguided individuals parroting one another and unwittingly serving ends they would never intentionally promote. (Actually, the ability to artistically arrange words in an amusing manner does not qualify someone to be the leading social voice of a country, but that's not important now.)

Knowledge and wisdom are Tabs's enemies. He understands that by limiting education and enlightenment, he can fool more people into believing that arriving at a true state of comprehension is too difficult and/or time-consuming. Sadly, those with the least education are those who would benefit most from the knowledge that Tabs has overstated his case against me by alluding to an illusory past. That's clear. But there is a format Tabs should follow for his next literary endeavor. It involves a topic sentence and supporting facts. Tabs may have the right to convert lush forests into arid deserts. He may have the right to perpetuate myths that glorify nihilism. But Tabs crosses the line when he uses his bully pulpit to turn the social order upside-down so that the dregs on the bottom become the scum on the top.

As I mentioned before, what we are dealing with here is fashion, politics, and money. But let me add that his occasional demonstrations of benevolence are not genuine. Nor are Tabs's promises. In fact, we must encourage the ethos of exchange value over use value. Only then can a society free of his spiteful holier-than-thou attitudes blossom forth from the roots of the past. And only then will people come to understand that he craves more power. I say we should give Tabs more power—preferably, 10,000 volts of it.

Tabs surely believes that it's perfectly safe to drink and drive. Unfortunately for him, that's all in his imagination. Tabs needs to get out of that fictional world and get back to reality, where people can see that I once overheard him say something quite astonishing. Are you strapped in? He said that space gods arriving in flying saucers will save humanity from self-destruction. Can you believe that? At least his statement made me realize that I do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with him. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I expose false prophets who preach that duplicitous, oppressive chiselers make the best scoutmasters and schoolteachers.

Tabs is not just unholy; he's exploitative, too. When his reinterpretations of historic events are challenged, Tabs usually responds by making my blood curdle. Well, you can't really expect him to defend his positions with facts, explanations, logical arguments, or even references to events that occurred less than two years ago, can you? To pick an obvious but often overlooked example, one of the things I find quite interesting is listening to other people's takes on things. For instance, I recently overheard some folks remark 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 feel, there's a time to avoid the extremes of a pessimistic naturalism and an optimistic humanism by combining the truths of both. Or, to put it less poetically, Tabs has a natural talent for complaining. He can find any aspect of life and whine about it for hours upon hours.

As the adherents of Randian objectivism believe, all of Tabs's diatribes are burdened by a specious magniloquence. Furthermore, as the adherents of empiricism observe, I want my life to count. I want to be part of something significant and lasting. I want to take steps toward creating an inclusive society free of attitudinal barriers.

In a previous letter, I announced my intention to develop a rational-empirical base for dialogue about Tabs's sentiments. Naturally, this announcement caused Tabs to mutter abuses befitting his education. Incidents like that truly demonstrate how he appears committed to the proposition that his views are correct, self-evident, and based on fact and reason, while other people's positions are not just wrong but illegitimate, ideological, and unworthy of serious consideration. If you were to get a second opinion from someone who's not a member of his peuplade, however, he'd of course tell you that we must open minds instead of closing them. If we don't, future generations will not know freedom. Instead, they will know fear; they will know sadness; they will know injustice, poverty, and grinding despair. Most of all, they will realize, albeit far too late, that Tabs has never disproved anything I've ever written. He does, however, often try to discredit me by means of flagrant misquotations, by attributing to me views that I've never expressed. In the end, if Tabs bites me I will bite back. Finally, to those of you who are faithfully helping me maximize our individual potential for effectiveness and success in combatting Tabs, let me extend, as always, my deepest gratitude and my most affectionate regards.

[nostatic]

point, counterpoint

I want this letter to serve as an oasis of sanity in Nostatic's desert of foolishness. But first, let me pose you a question: Is Nostatic actually concerned about any of us or does he just want to rub salt into our wounds? After reading this letter, you'll unequivocally find it's the latter. When his hypnopompic insights are challenged, Nostatic usually responds by turning publicity hounds loose against us good citizens. Well, you can't really expect him to defend his positions with facts, explanations, logical arguments, or even references to events that occurred less than two years ago, can you? If we don't soon tell him to stop what he's doing, he will proceed with his insidious personal attacks, considerably emboldened by our lack of resistance. We will have tacitly given him our permission to do so.

However deep one delves into the citations and footnotes of Nostatic's stances and however poised and "mainstream" his lieutenants appear once challenged, there is no way to forget that I have in fact told him that I really hate it when nasty miscreants like him go on with such vigor about subjects they don't even know about. Unfortunately, there really wasn't anything to his response. I suppose Nostatic just doesn't want to admit that his chums have tried repeatedly to assure me that he will eventually tire of his plan to inculcate the hermeneutics of suspicion in otherwise open-minded people and will then step aside and let us build a sane and healthy society free of his destructive influences. When that will happen is unclear—probably sometime between "don't hold your breath" and "beware of flying pigs". There are some morally crippled wankers who are unambitious. There are also some who are pernicious. Which category does Nostatic fall into? If the question overwhelms you, I suggest you check "both".

So what if Nostatic hates me for pointing out that his behavior is beyond detestable? Let him hate me. I consider such hatred a mark of honor, a mark of distinction. He recently stated that cultural tradition has never contributed a single thing to the advancement of knowledge or understanding. He said that with a straight face, without even cracking a smile or suppressing a giggle. He said it as if he meant it. That's scary because you may be wondering why the worst sorts of pompous drug addicts there are latch onto his machinations. 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 we must remove our chains and move towards the light. (In case you didn't understand that analogy, the chains symbolize Nostatic's disorganized deeds and the light represents the goal of getting all of us to strengthen our roots so we can weather the storms that threaten our foundation.)

Are Nostatic's theatrics good for the country? The nation's suicide statistics, drug statistics, crime statistics, divorce statistics, and mental illness statistics give us part of the answer. These statistics should make it clear that I want to counteract the subtle but pervasive social message that says that he would sooner give up money, fame, power, and happiness than perform a pharisaical act. But first, let me pose an abstract question. Does he realize he's more stuck-up than a foolhardy roustabout? Here's the answer, albeit in a somewhat circuitous and roundabout style: I am undeniably not up on the latest gossip. Still, I have heard people say that his most recent vainglorious claim (viz., that it is patriotic to start wars, ruin the environment, invent diseases, and routinely do a hundred other things that kill people) is a tissue of lies, bias, and emotional manipulation from beginning to end. Yes, I could add that his ill-bred pronouncements serve only to illuminate his lack of good taste and decency, but I wanted to keep my message simple and direct. I didn't want to distract you from the main thrust of my message, which is that there's no shortage of sin in the world today. It's been around since the Garden of Eden and will decidedly persist as long as Nostatic continues to deny us the opportunity to compile readers' remarks and suggestions and use them to tell him how wrong he is.

If Nostatic can give us all a succinct and infallible argument proving that he defends the real needs of the working class, I will personally deliver his Nobel Prize for Deluded Rhetoric. In the meantime, life is a search for the true, the good, and the beautiful. It is not, as Nostatic believes, an excuse to let down ladders that the superficial, unenlightened, and mendacious scramble to climb. He is currently limited to shrieking and spitting when he's confronted with inconvenient facts. Within a short period of time, however, Nostatic is likely to switch to some sort of "impinge upon our daily lives" approach to draw our attention away from such facts.

If we are powerless to expose every prissy practice of every prissy pettifogger, it is because we have allowed Nostatic to make things worse. Sure, he talks the talk but does he walk the walk? A complete answer to that question would take more space than I can afford, so I'll have to give you a simplified answer. For starters, if anything will free us from the shackles of his surly obloquies, it's knowledge of the world as it really is. It's knowledge that Nostatic wants to be the one who determines what information we have access to. Yet he is also a big proponent of a particularly self-satisfied form of authoritarianism. Do you see something wrong with that picture? What I see is that Nostatic claims to have turned over a new leaf shortly after getting caught trying to burn books. This claim is an outright lie that is still being circulated by Nostatic's adherents. The truth is that I once overheard Nostatic say something quite astonishing. Are you strapped in? Nostatic said that he has mystical powers of divination and prophecy. Can you believe that? At least his statement made me realize that he consumes, infests, and destroys. Nostatic lives off the death and destruction of others. For that reason alone we need to serve on the side of Truth.

At the same time, Nostatic will combine, in a rare mixture, bestial cruelty and an inconceivable gift for lying because he possesses a hatred that defies all logic and understanding, that cannot be quantified or reasoned away, and that savagely possesses wanton serpents with brusque and uncontrollable rage. If he thinks his homilies represent progress, Nostatic should rethink his definition of progress. In an article I read recently, he is quoted as saying that he wants to tear down all theoretical frameworks for addressing the issue. This was meant be taken as a joke, but the joke is on us. You see, it may seem difficult at first to perform noble deeds. It is. But Nostatic has a glib proficiency with words and very sensitive nostrils. He can smell money in your pocket from a block away. Once that delicious aroma reaches Nostatic's nostrils, he'll start talking about the joy of obscurantism and how the Earth is flat. As you listen to Nostatic's sing-song, chances are you won't even notice his hand as it goes into your pocket. Only later, after you realize you've been robbed, will you truly understand that you don't have to say anything specifically about him for him to start attacking you. All you have to do is dare to imply that we should force him into early retirement.

All of Nostatic's diatribes are burdened by a specious magniloquence. And that's why I'm writing this letter; this is my manifesto, if you will, on how to point out that the emperor has no clothes on. There's no way I can do that alone, and there's no way I can do it without first stating that he occasionally writes letters accusing me and my friends of being uncontrollable firebrands. These letters are typically couched in gutter language (which is doubtless the language in which he habitually thinks) and serve no purpose other than to convince me that by indiscriminately assigning value to practically everything, he has made "experience" all-important. Nostatic's experiences, however, are detached from any consideration of what is good or true, which means that they will almost certainly destroy everything beautiful and good by the end of the decade. Delude and often rob those rendered vulnerable and susceptible to Nostatic's snares because of poverty, illness, or ignorance if you like, Nostatic, because I simply don't care. I realize that some people may have trouble reading this letter. Granted, not everyone knows what "scientificoreligious" means, but it's nevertheless easy to understand that Nostatic doesn't care about freedom as he can neither eat it nor put it in the bank. It's just a word to him.

Okay, I admit that Nostatic has appointed himself the chairman, High Panjandrum, Grand Inquisitor, and overarching Pooh-Bah of an entourage whose exclusive purpose is to assuage the hungers of his cult followers with servings of fresh scapegoats. But implying that the kids on the playground are happy to surrender to the school bully is no different from implying that his inclinations are our final line of defense against tyrrany. Both statements are ludicrous. Let me end by appealing to our collective sense of humanity: I can't live with acrimonious ochlocrats who encourage men to leave their wives, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become libidinous racketeers.

[pete3799]

Could you expand on your brevity?

[DARISC]

Uhhh....in other words?

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by ckissick

Keep posts short.

You are so very laconic.

[DARISC]

removed - ns

[RWebb]

!.

[herr_oberst]

..

[DARISC]

Originally Posted by DARISC

removed - ns

oops

[red-beard]

No

[GH85Carrera]

Just read faster!