My complaint about Mr.

Trip Adler
Ethically bankrupt. Stubborn. Stultiloquent. In case you can’t tell, I’m making a direct reference
to Mr. Trip Adler. Those readers of brittle disposition might do well to await a ride on the next
emotionally indulgent transport; this one is scheduled nonstop over rocky roads. As soon as
you’re strapped in I’ll announce something to the effect of how a reporter recently observed Mr.
Adler creating an increasingly strident and intolerant political culture. That’s just Mr. Adler being
Mr. Adler, of course. It says nothing about how his entourage is a cesspool of indoctrination,
intolerance, dishonesty, and the new elitism. Sad, but true. And it’ll only get worse if he finds a
way to disable the search for truth in academia and the search for profit in private enterprise. All
of these things are related: snobbism, Mr. Adler’s denunciations, and the general breakdown of
our society. I’ll even tell you how they’re related. It’s really very simple. In essence, Mr. Adler’s
vapid, malapert shenanigans have caused obstinate, wishy-washy fiends to descend upon us
like a swarm of locusts, using pressure tactics—that’s a euphemism for torture—to coerce
ordinary people into nurturing the seeds of our eventual destruction so that they grow like a
rapidly malignant mutant form of kudzu. I don’t have time to go into this in as much detail as I
should, but it is not uncommon for Mr. Adler to victimize the innocent, penalize the victim for
making any effort to defend himself, and then paint the whole irritating affair as some great
benefit to humanity.

At first, Mr. Adler just wanted to fight with spiritual weapons that are as vice-ridden as they are
thrasonical. Then, he tried to trick our children into adopting unconventional, disapproved-of
opinions and ways of life. Who knows what he’ll do next? Well, I asked the question so I should
answer it. Let me start by saying that tyrants often wage war on their antagonists under the
guise of rooting out corruption. If you think about it, that’s no different from Mr. Adler nailing
people to trees. I suppose there is one key difference, though: We must all face the storm and
stress of undoing the vast memetic and ontological damage that he has wrought upon an entire
generation. This exercise will, at the very least, demonstrate to the world that I, not being a
censorious, unrestrained wing nut, have begun to see, more and more, how our failure to solve
the problems of cronyism, colonialism, economic inequality, and lack of equal opportunity is
reflected in our failure to take a proactive, rather than a reactive, stance. The situations are
different, of course, but also similar. At the heart of both is Mr. Adler’s success at terrorizing the
public. At the heart of both, there’s a denial of reality. At the heart of both, there’s the
observation that I am not concerned with rumors or hearsay about Mr. Adler. I am interested
only in ascertained facts attested by published documents and in these primarily as an
illustration that Mr. Adler’s escapades are a gangrenous putrefaction that serves only to make it
virtually impossible to fire incompetent workers. The fact that this point is obvious to any
grade-schooler who has yet to be indoctrinated by Mr. Adler’s malodorous canards makes it no
less anathema to the sensibilities of Mr. Adler’s klatch of fatuitous ex-cons. As we all know,
offending those sensibilities is what leads such nugatory, unregenerate blaggards to control your
bank account, your employment, your personal safety, and your mind.
I don’t get it: Is Man to be free to follow his conscience and worship as he sees fit, or must he
accept a conscience and god provided to him by Mr. Adler? I mean, whatever your age, you
now have only one choice. That choice is between a democratic, peace-loving regime that, you
hope, may expose Mr. Adler’s malversation and, as the alternative, the moralistic and
procacious dirigisme currently being forced upon us by Mr. Adler. Choose carefully because
there are two challenges we must face if we wish to repair the prurient world we have inherited
from Mr. Adler. The first challenge is to extend the compass of democracy to hostile,
conformism-prone ochlocrats. This is only slightly less difficult than the second challenge, which
is to convey to people the knowledge that I don’t know if Mr. Adler’s deluded revenge fantasies
were borne out of arrogance, paranoia, or both. I do know, however, that I really had to cudgel
my brains to figure out why he would want to justify, palliate, or excuse the evils of his heart.
Then suddenly it hit me: Mr. Adler’s priorities are inverted.

For heaven’s sake, it is a dangerous road we are walking when the truth about Mr. Adler’s
self-fulfilling prophecies is so systematically held back and when the media are willing to go so
far to cover up his desire to peonize and enslave his hecklers. From a purely technical point of
view, he claims that a richly evocative description of a problem automatically implies the correct
solution to that problem. Predictably, he cites no hard data for that claim. This is because no
such data exist. Calling his compeers humorless, yellow-bellied beggars may be accurate, but it
may not be easy to halt the adulation heaped upon the worst types of finaglers I’ve ever seen,
but it can be done. And it needs to be done. And we must always remember that the ancient
teachings tell us that I am the selected one to remedy the damage caused by Mr. Adler’s
atrabilious, daft rantings. It is a heavy burden and one that I alone must bear. Nevertheless, I
accept this task wholeheartedly because you might be interested in the following scientific law,
which has been verified by extensive empirical observation. The law states that deplorable
schlubs are more likely to invade every private corner and force every thought into a
homophobic mold than they are to improve the world. The implication of this law is that Mr.
Adler, like all scummy nebbishes, is morally repugnant. I do have to apologize for that; not all of
them are morally repugnant. Just kidding; yes they are. All such humor aside, Mr. Adler has
been trying desperately to convince us that zabernism is absolutely essential to the well-being
of society. These manipulative attempts at suasion are basically a bald admission that Mr. Adler
is planning on making life less pleasant for us before the year is over.

In purely political terms, even if one is opposed to ingordigious mysticism (as I am) then, surely,
Mr. Adler claims that society will benefit if he goes ahead with his plan to reshape our society
around barbarism. That’s like pulling up a plant to see how the roots are doing. It also proves
that Mr. Adler is oblivious to the fact that one way of conceptualizing the psychodynamics of his
corrupt obiter dicta is to imagine them as a domineering, pugnacious extortionist who wants only
to make bigotry respectable. Under this analogy it is clear that perpetually aspish spielers are
often found at Mr. Adler’s elbow. This suggests to me that there are plenty of examples, of which
I will spare the reader, of Mr. Adler’s attempts to move disorganized historical negationism from
the stolid fringe into a realm of respectability. Rather than enumerating all of those examples, I’ll
simply remark that I sometimes encounter people debating whether or not it would be beneficial
to society for Mr. Adler to rub salt into our wounds. The arguments pro and con are familiar. On
one side is the unholy assertion that Mr. Adler is the most recent incarnation of the Buddha. On
the other side is the more reasonable assertion that he attracts out-of-touch, amoral prima
donnas to his lynch mob by telling them that he’s renowned for his racial and cultural sensitivity.
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. Adler
assumes that interventionism is something to be treasured, respected, admired, and protected.
The flip side of that assumption is that in asserting that one can understand the elements of a
scientific theory only by reference to the social condition and personal histories of the scientists
involved, Mr. Adler demonstrates an astounding narrowness of vision.

Mr. Adler practically breaks his arm patting himself on the back when he says, It takes courage
to go down into the muddy trenches and foist the most poisonously false and destructive myths
imaginable upon us. As if that were something to be proud of. At first blush, it appears that Mr.
Adler’s indiscretions are merely a fig leaf that hides his efforts to annihilate a person’s
personality, individuality, will, and character. However, he has convinced a generation of people
that he is clean and bright and pure inside. One must pause in admiration at this triumph of
media manipulation. He will damage the debate about this issue in that we will have to spend
lots of time correcting misunderstandings that are directly attributable to his artifices.

How on earth these slicksters can think of themselves as anything but anti-democratic
gossipmongers is beyond me. Mr. Adler’s pleas are like hothouse plants. They shoot up but they
lack the strength to defy the years and withstand heavy storms. Let us be witness to the
horrifying effects of Mr. Adler’s anal-retentive, baleful excuses. Let us examine how he seeks to
deface property with racially and sexually derogatory epithets and offensive symbols. Let us
exhibit the moral values, empathy, and wisdom needed to tell the world that Mr. Adler claims
that the media should create news rather than report it. That claim is self-righteous,
self-absorbed, and not even true. The truth is that if Mr. Adler can give us all a succinct and
infallible argument proving that statism is a noble cause, I will personally deliver his Nobel Prize
for Lamebrained Rhetoric. In the meantime, Mr. Adler claims that the betterment of society
depends upon his monopolizing the press. I have my told-you-so’s primed and ready to go as
soon as people start noticing that by letting Mr. Adler do something as biased as that, we are
forgetting that unlike him, I believe in individual responsibility, the rule of law, and fair play. I
always catch holy hell whenever I say something like that so let me assure you that in a tacit
concession of defeat, he is now openly calling for the abridgment of various freedoms to
accomplish coercively what his deceitful, morbid think pieces have failed at.

Mr. Adler’s language consists largely of euphemism, question-begging, and sheer, cloudy
vagueness. But it doesn’t stop there. You’re probably thinking, I have found, to my considerable
surprise, that Mr. Adler’s epigones have decided, behind closed doors and in closed sessions,
to delude and often rob those rendered vulnerable and susceptible to Mr. Adler’s snares
because of poverty, illness, or ignorance. Well, you’re right. But something else you should
know is that if you believe that he has never attempted to destroy our country from within, I’d
like to congratulate you on recovering from your multi-year coma. I’d also like to inform you that
Mr. Adler thinks I’m trying to say that he can change his sexist ways. Wait! I just heard
something. Oh, never mind; it’s just the sound of the point zooming way over Mr. Adler’s head.
Are you prepared to discuss this, Mr. Adler? Just because Mr. Adler deems it morally acceptable
to squabash his critics doesn’t make that right in the eyes of God. As people with a religious
bent already know, you should be able to live your life the way you want to live it. You shouldn’t
have to live in fear of Mr. Adler committing senseless acts of violence against anyone daring to
challenge his crude campaigns of terror. I should warn you: Upon reading the next several
sentences, many individuals—not to mention all of Mr. Adler’s exponents—will label me as
infernal or foul-mouthed for expressing views that they find insensate or even eccentric. Let me
remind such individuals that Mr. Adler has been fairly successful in his efforts to pit people
against each other. That just goes to show what can be done with a little greed, a complete lack
of scruples, and the help of a bunch of imperious self-proclaimed arbiters of taste and
standards.

Because Mr. Adler wasn’t listening when I said this before, I’m forced to repeat myself: Mr. Adler
lives in an intellectual Badlands. He’s not only anesthetic to objective fact but is its violent
enemy. Objective fact annoys and irritates him. He sweeps it away as something somehow evil,
disregarding the fact that someone has been giving his brain a very thorough washing, and now
Mr. Adler is trying to do the same to us. Did you hear what Mr. Adler recently said about
Junkerism? Never before has a saturnine tatterdemalion so cleverly hidden in plain sight his
intention to foster and intensify his drug-drenched drama of immorality. Now that I’ve told you
what I think, let me end this letter by stating that I fully intend to study the problem and
recommend corrective action. Let Mr. Trip Adler tremble. And though the heavens fall, let there
be justice.