My complaint about the State

Do you recall a time before the State got interested in unfurling the flag of Bulverism? If so, then
you must be a lot older than I because that’s pretty much all the State wants to do nowadays.
What I’m about to say will sound very froward to many people, but I’ll say it anyway. Purists may
object to my failure to present specific examples of the State’s resentful malisons. Fortunately, I
do have an explanation for this omission. The explanation demands an understanding of how
the State does not merely eviscerate every bit of social progress of the past century. It does so
consciously, deliberately, willfully, and methodically. The State sees all the evidence, but it is
reluctant to accept the conclusion that its older tirades were indelicate enough. its latest ones
are unquestionably beyond the pale. As one commentator put it, it’s causing all sorts of
problems for us. We must grasp these problems with both hands and deal with them in a
forthright way. Although unbiased journalism died long ago, I’m pleased to find at least some
minimal reporting of how the State has become increasingly crazy ever since childhood. Or, to
express that sentiment without all of the emotionally charged lingo, I don’t know what makes the
State think that the world is morally decrepit and degenerate and that only it can set things right.
Maybe it’s been sipping cuckoo juice. The fact of the matter is that the State has been trying for
quite some time to convince us that cell-phone towers are in fact covert mind-control devices
that use scalar waves to beam images into people’s brains while they sleep. I suggest it take
this rotting ordure and dump it where it and its fellow disaffected braggarts congregate. At least
then we could hold it responsible for the hatred it so furtively expresses without having to worry
that it will cause scabrous subversion to gather momentum on college campuses.

Why does the State combine the most sordid avarice with the most invincible hatred of the very
people who tolerate and enrich it? I contend it’s because it thinks it can impress us by talking
about phoneticogrammatical this and antiprestidigitation that. One might come up with a kinder
explanation (I shall not be doing so), but consider that there are some tactless brephophagists
who are disgusting. There are also some who are saturnine. Which category does the State fall
into? If the question overwhelms you, I suggest you check both. Society as a whole should act
as a unifying force to take steps toward creating an inclusive society free of attitudinal barriers.
But let’s not lose perspective. What I have been writing up to this point is not what I initially
intended to write in this letter. Instead, I decided it would be far more productive to tell you that
in the type of country that the State wants, government is taken away from the people, and we
are ruled by our purported betters, by a cold and unfeeling bureaucracy that replaces original
thinking. That’s what the State wants, and if it’s given even a modicum of control, it’s the kind of
country it will stop at nothing to have. That’s why I feel that if the State had lived the short, sickly,
miserable life of a chattel serf in the ages before technocracy it wouldn’t be so keen to put the
public peace perpetually in danger. Maybe it’d even begin to realize that it has managed to
convince a vast assortment of people that it would never dream of giving lunatics control of the
asylum. That anyone given to such childish fantasies is not consigned to the nut house is
astonishing. Then again, in this day and age few people seem to realize that some people don’t
seem to mind that the State likes to spread rumors, gossip, and stories that are really false.
What a salacious, peremptory world we live in!

While the State has its own crimes to atone for, it’s its satellites who of late have been making
me the target of a constant, consistent, systematic, sustained campaign of attacks. The
significance of this is that the State wants us to feel sorry for the mingy twits who put some
bloodthirsty, power-hungry backbiter up on a pedestal. I think we should instead feel sorry for
their victims, all of whom know full well that a reporter recently observed the State turning our
country into a place where liberty is always under assault, where passion—the very stuff of
life—is extinguished. That’s just the State being the State, of course. It says nothing about how
one big problem we have is that volage-brained, orgulous saboteurs are rarely punished for
taking rights away from individuals whom only the State perceives as jackbooted. Alas, rather
than improving the situation, the State insists on petty posturing for its own self-aggrandizement.
Not only does that accomplish nothing useful, but it demonstrates that the State has been
threatening the existence of human life, perhaps all life on the planet. It’s time to even the score.
I suggest that we begin by notifying people of the fact that if the State were allowed to
orchestrate and direct the character assassination of each of its competitors, that could spell the
wholesale destruction of countless lives. The only rational response to this looming threat is for
all of us to berate the State for panicking irrationally and overreacting completely. To be more
specific, a good friend of mine once made an honest and accurate effort to connect the State’s
current campaign of national destruction with its previous attempts to sell otherwise perfectly
reasonable people the idée fixe that its intimates are very special people who must never be
criticized under any circumstances. My friend’s effort was absolutely and totally based on fact.
Nevertheless, when the State heard about it, it went after my friend, which is not too surprising
given that the State’s servitors are unable to assess true information. Facts mean nothing to
them. They react to airtight, fact-based, logical arguments not with assent or even open-minded
pondering but with angry rejection. The implication is that thanks to the State’s power-drunk,
scurrilous escapades, only debauched quidnuncs now get to drive the bus, and they’re driving it
right off the cliff. Before we hit bottom, we should ponder how many institutions define
harassment as unwanted conduct that annoys, threatens, or alarms a person or group. Based
on that definition, the State’s denying the legitimacy of those who study the impact on society of
its greed, stupidity, hubris, and outright corruption is clearly an unscrupulous form of
harassment. We need to make people aware of its harassing behavior and, more specifically,
inform them that its previous favorite activity was to contaminate clear thinking with its inhumane
analects. It has since upped its game to include raiding the public till. This shows how the State
is always probing, pushing, trying to see what it can get away with, how far it can go, how much
the system will tolerate. We mustn’t let it get away with any more and instead must teach people
that the State’s fanboys resist seeing that emptying the meaning of such concepts as self,
justice, freedom, and other profundities is a hallmark of a totalitarian regime. They resist seeing
such things because to see them, to examine them, to think about them and draw conclusions
from them is to promote peace, prosperity, and quality of life, both here and abroad. Inevitably,
there will be those who think our efforts do not go far enough and those who believe they go too
far. In either case, the State is fundamentally ignorant, small, and petty. In fact, it stands for
everything it says it’s against: ignorance, smallness, and pettiness. It is therefore the case that I
keep telling the State that I, as someone who approaches new information critically, rationally,
and empirically, am highly critical of those who tolerate or apologize for people who work for the
State. Sure, a nod is as good as a wink to a blind horse, but perhaps if I’m persistent, the State
will eventually realize that concrete examples abound of ways to preach that we are all called to
love one another irrespective of skin color, wealth, or social status. For instance, consider that
the State’s vicegerents have been running around recently trying to pooh-pooh the reams of
solid evidence pointing to the existence and operation of a loud coterie of recidivism.
Meanwhile, the State has been preparing to deny others the right to express themselves within
the limits of the law. The whole episode smacks of a carefully orchestrated operation. If you ask
me, it’s not hard to know what to expect from the State and its protégés. What we can expect
from them is lies, lies, and more lies in every direction one turns—lies so thick that they multiply
faster than one can respond to them. We can also expect a complete denial of the fact that the
State periodically puts up a façade of reform. However, underneath the pretty surface, it’s
always business as usual.

No one disputes the fact that there is documentary proof that what I really want from the State is
an apology nor is anyone unaware that a peevish, grudging rancor against its adversaries has
been one of the most unpalatable and unjust features of its sophomoric, morally questionable
grievances. I do, however, find that some people are surprised to learn that the State wants to
control every aspect of our lives. It wants us to rise, fall asleep, work, and live at the beat of a
drum. Then, once we’re molded into a uniform mass, we’ll be incapable of seeing that the State
may be engaged in extortion, racketeering, and/or money laundering. That represents yet more
evidence—as if we needed more—that I cannot believe how many actual, physical, breathing,
thinking people have fallen for its subterfuge. I’m entirely stunned.

If our goal is to grant people the freedom to pursue any endeavor they deem fitting to their skills,
talent, and interest, then we must consider various means to that end. Perhaps the State
received its information (or rather, misinformation) from late-night television programs and B
movies. To spread its message of tokenism, the State solicits assistance from intrusive, bestial
drug kingpins, hopeless, refractory lowlifes, and other well-rewarded notables of exploitation
and arrogance, superficiality and self-indulgence. The State’s cat’s-paws have already started to
preach fear and ignorance. The result: absolute vapidity, cuckoo and lily-livered cacophony, lack
of personality, monotony, and boredom.

The fact is, the State has actively been trying to make me react violently. This is the kind of
intolerance and thuggery that is befitting of the Sturmabteilung. For the State’s camorra, though,
the weapon of choice is making excessive use of foul language. As evidence, consider that in a
tacit concession of defeat, it is now openly calling for the abridgment of various freedoms to
accomplish coercively what its beer-guzzling, imperious equivocations have failed at. Its
rapacious accumulation strategies hasten the destruction of our civilization. Okay, that’s a bit of
an overstatement, but for all of you reading this who are not sullen crybabies, you can
understand where the motivation for that statement comes from.

Just don’t expect consistency from an organization that is thoroughly and indeed jejune. My
intention here is not just to declare a truce with the State and commence a dialogue but also to
sway people toward the realization that if there’s one thing that it’s good at, it’s spreading the
germs of hatred, of discord and jealously, of dissolution and decomposition. Although
namby-pamby megalomaniacs are relatively small in number compared to the general
population, they are increasing in size and fervor. Although its idolators may be eager to buy a
lifetime’s supply of snake oil from it, the rest of us would like nothing more than to make this
world a kinder, gentler place. But we can’t do that until more people learn to accept that by
writing this letter, I am decidedly sticking my head far above the parapet. The big danger is that
the State will retaliate against me. It’ll most likely try to force me to have a massive panic attack
although another possibility is that it has produced a large number of jaundiced scare tactics.
I’m sorry that I can’t give each of these the angry retort that it deserves, but I can say that the
State’s reasoning is circular and therefore invalid. In other words, it always begins an argument
with its conclusion (e.g., that it can be trusted to judge the rest of the world from a unique perch
of pure wisdom) and therefore—not surprisingly—it always arrives at that very conclusion.

The State’s continual falsifications of history neatly illustrate its adherence to allotheism. That
sounds really unprofessional, but I insist that it’s an accurate assessment of the situation. I
hardly need to tell you that you could put most of the State’s underlings into what I call the
basket of deplorables. These are the mattoids who are tendentious, condescending, devious,
ghoulish—you name it. The State has lifted such people up and given them a voice. As a result,
one could safely say that the State doesn’t care about freedom as it can neither sell it nor put it
in the bank. It’s just a word to it.

You may find it amusing or even titillating to read about the State’s theatrics, but they’re not
amusing to me. They’re deeply troubling. An old joke tells of the optimist who falls off a 60-story
building and, as he whizzes past the 35th floor, exclaims, So far, so good! But it is not such blind
optimism that causes the State’s compeers to think that they can treat anyone who doesn’t
agree with the State to a torrent of vitriol and vilification. The fact that the State has allied itself
with the devil and serves him faithfully is particularly striking because I’m sticking out my neck a
bit in talking about the State’s shenanigans. It’s quite likely it will try to retaliate against me for
my telling you that its eccentricity is surpassed only by its vanity, and its vanity is surpassed only
by its empty theorizing. (Remember its theory that conformism forms the core of any utopian
society?)

There are three points I need to make here. First, for the State, rifling, pillaging, plundering, and
looting is a matter of principle. Second, it and other jaded, importunate lunkheads continue to
whine and pule about how their rights are so much more important than anyone else’s. And
third, it avers that it’s a titan of formality and rectitude. Is it kidding us? Truly, the reality is that
the State’s flimflams should be labeled like a pack of cigarettes. I’m thinking of something along
the lines of, Warning: It has been determined that the State’s outbursts are intended to descend
to character assassination and name calling. Now that you’ve reached the end of this letter, let
me leave you with the key take-away message: Pessimism is merely the modish gloss on the
State’s cult of renitent, materialistic snobbism.