Sentani
   |
Posted - 2005.08.07 14:44:00 -
[1]
I am not writing to agree or disagree with Greifer. What I have to say, however, regards Greifer's conscious decision to deplete the ozone layer. Let's review the errors in its statements in order. First, there is blood on its hands.
It's really amazing, isn't it? We can put people on the Moon and send robot explorers to Mars, but Greifer says that everyone who doesn't share its beliefs is a disruptive, sordid infidel deserving of death and damnation. Wow! Isn't that like hiding the stolen goods in the closet and, when the cops come in, standing in front of the closet door and exclaiming, "They're not in here!"? Ignorance is bliss. This may be why Greifer's goombahs are generally all smiles. We mustn't let Greifer steal our birthrights. That would be like letting the Mafia serve as a new national police force in Italy.
What's interesting is that the ideological fervor of Greifer's spin doctors springs from their desire to alter laws, language, and customs in the service of regulating social relations. That's clear. But I have never been in favor of being gratuitously irresponsible. I have also never been in favor of sticking my head in the sand or of refusing to foster mutual understanding. Take this example: Let's say that Greifer's ability to capitalize on the economic chaos, racial tensions, and social discontent of the current historical moment can be explained, in large part, by the following. Now let's say that its fairy tales are a mixture of addlepated self-righteousness and psychotic duplicity. Does that mean that without Greifer's superior guidance, we will go nowhere? No, because I have a message for it. My message is that, for the good of us all, it should never combine, in a rare mixture, bestial cruelty and an inconceivable gift for lying. It should never even try to do such a rash thing. To make myself perfectly clear, by "never", I don't mean "maybe", "sometimes", or "it depends". I mean only that Greifer always tries to rationalize its theories with compelling gobblede**** about some "greater good". Don't make the mistake of thinking otherwise. Greifer does, and that's why its subordinates actually believe the bunkum they're always mouthing. That's because these sorts of featherbrained, impolitic cult leaders are idealistic, have no sense of history or human nature, and they think that what they're doing will somehow improve the world before long. In reality, of course, Greifer either is or elects to be ignorant of scientific principles and methods. It even intentionally misuses scientific terminology to trick our children into adopting unconventional, disapproved-of opinions and ways of life.
Although the Gospel According to Greifer says that Greifer never engages in dangerous, conceited, or stinking politics, I believe that what I just wrote is not based on merely a single experience or anecdote. Rather, it is based upon the wisdom of accumulated years, spanning two continents, and proven by the fact that if it continues to abuse science by using it as a mechanism of ideology, I will be obliged to do something about it. And you know me: I myself never neglect my obligations. Greifer says it's not myopic, but it's honestly imperious, and that's essentially the same thing. If Greifer thinks that its maneuvers are not worth getting outraged about, then it's sadly mistaken. I feel that Greifer has insulted everyone with even the slightest moral commitment. It obviously has none, or it wouldn't waste hours and hours in fruitless conferences and meetings.
Greifer is too obtrusive to read the writing on the wall. This writing warns that I want to shoo it away like the annoying bug that it is. That may seem simple enough, but it has been said that seeing it rewrite and reword much of humanity's formative works to favor clericalism is a nauseating and disgusting spectacle. I believe that to be true. I also believe that if Greifer's pleas get any more politically incorrect, I expect they'll grow legs and attack me in my sleep. Greifer takes things out of context, twists them around, and then neglects to provide decent referencing so the reader can check up on it. It also ignores all of the evidence that doesn't support (or in many cases directly contradicts) its position. This is an exceptionally convincing illustration of the power wielded by Greifer and of the destructive way in which it uses that power. Let me explain. Greifer just keeps on saying, "We don't give a [expletive deleted] about you. We just want to consign most of us to the role of its servants or slaves." In closing, we must work together to provide a positive, confident, and assertive vision of humanity's future and our role in it. Together, we can make a difference. Forever and always.
|