Now you can…you can even choose to in 10 paragraphs…its awesome…try it…
.My complaint about MSN Messenger
There is currently a lot of controversy about MSN Messenger’s litanies, and I know that any letter on the subject will almost certainly cause someone to erode constitutional principles that have shaped our society and remain at the core of our freedom and liberty. Still, whenever I confront MSN Messenger about its effrontive histrionics, it either tells me that I don’t understand it or feeds me some meaningless mumbo-jumbo about Maoism. I assume you already know that I cannot simply sit idly by while politically incorrect antagonists trivialize certain events that are particularly special to us all, but I have something more important to tell you. Even if nettlesome, egocentric punks join MSN Messenger’s band with the best of intentions, they will still pit people against each other when you least expect it. Not all, I hasten to add, do join with the best of intentions.
I want to give people more information about MSN Messenger, help them digest and assimilate and understand that information, and help them draw responsible conclusions from it. Here’s one conclusion I indubitably hope people draw: No one likes being attacked by pusillanimous, tasteless euphuists. Even worse, MSN Messenger exploits our fear of those attacks – which it claims will evolve in a matter of days into biological, chemical, or nuclear attacks – as a pretext to spread belligerent, presumptuous views. If you think that’s scary, then you should remember that I and MSN Messenger part company when it comes to the issue of stoicism. It feels that my bitterness at it is merely the latent projection of libidinal energy stemming from self-induced anguish, while I suspect that when a mistake is made, the smart thing to do is to admit it and reverse course. That takes real courage. The way that MSN Messenger stubbornly refuses to own up to its mistakes serves only to convince me that its proposed social programs are based on two fundamental errors. They assume that we’re supposed to shut up and smile when it says blinkered things. And they promote the mistaken idea that human beings should be appraised by the number of things and the amount of money they possess instead of by their internal value and achievements. The next time MSN Messenger decides to appropriate sacred symbols for unforgiving purposes, it should think to itself, cui bono? – who benefits? Of course, it appears that, for MSN Messenger, “open-mindedness” isn’t a policy or a belief, but a flag to wave when it feels like it, and one to hide when it doesn’t suit its purposes. I don’t think anyone questions that. But did you know that it looks down with a really limitless condescension on anyone who has not been dragged through the obligatory schools and had the necessary knowledge pumped into him? Can you really blame me for suggesting that there is no longer any room for hope? MSN Messenger’s campaigns are a house of mirrors. How are we to find the opening that leads to freedom? The answer is obvious if you understand that if you’ve never seen MSN Messenger popularize a genre of music whose graphic lyrics explicitly urge immoral, pesky mafia dons to promote a form of government in which religious freedom, racial equality, and individual liberty are severely at risk, you’re either incredibly unobservant or are concealing the truth from yourself.
MSN Messenger’s intent is to prevent us from asking questions. It doesn’t want the details checked. It doesn’t want anyone looking for any facts other than the official facts it presents to us. I wonder if this is because most of its “facts” are false. Again, “MSN Messenger” has now become part of my vocabulary. Whenever I see someone create an untrue and injurious impression of an entire people, I tell him or her to stop “MSN Messenger-ing”.
Is there, or is there not, a wayward plot to deface a social fabric that was already deteriorating, organized through the years by subversive smut peddlers? The answer to this all-important question is that not only has the plot existed, but it is now on the verge of complete fulfilment. This makes me fearful that I might someday find myself in the crosshairs of MSN Messenger’s duplicitous stances. (To be honest, though, it wouldn’t be the first time.)
MSN Messenger has compiled an impressive list of grievances against me. Not only are all of these grievances completely fictitious, but MSN Messenger is an opportunist. That is, it is an ideological chameleon, without any real morality, without a soul. MSN Messenger has a long, vigilantism-infested history of attempts to scrap the notion of national sovereignty. Of course, this sounds simple, but in reality, the real issue is simple: MSN Messenger’s solutions are oligarchism reincarnate. If MSN Messenger wants to complain, it should have an argument. It shouldn’t just throw out the word “interdifferentiation”, for example, and expect us to be scared.
Of course, in a discussion of this type, one should certainly mention that I didn’t want to talk about this. I really didn’t. But MSN Messenger is addicted to the feeling of power, to the idea of controlling people. Sadly, it has no real concern for the welfare or the destiny of the people it desires to lead. MSN Messenger commonly appoints ineffective people to important positions. It then ensures that these people stay in those positions, because that makes it easy for MSN Messenger to let iconoclastic, misguided shallow-types serve as our overlords.
MSN Messenger’s statements such as “MSN Messenger is entitled to incite an atmosphere of violence and endangerment toward the good men, women, and children of this state” indicate that we’re not all looking at the same set of facts. Fortunately, these facts are easily verifiable with a trip to the library by any open and honest individual. It will be objected, to be sure, that MSN Messenger doesn’t honestly want to excoriate attempts to bring questions of masochism into the (essentially apolitical) realm of pedagogy in language and writing. At first glance, this may seem to be true, but when you think about it further, you’ll surely conclude that I want to get us out of the hammerlock that it is holding us in. That may seem simple enough, but a colleague recently informed me that a bunch of obscene, muzzy-headed braggarts and others in MSN Messenger’s amen corner are about to advocate fatalistic acceptance of a patronizing, subhuman new world order. I have no reason to doubt that story because MSN Messenger’s animadversions are based on a technique I’m sure you’ve heard of. It’s called “lying”.
MSN Messenger’s revenge fantasies are merely childish attempts at ridicule. You may have detected a hint of sarcasm in the way I phrased that last statement, but I assure you that I am not exaggerating the situation. MSN Messenger is not interested in what is true and what is false or in what is good and what is evil. In fact, those distinctions have no meaning to it whatsoever. The only thing that has any meaning to MSN Messenger is escapism. Why? Although I haven’t yet been able to concoct an acceptable answer to that question, I can suggest a tentative hypothesis. My hypothesis is that MSN Messenger parrots whatever ideas are fashionable at the moment. When the fashions change, its ideas will change instantly, like a weathercock.
We must do away with the misconception that MSN Messenger can override nature. No joke. I believe, way deep down, that like a verbal magician, MSN Messenger knows how to lie without appearing to be lying, how to bury secrets in mountains of garbage-speak. Consider the issue of confused negativism. Everyone agrees that it may seem excessive to note that the most perceptive members of our society respond positively to my message that it would be grossly premature for MSN Messenger to claim final victory, but there are still some slatternly ruffians out there who doubt that a leopard can’t change its spots. To them I say: If I try really, really hard, I can almost see why MSN Messenger would want to make us dependent on inimical dummkopfs for political representation, economic support, social position, and psychological approval.
I may be opening a Pandora’s box by writing this, but we should agree on definitions before saying anything further about MSN Messenger’s smarmy protests. For starters, let’s say that “propagandism” is “that which makes MSN Messenger yearn to open the gates of hell.” The whole premise of MSN Messenger’s rejoinders is false, and its arguments are specious at best. MSN Messenger’s eccentricity is surpassed only by its vanity. And its vanity is surpassed only by its empty theorizing. (Remember its theory that it is the one who will lead us to our great shining future?) I don’t want to overstate this point, but MSN Messenger’s opinion is that censorship could benefit us. Of course, opinions are like sphincters: we all have them. So let me tell you my opinion. My opinion is that were he alive today, Hideki Tojo would be MSN Messenger’s most trustworthy ally. I can see Tojo joining forces with MSN Messenger to help it impair the practice of democracy. In closing this letter, let me point out that I would be remiss if I didn’t remind you that that last statement is almost a tautology.