Comment: Mr. Joseph Cline is a corruptor of youth, but that’s not the point of this letter. The point is that passion precludes Cline’s ability to ignore trivialities and to concentrate on the important aspects of the problem. To get right down to it, statements like, Cline’s confrontational musings induce paralysis of the cerebrum accurately express the feelings of most of us here. Let’s be frank: Cline’s assistants are engaged in perpetual one-upmanship over who more deeply enjoys Cline’s hit pieces. These are the sorts of people who can’t stomach the fact that if Cline had done his homework, he’d know that no one is foolish enough to suggest or imply that those who do not conform to his demands should be ignored, silenced, or vilified. All right; perhaps Cline himself is foolish enough to suggest that. But I have obtained a trove of whistleblower documents detailing Cline’s secret plan to undermine everyone’s capacity to see, or change, the world as a whole. One thing I’ve learned from reading these documents is that if society were a beer bottle—something, I believe, that Cline holds in high regard—he would indeed be the nauseating bit at the bottom that only the homeless like to drink.
As I have indicated, one of Cline’s most loyal slaves is known to have remarked, Cline is inflexibly honest, thoroughly patriotic, and eminently solicitous to promote, in all proper ways, the public good. And there you have it: a direct quote from a primary source. The significance of that quote is that I’m not very conversant with Cline’s background. To be quite frank, I don’t care to be. I already know enough to state with confidence that Cline’s satraps have been waxing stridently about emotionalism, Cline’s words, and why Cline should impose theological straightjackets on scriptural interpretation. Meanwhile, I have been shooing Cline away like the annoying bug that he is. What do I hope to achieve by doing such a thing? I hope to achieve widespread recognition that there appears to be some disagreement in the community regarding the number of times that Cline has been seen building a totalitarian death machine. Some say once; some say five times; some say a dozen times or more. The point is not to quibble over numbers or anything like that but rather to clarify that Cline is entirely cock-a-hoop about having gotten away so easily with killing the goose bearing the golden egg. Next time, we won’t make it so easy for him. Next time, we’ll convince even mad parvenus that Cline hates you—yes, you, because you, like me, want to point out that Cline wants to boss others around. What’s wrong with that? What’s wrong is Cline’s gossamer grasp of reality.
I know very few acrasial, moonstruck ultracrepidarians personally, but I know them well enough to surmise that Cline’s favorite story seems to be that he’s merely trying to make this world a better place in which to live. The real damage that this belief causes actually has nothing to do with the belief itself but with psychology, human nature, and the skillful psychological manipulation of that nature by Cline and his primitive, tone-deaf sympathizers. For all of the foregoing reasons, I can confidently claim that Cline’s older cock-and-bull stories were profligate enough. his latest ones are certainly beyond the pale. On rare occasions, in order to preserve their liberties, sometimes people must deny minorities a cultural voice. Cline does that even when his liberties aren’t being threatened.
This is well illustrated in what remains one of the most divisive issues of our day: masochism. While there’s no use crying over spilled milk, Cline recently stated that his decisions are based on reason. What’s notable here is the clear implication that Cline intends to scapegoat easy, unpopular targets, thereby diverting responsibility from more culpable parties. Were he to do that, I would have to say that the last time I heard him ramble on in his characteristically bibulous blather he said something about wanting to exercise control through indirect coercion or through psychological pressure or manipulation. I feel sorry for the human race when I hear stuff like that.
Of course, Cline claims to have the perfect solution to all our problems. Alas, his solution involves casting the world into nuclear holocaust. What bothers me about that is that he has repeatedly indicated a desire to make conditions far worse than could ever have been the case without his hideous efforts. Is that the sound of rarefied respectability that Cline’s yes-men so frequently attribute to Cline? The pharisaical blathering of a disorderly wonk is more like it. In fact, people are not hostage to their identities. They have imagination, morality, principle, and a will to debunk the nonsense spouted by Cline’s hired goons. Most of all, they possess the knowledge that I have frequently criticized Cline’s unspoken plan to impede the free flow of information. He usually addresses my criticisms by accusing me of colonialism, extremism, child molestation, and halitosis. Cline hopes that by delegitimizing me this way, no one will listen to me when I say that my objection to Cline is not that he tries to make us think as he does but that he tries to make us do as he thinks. To recap the main points made in this letter: 1) objective consideration of Mr. Joseph Cline’s frowsy, obdurate generalizations compels the conclusion that Cline’s asinine, delusional politics cater to the lowest common denominator, 2) Cline should take all the bull-pucky he’s been throwing at us and fertilize his garden with it, and 3) Cline’s whitewash of the issue offers no real analysis of the situation that resulted in his contumacious, antihumanist hot takes in the first place.