Complaint against FinnI don't intend to discomfit my readers, but I do need to point out that maladroit loonies suffer from a collective self-image that prefers victimization to success and imposes a suffocating group conformity that ostracizes nonconformists. By way of introduction, let me just say that what I wrote just a moment ago is not the paranoid rambling of an unsophisticated, wanton wacko. It's a fact. Finn keeps saying that genocide, slavery, racism, and the systematic oppression, degradation, and exploitation of most of the world's people are all absolutely justified. This is exemplary of the nonsensical rhetoric and scaremongering that typifies the language of revolting scaramouches and other malodorous personæ non gratæ. The law is not just a moral stance. It is the consensus of society on our minimum standards of behavior. To say otherwise would be thrasonical.
If it weren't for pertinacious ruffians, Finn would have no friends. His execrable calumnies are an evil without remedy. How does he deal with this fascinating piece of information? He totally ignores it.
I've received a smattering of mail from people who want to know the real story behind Finn's stubborn apothegms, so here it is: I sometimes ask myself whether the struggle to express my views is worth all of the potential consequences. And I consistently answer by saying that I would indisputably like to comment on Finn's attempt to associate tribalism with cameralism. There is no association. It is well known that most of what Finn says is pure gibberish. But Finn uses his societal status as some sort of mystical talisman that immunizes his analects from any sort of legitimate criticism. To say anything else would be a lie. I have often maintained that reasonable people can reasonably disagree. Unfortunately, when dealing with Finn and his shills, that claim assumes facts not in evidence. So let me claim instead that I have in fact told Finn that he is controlling and demanding. Unfortunately, there really wasn't anything to his response. I suppose Finn just doesn't want to admit that if you read between the lines of his stances, you'll really find that he has already begun destroying our moral fiber. I wish I were joking, but I'm not. What's more, Finn is a psychologically defective person. He's what the psychiatrists call a constitutional psychopath or a sociopath.
Finn has allowed himself to become a spokesman for the same point of view shared by stroppy, deplorable lunatics, self-indulgent conspiracy theorists, and warped individuals while masquerading as an outspoken radical bucking the system. People tell me that we must always be looking towards the future while keeping the past in mind. And the people who tell me this are correct, of course. It saddens me that Finn has so frequently lied about how he commands an army of robots that live in the hollow center of the earth and produce earthquakes whenever they feel like shaking things up a bit on the surface that some weaker-minded people are starting to believe it. We need to explain to such people that it's irrelevant that my allegations are 100% true. Finn distrusts my information and arguments and will forever maintain his current opinions.
Finn dreams of a time when he'll be free to poke someone's eyes out. That's the way he's planned it, and that's the way it'll happen—not may happen but will happen—if we don't interfere, if we don't enable all people to achieve their potential as human beings. This is not a question of jujuism or chauvinism. Rather, it is a question about how in order to solve the big problems with Finn we must first understand these problems, and to understand them, we must throw down the gauntlet and challenge his brethren to embark on a new path towards change. His stories about metagrobolism are particularly ridden with errors and distortions, even leaving aside the concept's initial implausibility. Here are a few points to ponder:
1. The fact that morally repugnant carpers of various stripes find Finn's diatribes entertaining—indeed, titillating—is deeply horrifying to the past and potential victims of such taradiddles.
2. It breaks my heart and fills my chest with agonizing pain when I see Finn crush any semblance of opposition to his simple-minded magic-bullet explanations.
3. There are deeper issues afoot here.
Those points may at first seem unrelated, but when you connect the dots it becomes clear that Finn has a natural talent for complaining. He can find any aspect of life and whine about it for hours upon hours. With that, I'll draw this letter to a close. No doubt I've made some factual mistakes in the text you just read, but essays since Montaigne have been about locating truth, not about assembling facts. I'll be happy as long as you've learned from this letter that Finn's mischievous strictures arose out of an unjust system only to spread more injustice in their wake, proving that there is no end to tendentious immoralism.
If it weren't for pertinacious ruffians, Finn would have no friends. His execrable calumnies are an evil without remedy. How does he deal with this fascinating piece of information? He totally ignores it.
I've received a smattering of mail from people who want to know the real story behind Finn's stubborn apothegms, so here it is: I sometimes ask myself whether the struggle to express my views is worth all of the potential consequences. And I consistently answer by saying that I would indisputably like to comment on Finn's attempt to associate tribalism with cameralism. There is no association. It is well known that most of what Finn says is pure gibberish. But Finn uses his societal status as some sort of mystical talisman that immunizes his analects from any sort of legitimate criticism. To say anything else would be a lie. I have often maintained that reasonable people can reasonably disagree. Unfortunately, when dealing with Finn and his shills, that claim assumes facts not in evidence. So let me claim instead that I have in fact told Finn that he is controlling and demanding. Unfortunately, there really wasn't anything to his response. I suppose Finn just doesn't want to admit that if you read between the lines of his stances, you'll really find that he has already begun destroying our moral fiber. I wish I were joking, but I'm not. What's more, Finn is a psychologically defective person. He's what the psychiatrists call a constitutional psychopath or a sociopath.
Finn has allowed himself to become a spokesman for the same point of view shared by stroppy, deplorable lunatics, self-indulgent conspiracy theorists, and warped individuals while masquerading as an outspoken radical bucking the system. People tell me that we must always be looking towards the future while keeping the past in mind. And the people who tell me this are correct, of course. It saddens me that Finn has so frequently lied about how he commands an army of robots that live in the hollow center of the earth and produce earthquakes whenever they feel like shaking things up a bit on the surface that some weaker-minded people are starting to believe it. We need to explain to such people that it's irrelevant that my allegations are 100% true. Finn distrusts my information and arguments and will forever maintain his current opinions.
Finn dreams of a time when he'll be free to poke someone's eyes out. That's the way he's planned it, and that's the way it'll happen—not may happen but will happen—if we don't interfere, if we don't enable all people to achieve their potential as human beings. This is not a question of jujuism or chauvinism. Rather, it is a question about how in order to solve the big problems with Finn we must first understand these problems, and to understand them, we must throw down the gauntlet and challenge his brethren to embark on a new path towards change. His stories about metagrobolism are particularly ridden with errors and distortions, even leaving aside the concept's initial implausibility. Here are a few points to ponder:
1. The fact that morally repugnant carpers of various stripes find Finn's diatribes entertaining—indeed, titillating—is deeply horrifying to the past and potential victims of such taradiddles.
2. It breaks my heart and fills my chest with agonizing pain when I see Finn crush any semblance of opposition to his simple-minded magic-bullet explanations.
3. There are deeper issues afoot here.
Those points may at first seem unrelated, but when you connect the dots it becomes clear that Finn has a natural talent for complaining. He can find any aspect of life and whine about it for hours upon hours. With that, I'll draw this letter to a close. No doubt I've made some factual mistakes in the text you just read, but essays since Montaigne have been about locating truth, not about assembling facts. I'll be happy as long as you've learned from this letter that Finn's mischievous strictures arose out of an unjust system only to spread more injustice in their wake, proving that there is no end to tendentious immoralism.
Complaint against Finn
