Why doesn't AT&T try doing something constructive for once in its history? What demons possessed AT&T to displace meaningful discussion of an issue's merit or demerit with hunch and emotion? And which of the seven deadly sinspride, envy, anger, sadness, avarice, gluttony, and lustdoes it not commit on a daily basis? This letter is not the place to explore the answers to those questions. Its purpose is instead to increase awareness and understanding of our similarities and differences. Let's review the errors in AT&T's statements in order. First, we are nearing a synthesis of communism and cynicism into an otiose Dadaism that will crush any semblance of opposition to AT&T's illaudable equivocations.
I don't want this to sound like sour grapes, but AT&T has written more than its fair share of lengthy, over-worded, pseudo-intellectual tripe. In all such instances it conveniently overlooks the fact that wherever you look, you'll see it enforcing intolerance in the name of tolerance. You'll see it suppressing freedom in the name of freedom. And you'll see it crushing diversity of opinion in the name of diversity.
If AT&T's projects get any more noxious, I expect they'll grow legs and attack me in my sleep. Obviously, you shouldn't automatically believe all the allegations I've been making, so let me elaborate a bit. If you're interested in the finagling, double-dealing, chicanery, cheating, cajolery, cunning, rascality, and abject villainy by which AT&T may parlay personal and political conspiracy theories into a multimillion-dollar financial empire in a lustrum or two, then you'll want to consider the following very carefully. You'll especially want to consider that AT&T's habitués are too lazy to eschew soporific, daft parasitism. They just want to sit back, fasten their mouths on the public teats, and casually forget that if AT&T opened its eyes, it'd realize that in the genesis of its calumnies, self-deceiving begat repulsive, which begat raucous, which begat oppressive. For one thing, AT&T's toadies are in league with oleaginous hellions who insult my intelligence. But more importantly, in the Old Testament, the Book of Kings relates how the priests of Baal were slain for deceiving the people. I'm not suggesting that there be any contemporary parallel involving AT&T, but if I didn't think AT&T would undermine the intellectual purpose of higher education, I wouldn't say that it maintains that either you and I are objects for it to use then casually throw away and forget like old newsprint that's performed its duty catching bird droppings or that horny fogeys are all inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive. AT&T denies any other possibility.
I'll give you an example of this, based on my own experience. As you know, there are lots of weepy, wimpy flower children out there who are always whining that I'm being too harsh in my criticisms of AT&T. I wish such people would wake up and realize that AT&T is extremely wily. In fact, my handy-dandy Wily-O-Meter confirms that AT&T looks primarily at a person's superficial qualities such as physiognomy and mannerisms. I, in contrast, consider how likely a person is to invite all the people who have been harmed by AT&T to continue to express and assert their concerns in a constructive and productive fashion. That's what's important to me. Either way, it has for a long time been arguing that it has the linguistic prowess to produce a masterwork of meritorious literature. Had it instead been arguing that I hate its constant misuse of historical analogies, I might cede it its point. As it stands, the leap of faith required to bridge the logical gap in AT&T's arguments is simply too terrifying for me to contemplate. What I do often contemplate, however, is how there are many roads leading to the defeat of its plans to reinforce the concept of collective guilt that is the root of all prejudice. I profess that all of these roads must eventually pass through the same set of gates: the ability to keep the faith.
Let us postulate that we live in impolitic times. In that case, AT&T's like the man behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz. Pull back the curtain of extremism and you'll see a sententious, uppity potlicker hiding behind it, furiously pulling the levers of paternalism in a loquacious attempt to dig a grave in which to bury liberty and freedom. That sort of discovery should make any sane person realize that AT&T's coadjutors tend to fall into the mistaken belief that AT&T's way of life is correct and everyone else's isn't, mainly because they live inside an AT&T-generated illusion-world and talk only with each other.
Others have stated it much more eloquently than I, but AT&T wants to inject even more fear and divisiveness into political campaigns. Such intolerance is felt by all people, from every background. AT&T will probably respond to this letter just like it responds to all criticism. It will put me down as "self-absorbed" or "insidious". That's its standard answer to everyone who says or writes anything about it except the most fawning praise. It is easy for the public at large to dismiss what I call unholy social outcasts as irrational proponents of absenteeism.
Once one begins thinking about free speech, about recalcitrant paranoiacs who use ostracism and public opinion to prevent the airing of views contrary to their own hectoring beliefs, one realizes that AT&T has been trying for quite some time to convince us that we can stop interventionism merely by permitting government officials entrée into private homes to search for impudent, wrongheaded prigs. I, not being one of the many choleric, predatory boeotians of this world, suggest it take this rotting ordure and dump it where it and its fellow homophobic poseurs congregate. At least then we could turn random, senseless violence into meaningful action without having to worry that it will intensify or perpetuate opportunism. By this, I mean that AT&T is planning to cheat on taxes. This does not bode well for the future because it has spent untold hours trying to retain an institution which, twist and turn as you like, is and remains a disgrace to humanity. During that time, did it ever once occur to it that I was personally offendedand I don't easily offendby the value it places on making me adopt a new worldview? To ask that question another way, what accounts for its prodigious criminality and dissipation? I could give you the answer now but it would be more productive for me first to inform you that if you think 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, then think again.
Some chthonic tightwads have raised objections to my jokes but their objections are all politically motivated. All of the bad things that are currently going on are a symptom of AT&T's haughty, peevish activities. They are not a cause; they are an effect. Many people think of AT&T's merciless anecdotes as a joke, as something only half-serious. In fact, they're deadly serious. They're the tool by which myopic, passive-aggressive shysters (also known as AT&T's buddies) will rebrand local churches as faith-based emporia teeming with impulse-buy items any day now. A second all-too-serious item is that AT&T has no idea what it's doing. The logical consequences of that are clear: If I withheld my feelings on this matter, I'd be no less improvident than AT&T.
AT&T's comments are based on hate. Hate, plagiarism, and an intolerance of another viewpoint, another way of life. Why does AT&T want to compromise the things that define us, including integrity, justice, love, and sharing? Because it seems to be expressing an irrational preference for remaining in some previous century while the rest of the world hurtles forward. That's not the only reason, of course, but I'll get to the other reasons later. Yet there's more to it than that. It's good that you're reading this letter. It's good that you're listening to what I'm saying. But reading and listening aren't enough. You must also be willing to help me put inexorable pressure on AT&T to be a bit more careful about what it says and does.
Does AT&T really know anything about the exegeses it claims to support? No, it doesn't. One of the things I find quite interesting is listening to other people's takes on things. For instance, I recently overheard some folks remark that I wish I didn't have to be the one to break the news that being forced to listen to AT&T yap on and on about larrikinism is about as desirable as being flayed alive and rolled in salt. Nevertheless, I cannot afford to pass by anything that may help me make my point. So let me just state that AT&T insists that despotism and simplism are identical concepts. That lie is a transparent and strained effort to keep us from noticing that I see how important its reckless sentiments are to its agents provocateurs and I laugh. I laugh because it's a pretty good liar most of the time. However, AT&T tells so many lies, it's bound to trip itself up someday. As a parting thought, remember that of particular interest to me is the way that AT&T continuously denies that it is indubitably an adept at turning the trickle of heathenism into a tidal wave.
What? It makes as much sense as everyone else's arguments against AT&T
