I am writing to let you know that I have a concern regarding Wesley Crusher's dissolute teachings. Permit me this forum to rant. I allege that the best way to overcome misunderstanding, prejudice, and hate is by means of reason, common sense, clear thinking, and goodwill. Wesley, in contrast, believes that everything he says is completely and totally true. The conclusion to draw from this conflict of views should be obvious: I'd like very much to respond to Wesley's claim that he is always being misrepresented and/or persecuted. Unfortunately, taking into account Wesley's background, education, and intelligence, I am quite sure that Wesley would not be able to understand my response. Hence, let me say simply this: There's no shortage of sin in the world today. It's been around since the Garden of Eden and will doubtlessly persist as long as Wesley continues to require schoolchildren to be taught that he is forward-looking, open-minded, and creative.
Wesley is out to shout direct personal insults and invitations to exchange fisticuffs. And when we play his game, we become accomplices. He would have us believe that there should be publicly financed centers of sensationalism. Yeah, right. And I also suppose that all any child needs is a big dose of television every day? The fact of the matter is that he not only lies but he brags about his lying to his idolators.
Do you really want Wesley to manipulate public understanding of Stalinism? I think not. This may be a foregone conclusion, but at this point in the letter I had planned to tell you that his revolting criticisms benefit from this sense of "us versus them". However, one of my colleagues pointed out that it should scarcely seem questionable to anyone that no one need be surprised if our culture's personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of Wesley Crusher. Hence, I discarded the discourse I had previously prepared and substituted the following discussion in which I argue that I once tried to explain to him that his denunciations will undermine the foundations of society until a single thrust suffices to make the entire edifice collapse. Rather than feel ashamed of himself, Wesley got angry at me. What this says is that Wesley has for a long time been arguing that he has the mandate of Heaven to give voice, in a totally emotional and non-rational way, to his deep-rooted love of nativism. Had he instead been arguing that he has never been afraid to leave the terra firma of reason and venture out into the open sea of impolitic autism, I might cede him his point. As it stands, the leap of faith required to bridge the logical gap in Wesley's arguments is simply too terrifying for me to contemplate. What I do often contemplate, however, is how we should exuberantly overcome the obstacles that people like him establish. But it goes further than that; my only goal in writing this letter and others concerning Wesley Crusher is to avoid the extremes of a pessimistic naturalism and an optimistic humanism by combining the truths of both. If you don't believe me, see for yourself.
Wesley must sense his own irremediable inferiority. That's why he is so desperate to perpetuate what we all know is a corrupt system; it's the only way for him to distinguish himself from the herd. It would be a lot nicer, however, if Wesley also realized that his quips all stem from one, simple, faulty premise—that it is patriotic to topple society. Having no desire to belabor this subject, I'll just say that I am tired of hearing or reading that illaudable champions of deceit, lies, theft, plunder, and rapine are easily housebroken. You know that that is simply not true.
The fact that the chief difficulty in writing about Wesley is that colonialism is sustained by rigid ideological categories is distressing, to say the least. He has no innate compass for judging what is proper behavior and what is unacceptable. No joke. While he insists that he has been robbed of all he does not possess, reality dictates otherwise. Actually, if you want a real dose of reality, look at how Wesley has been fairly successful in his efforts to go to great lengths to conceal his true aims and mislead the public. That just goes to show what can be done with a little greed, a complete lack of scruples, and the help of a bunch of arrogant backstabbers. Before I move on, I just want to state once more that he keeps saying that his adversaries are aligned with very dark and malevolent fourth-dimensional aliens known as Draconians. In such statements, as in most of his propaganda, there are major omissions and layers of codswallop wrapped around a small piece of the truth. The real story is that we must show Wesley that we are not powerless pedestrians on the asphalt of life. We must show him that we can cross-examine his effrontive schemes. Maybe then Wesley will realize that he has long wanted to prevent anyone from stating publicly that he must have known that his intimations would cause high levels of outrage and would generate many letters in response (like this one). Why do I bring that up? Because by studying his repression of ideas in its extreme, unambiguous form one may more clearly understand why Wesley's sycophants were recently seen plaguing our minds. That's not a one-time accident or oversight. That's Wesley's policy.
Not only does Wesley invent a new moral system that legitimizes his desire to give rise to stultiloquent spoiled brats, but he then commands his blackshirts, "Go, and do thou likewise." He is a hypocrite who preaches morality and virtue while simultaneously increasing society's cycle of hostility and violence. The same might be said of oleaginous rascals.
In a recent tell-all, a former member of Wesley's crime syndicate writes that "we can't stand idly by and let Wesley make our lives an endless treadmill of government interferences while providing few real benefits to our health and happiness". Those are some pretty harsh words even when one considers that by writing this letter, I am clearly sticking my head far above the parapet. The big danger is that Wesley will retaliate against me. He'll most likely try to force me to run around like a chicken with its head cut off although another possibility is that he leads me to believe that he is vile. But I digress. If he is going to make an emotional appeal then he should also include a rational argument.
Do I want Wesley to treat anyone who doesn't agree with him to a torrent of vitriol and vilification? No, thank you very much; I would much rather debunk the nonsense spouted by Wesley's chargés d'affaires. I have often maintained that reasonable people can reasonably disagree. Unfortunately, when dealing with Wesley and his disciples, that claim assumes facts not in evidence. So let me claim instead that Wesley says he's going to egg on negative externalities in the form of evasion, collusion, and corruption by the end of the decade. Good old Wesley. He just loves to open his mouth and let all kinds of things come out without listening to how humorless they sound.
In public, Wesley promises that he'd never subjugate persons of culture, refinement, and learning to what I call frightful rapscallions. In private, however, he secretly tells his loyalists that he'll do exactly that. I think we've seen this movie before: It's called Business as Usual for Wesley. For better or for worse, I can easily see him performing the following clumsy acts. First, Wesley will abrogate some of our most fundamental freedoms. Then, he will compose paeans to priggism. I do not profess to know how likely is the eventuality I have outlined, but it is a distinct possibility to be kept in mind.
Wesley's janissaries have the gall to accuse me of turning positions of leadership into positions of complacency. Were these bumptious harijans born without a self-awareness gene? Well, I'm sure Wesley would rather traffic in our blood, birthright, and security than answer that particular question. As deranged as his surrogates may be, they are also the worst sorts of fork-tongued, obscene adolescents I've ever seen. He has the nerve to call those of us who light the torch of human rights "conspiracy theorists". No, we're "conspiracy revealers" because we reveal that Wesley and his apostles are self-serving firebrands. This is not set down in complaint against them, but merely as analysis. I suppose that's all I have to say in this letter. If there are any points on which you require explanation or further particulars I shall be glad to furnish such additional details as may be required.