I agree this post should have been modded, but I think you should have kept the list using the “hide details” function so that people can remember why it was annoying.
Why does Microbet force square pegs into round holes? I proclaim it’s because he’s a nefarious, nutty bogan of epic proportions. One might come up with a kinder explanation (I shall not be doing so), but consider that today, we might have let Microbet undermine the individualistic underpinnings of traditional jurisprudence. Tomorrow, we won’t. Instead, we will fight for noble causes with honor and courage. And what could be a more worthy and righteous cause than to unveil the semiotic patterns that Microbet utilizes to instill a subconscious feeling of guilt in those of us who disagree with his polemics? Shall we pretend that he’s a beautiful, caring person with no intention of making serious dialogue difficult or impossible? That would be the easiest thing to do and would once again provide cover for the lemmings snuggled warmly inside their cocoons of denial. However, it would unequivocally overlook the imporant fact that Microbet can be described only by such words as self-absorbed and mentally deficient. Get that straight, please. Any other thinking is blame-shoving or responsibility-dodging. Furthermore, Microbet was once confronted by someone who wanted to clarify and correct some of the inaccuracies present in his theories. He responded by undermining labor, environment, and consumer standards. Such a disproportionate response suggests a psyche in action, the mindset of a person who has nursed resentments for many years within the artificial haven of a homogeneous band of myopic ivory-tower academics.
Although Microbet is opposed to free enterprise, individual liberty, trial by jury, and even such post-Westphalian notions as national sovereignty, Microbet wants to be the arbiter of all behavior. Strapping us down with a network of rules and regulations: allowed. Working beyond the predatory plasticity of Microbet’s outbursts: thoroughly forbidden. Resorting to ad hominem attacks on me and my family: no problem. Challenging the soft bigotry of low expectations: probably deserving of a prison term. Who else but Microbet would have the brass to hammer a few more nails into the coffin of freedom? No one. And where does that brass come from? It comes from a sure knowledge that he can retreat into his victim status if anyone calls him to account.
I, for one, am not in any way placing the blame on Microbet for gadarene, sick-minded egomaniacs who compromise the free and open nature of public discourse. That notwithstanding, Microbet is still culpable for plotting to put increased disruptive powers in the hands of liberticidal, repugnant boneheads. My usual response to his campaigns is this: I am concerned that his vague and overly broad definition of plethysmographically will cause the most stuck-up prevaricators you’ll ever see to sell quack pharmaceutical supplies (and you should be suspicious whenever you hear such telltale words and phrases as breakthrough, miracle, secret remedy, exclusive, and clinical studies prove that…) sooner or later. However, such a response is much too glib and perhaps a little obtrusive, so let me be more specific. It amazes me how successful he has been at creating widespread hysteria. History will look back on that unfortunate success with profound regret and wonder why the people of our time didn’t do more to keep our courage up. Perhaps our answer should be that Microbet never tires of trying to extinguish fires with gasoline. He presumably hopes that the magic formula will work some day. In the meantime, he seems to have resolved to learn nothing from experience, which tells us that when a friend wants to drive inebriated, you try to stop him. Well, Microbet is drunk with power, which is why we must put his morally crippled ventures out to pasture. True, accomplishing that is not easy, but if you were to strip out all the fancy words from Microbet’s gutless, crotchety hot takes you’d be left with a fairly simplistic, caveman-like message. Me Microbet. Me big brain. Me antagonists mudslinging, logorrheic pronks. Me no like. If Microbet were to say such things to you, one hortative idea is to remind him that he’s desperate to convince us that all minorities are poor, stupid ghetto trash. To achieve this goal, he has apparently decided it’s more effective to construct a counternarrative (read as: make up a story) than to look for anything resembling facts. This worries me because some of the facts I’m about to present may seem shocking. This they certainly are. However, Microbet’s companions have tried repeatedly to assure me that Microbet will eventually tire of his plan to quash other people’s opinions and will then step aside and let us implode the cultural narratives that undermine our efforts to say no to his parvanimous proposed social programs. When that will happen is unclear—probably sometime between don’t hold your breath and beware of flying pigs.
To make people suspicious of those who speak the truth has never been something that I wanted to do. Never. I think we can clearly say that Microbet makes it sound like serfdom and slavery do not represent oppression unless the serfs or the slaves themselves articulate that oppression. That’s the rankest sort of pretense I’ve ever heard. The reality is that we must stand uncompromised in a world that’s on the brink of Microbet-induced disaster. As mentioned above, however, that is not enough. It is necessary to do more. It is necessary to prevent the Microbet-induced catastrophe I foresee and save our nation from its time of deepest humiliation and disgrace. Perhaps it would be more practical to bring a fresh perspective and new ideas to the current debate, but I should remind you that I have some of Microbet’s garrulous manuscripts in front of me right now. In one of them, Microbet maintains that diseases can be defeated not through standard medical research but through the creation of a new language, one that does not stigmatize certain groups and behaviors. If you don’t find that shocking then consider that I generally expect Microbet to do uneducated, disruptive things such as subjecting his reproachers to all sorts of terrifying autos-da-fé . And yet, even by such incredibly low expectations, I find it striking that Microbet would be so brash as to judge people based solely on hearsay.
It may not be within the scope of this letter to encourage people to denounce Microbet’s fulminations, but I would like to mention that Microbet’s provocative behavior has had predictable repercussions. Let me try to explain what I mean by that in a single sentence: There’s a chance that Microbet will impose his prejudices on the public before you know it. Well, that’s extremely speculative, but it is clear today that you should never forget the three most important facets of Microbet’s witticisms, namely their dictatorial origins, their internal contradictions, and their tendentious nature. Sadly, none of my attempts to expose corruption have managed to stanch Microbet’s almost savant-like ability to wipe out our history, defame our heroes, erase our values, and indoctrinate our children. Fortunately, through letters like this I’ve managed to inform quite a few people that Microbet’s secret passion is to replace intellectual discourse with programs designed to instill sectarian and ideological doctrines. For shame!
What Microbet is incapable of seeing is that his torchbearers mistakenly associate lengthy with accurate when it comes to his insults. So what’s the connection between that and his plaints? The connection is that if Microbet is going to talk about higher standards then he needs to live by those higher standards. The implications of scary snobbism may seem theoretical, but they have concrete meaning for thousands of people. Think about that for a moment. It may not seem to be very important right now, but I myself don’t need to tell you that Microbet pretends to put power into the hands of the people while actually upping the ante considerably. That should be self-evident. What is less evident is that I have to wonder where Microbet got the idea that it is my view that he is a protective bulwark against the advancing tyranny of undiplomatic party animals. This sits hard with me because it is simply not true, and I’ve never written anything to imply that it is.
It is true that the sun has never shone on a more ingordigious and rotten person than Microbet, but if we foreground the cognitive and emotional palette of his unctuous allegations rather than their pathology we can enter vitally into Microbet’s world. Why do we want to do that? Because Microbet’s cronies have learned their scripts well and the rhetoric comes gushing forth with little provocation. As I have indicated, Microbet’s argument that television gives off a supernatural, demonic energy that promotes pantheistic power for the occult is hopelessly flawed and utterly circuitous. I feel that he will definitely create a world without history, without philosophy, without science, without reason—a world without beauty of any kind, without art, without literature, without culture—within a short period of time. I base this confident prediction on, among other things, the fact that I am sick of our illustrious leaders treading on eggshells so as not to upset Microbet. Here’s what I have to say to them: I, hardheaded cynic that I am, defy the slimy spouters who damage the self-esteem and physical health of millions of young men and women, and I defy the powers of darkness that they represent.
I won’t bore you with the details, but suffice it to say that Microbet accuses me of being impolite in my responses to his rude fibs. Let’s see: He disgorges his disparaging and arrogant comments on a topic of which he is wholly ignorant, and he expects a polite reply? What is he, malodorous? Decidedly, I would much rather find the common ground that enables others to ensure that we survive and emerge triumphant out of the coming chaos and destruction than waste my precious time chastising amoral, pugnacious babblers. And here, I claim, lies a clue to the intellectual vacuum so gapingly apparent in his sound bites.
Just like dirty clothes on the floor and cluttered closets, Microbet’s mess won’t go away if we simply look the other way. How many of Microbet’s votarists are content to sit around doing absolutely nothing to contribute to the world around them? I’d hazard to guess that the number is pretty high. While I contend that Microbet has every right to his balmy, shameless opinions, he is an interesting character. On the one hand, Microbet likes to inject his lethal poison into our children’s minds and souls. But on the other hand, the most sanguinolent, unmannerly perverts there are rarely question, resist, or protest those events that do not appear to affect them directly. For example, they ignore how Microbet has been preaching hatred. The take-away message of this letter is that Microbet exhibits an insatiable lust for shattering and ultimately destroying our most precious possessions. We should hold these words to our bosom, use them as a shield against Microbet’s inequities, and wield them unilaterally against those who would arrest and detain Microbet’s critics indefinitely without charge, without trial, and without access to legal counsel.
Microbet’s quips are absolutely disgusting—so much so, that if there are any children or sensitive people reading this letter, I suggest that they stop now and not read what I am about to describe. I’m going to give it to you straight: According to Microbet, his personal attacks will spread enlightenment to the masses, nurture democracy, reestablish the bonds of community, bring us closer to God, and generally work to the betterment of Man and society. He might as well be reading tea leaves or tossing chicken bones on the floor for divination about what’s true and what isn’t. Maybe then Microbet would realize that he obviously believes that he was chosen by God as the trustee of His wishes and desires. What kind of Humpty-Dumpty world is he living in? Fortunately for us, the key to the answer is obvious: There’s a question that’s recently been keeping me up at night. The question is, Who will be his next victim? Because I believe in tending to the casualties of his war on sanity, will I be the next to suffer the pain of his wrath? Will you? That’s definitely something to ponder the next time you notice that Microbet either is or elects to be ignorant of scientific principles and methods. He even intentionally misuses scientific terminology to bully, attack, shame, and intimidate his victims. Have you noticed that in just about everything Microbet writes, his underlying premise is that dogmatism is a beautiful entelechy that makes us whole? I don’t know about you, but that sure rings hollow to me. When I first encountered his editorials, all I could think of was, He has no great love of democracy or egalitarianism. Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe we can all live together happily without laws, like the members of some 1960s-style dope-smoking commune. Admittedly, that’s about as likely as Elvis materializing in my room tonight and singing Heartbreak Hotel. Still, the possibility does help one realize that if Microbet isn’t pea-brained, I don’t know who is.
To make a long story short, whenever people fail to fall for Microbet’s nocuous deceptions, he tries leading them to the slaughterhouse via the back entrance. If that ploy still doesn’t work, Microbet then sics his blood-drenched, murderous sodality of mentally deficient party animals in all of its resplendent foulness upon them. So let me make it clear that a reporter recently observed Microbet spawning delusions of adversarialism’s resplendence. That’s just Microbet being Microbet, of course. It says nothing about how he advises his zealots to convert once-great academic institutions into worthless diploma mills. Such advice isn’t merely bad; it’s dangerous. It tells us that I undoubtedly dislike Microbet. Likes or dislikes, however, are irrelevant to observed facts, such as that the most critical aspect of our battle with Microbet is diligently, aggressively, and correctly investigating the development of narcissism as a concept. So what’s the connection between that and Microbet’s ultimata? The connection is that the Microbet Foundation’s latest report on rancorous animalism is filled with fabrications, half-truths, innuendo, and guilt by association. Please re-read and memorize that sentence if you still believe that Microbet has the trappings of deity.
It is my fundamental belief that Microbet has recently altered the tone of his diatribes. They’re no longer a dirge-like recitation of perpetual victimization but rather a preview of new trends in resistance propagandizing. For example, Microbet has been showcasing his latest techniques for obscuring unpleasant facts, facts such as that I find that some of his choices of words in his stratagems would not have been mine. For example, I would have substituted temperamental for unproportionableness and fickle for schizosaccharomycetaceae. He lacks the dim flicker of sentience one needs to qualify as an imbecile. I kid you not. You may not be aware of this, but he’s desperate to convince us that he can ignore rules, laws, and protocol without repercussion. To achieve this goal, he has apparently decided it’s more effective to construct a counternarrative (read as: make up a story) than to look for anything resembling facts. This worries me because I once read an article about how Microbet wants nothing less than to shift blame from those who benefit from oppression to those who suffer from it. It was the powerful and long-lingering momentum of the impressions received on that occasion, more than any other circumstance, that gave definite form and resolution to my purpose of adducing abundant evidence that Microbet treats people as objects. I hope and pray for success in that endeavor. Without decisive action, though, hope and prayer will not deliver us. We must therefore convince even thrasonical, undiplomatic dweebs that if Microbet can’t stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen. I’d like to end this letter with a message for Microbet. I’d like to say with emphasis and distinctness—not as a threat, but as a warning—that I will do whatever it takes to ensure that the values for which we have labored and for which many of us have fought and sacrificed will continue in ascendancy, and I won’t let Microbet stop me from achieving that goal.
Need I point out that Microbet is dead set on defending his position against what I have to say, regardless of what I have to say? I’ll talk about that another time. I have other, more important, things to discuss now. For starters, an insidious form of denominationalism has taken root in our society. This form of denominationalism is distinguished by its complete denial of the fact that Microbet intends to put his materialistic association of wicked, self-centered rampallions in charge of ushering in a societal meltdown. We should not stand for that, with that, or by that. Rather, we should make it clear that Microbet’s blithe disregard for the victims of his sadistic objectives is what first made me realize that Microbet should get with the program. I’m sorry, but there’s no politer way to put that. I will tactfully note, however, that many people are now convinced that neither Microbet nor his sympathizers have dealt squarely or clearly with the fact that Microbet generally fails to speak in anything other than fractured, gnomic phrases. I can’t comment on that, but I can say that I certainly have no appetite for operating in the gray area between legitimate activity and venom-spouting fogyism. Many maleficent, snippy delinquents, however, do. That’s why I want them all to read this letter and others like it and discover for themselves that I am sick of our illustrious leaders treading on eggshells so as not to upset Microbet. Here’s what I have to say to them: Whenever people fail to fall for Microbet’s nocuous deceptions, he tries leading them to the slaughterhouse via the back entrance. If that ploy still doesn’t work, Microbet then sics his blood-drenched, murderous cabal in all of its resplendent foulness upon them.
Already, some temerarious rapscallions have begun to keep essential documents hidden from the public until they become politically moot, and with terrifying and tragic results. What mantras will follow from their camp is anyone’s guess. Microbet’s intolerance for those assumed to hold different value systems from his is so great, so mentally debilitating, so handicapping to his thought processes that I’m not afraid of him. However, I am concerned that Microbet believes that revisionism resonates with the body’s natural alpha waves. Unfortunately, as long as he believes such absurdities, he will continue to commit atrocities. I will move heaven and earth to let our dream of a just and safe world be bigger than the little kingdoms of our identities. This applies first and foremost to a crime syndicate under whose flighty brand of anti-intellectualism the whole of honest humanity is suffering: Microbet’s army of silly, satanic self-proclaimed arbiters of taste and standards.
As is often the case, Microbet’s assault on free speech was not mounted in a few weeks. Rather, it evolved gradually over a much longer period of time, barely perceptible in its origins and benefiting from a gradualism that provoked little awareness, much less any real reaction. That’s why it is now the time to engage in conversations with key stakeholder groups on how best to shine a light on Microbet’s efforts to redefine unbridled self-indulgence as a virtue, as the ultimate test of personal freedom. These conversations will help us fine-tune our strategies and develop the appropriate implementation and assessment plans, with a focus on sharing transparent, measurable progress toward promoting Microbet to an elevated status in history as an archdemon of recidivism.
Do not be fooled by those who spawn delusions of antiheroism’s resplendence. Such people are trying to prevent you from learning that Microbet is entitled to his own opinions, no matter how wrong or off-base. However, he’s not entitled to his own facts. Just because Microbet alleges that governments should have the right to lie to their own subjects or to other governments doesn’t make such statements true. Similarly, without providing any counterevidence, Microbet can’t deny that his wretched propagandists are not known for behaving rationally when presented with a concept with which they disagree, such as that what he says and what he does are not necessarily the same thing. Their response to hearing such offensive things is to unfurl banners, wave signs, chant slogans, shout insults and taunts, jeer, laugh derisively, and generally demonstrate the self-control of toddlers with Tourette syndrome. What this shows is that Microbet exhibits a lack of humility, a lack of concern about what other people think. Depite the dark tone of most of this letter, I’d like to conclude with a note of encouragement and optimism. With malice toward none, with charity for all, let us strive on to take steps against the whole iconoclastic brotherhood of sick, brutal criminal masterminds.
Fact: History has once again proved me right.
Fact: His belief systems are a lily-livered, intellectually challenged carnival of snobbism.
Fact: Abysmal guttersnipes are unequivocally the lowest form of human life.
In addition, one can usually be pretty sure when he’s lying. Sometimes there’s a little doubt: maybe it’s not a deliberate lie but merely a difference of opinion. But when Microbet claims that he has mystical powers of divination and prophecy, there’s no room for ambiguity: he’s lying. So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that you might say, Microbet has long favored speech codes that label his ethics as provocative or challenging while simultaneously labeling his adversaries’ responses as intolerant or hateful. Fine, I agree. But no matter how bad you think Microbet’s verbalisms are, I assure you that they are far, far worse than you think. You should know that it’s not yet illegal to demand a thoughtful analysis and resolution of our problems with Microbet. Microbet is working on that, though. I suspect that in the immediate years ahead, we’ll no longer be allowed to state in public that this is not the first time I’ve wanted to put an end to stuporous priggism. But it is the first time I realized that if his tetchy cringers want to believe that disingenuous, jackbooted blatherers have dramatically lower incidences of cancer, heart attacks, heart disease, and many other illnesses than the rest of us, that’s okay with me. Such disrespectful claims represent an echt expression of their beliefs, even though these beliefs are absolutely blathering and overlook the fact that if it were up to Microbet, we’d all be grazing contentedly in the pasture of narcissism right now. We’d be thoroughly unaware of the fact that people like him consider themselves heroes. They are not. Rather, I admit I have a tendency to become a bit insensitive whenever I rebuke Microbet for shoving us toward an absolute state of vassalage. While I am desirous of mending this tiny personality flaw, as a personal endeavor I contacted some of Microbet’s partners in crime to see if we could find common ground. It turns out there exists no common ground. These people won’t even acknowledge that Microbet wants to prevent us from ensuring that the values for which we have labored and for which many of us have fought and sacrificed will continue in ascendancy. If he manages to do that, he’ll have plenty of time to focus on his core mission: eliminating the plebiscitary mechanisms that ensure a free and democratic society.
As stated earlier, by Microbet’s standards, if you have morals, believe that character counts, and actually raise your own children—let alone teach them to be morally fit—you’re definitely a perfidious party animal. My standards—and I suspect yours as well—are quite different from his. For instance, I obviously feel that I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, if you look back over some of my older letters, you’ll see that I predicted that Microbet would turn the social order upside-down so that the dregs on the bottom become the scum on the top. And, as I predicted, he did. But you know, that was not a difficult prediction to make. Anyone who has bothered to learn even a little about Microbet could have made the same prediction. Finally, whatever you have learned or received or heard from me or simply read in this letter, put it into practice, and you will succeed at investigating the development of lexiphanicism as a concept.
2 Likes
Please tell me / pm me what this is, it’s great (micro is cool, I just mean is it just mad libs on some site somewhere?)
A part of me is hoping he’s just drunk and that’s a glorious text-to-speech rant for the ages.
1 Like
And Mr. Mantle, do you have anything you’d like to add?
Not really, but I agree with everything Casey said!
agreed
6 Likes
No
Why do you guys have to quote all that shit when replying?
3 Likes
Summary
I hate you all.
2 Likes
these hijinx just highlight what a blessing the “j” key is for navigating posts.
2 Likes
If you hear me say “that’s crazy” twice, please start wrapping up your story
8 Likes
Reads like Lorem Ipsum for a philosophy journal.
Does any mod, especially the one who moved the posts, wish to address this claim?
https://unstuckpolitics.com/t/the-presidency-of-joe-biden-jr/3876/604
So only post one tweet of Biden’s law enforcement committing war crimes against protestors or what?
2 Likes
Two tops, unless someone posts that poem from the inauguration again.
Do we not get any break before we have to be radicalized against this president too?
1 Like
The people getting tear gassed didn’t so you don’t either
2 Likes
Yes, all of this, and also starting a new thread focused on police violence is hardly censorship. As best I can tell, the George Floyd thread flourished better as a separate thread than it would have under the Trump thread. As much as there is an argument for making people see things that may upset their worldview, substantive content like that also gets lost in megathreads.
1 Like
tab, I apologize in advance for this accusation, but I don’t see how this question comes in good faith. I mean if a person really is having trouble reading the room to show kindness to their community, I think what happened in this situation is plenty appropriate.
I would see an issue if Chad had been told he isn’t allowed to say these things. But as I understand it, he not only is free to continue to post the same things as frequently and voluminously as he likes, a dedicated thread was made not to silence that conversation but to provide an environment in which it can thrive.
With the bonus benefit that the other conversation he asked to interrupt can now continue as well.
Seems like a win/win to me??
1 Like
I appreciate moving threads where a real 100+ post segue is commencing but to just move a few posts expressing concern for the current president’s actions (and/or that of their administration) in the president’s thread to its own thread seems like a slippery slope to me. Because I’m sure many posters who would benefit from seeing this will see a separate thread and ignore them for whatever reason (maybe just ceebs reading specific threads vs the Biden megathread) thus undermining the concerns of a segment of posters on this forum. So a win/win for the ‘I don’t wanna be bummed out’ crowd maybe but difficult conversations should be had.
4 Likes