Some of my colleagues recommended that I write a letter about how Mr. Stik Mann should take all the bull-pucky he's been throwing at us and fertilize his garden with it. This is that letter. You see, I truly believe that corruption, lying, and hypocrisy are the fundaments of Mr. Mann's philosophies. And because of that belief, I'm going to throw politeness and inoffensiveness to the winds. In this letter, I'm going to be as rude and crude as I know how, to reinforce the point that today, we might have let Mr. Mann provide the pretext for police-state measures. Tomorrow, we won't. Instead, we will suggest the kind of politics and policies that are needed to restore good sense to this important debate.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the law is not just a moral stance. It is the consensus of society on our minimum standards of behavior. All the deals Mr. Mann makes are strictly one-way. Mr. Mann gets all the rights, and the other party gets all the obligations. His cronies are odious at best, the downfall of society at worst. Of that I am certain, because he will probably respond to this letter just like he reponds to all criticism. He will put me down as "unconscionable" or "grungy". That's his standard answer to everyone who says or writes anything about him except the most fawning praise. I know very few deluded unprofessional-types personally, but I know them well enough to surmise that there are some insincere saboteurs who are irrational. There are also some who are whiney. Which category does Mr. Mann fall into? If the question overwhelms you, I suggest you check "both". Contumelious devil-worshippers may possess a mass of "knowledge", but their brains are unable to organize and register the material they have taken in.
It's not that I have anything against bohemians in general. It's just that his method (or school, or ideology -- it is hard to know exactly what to call it) goes by the name of "Mr. Mann-ism". It is a yawping and avowedly impolitic philosophy that aims to dispense outright misinformation and flashlight-under-the-chin ghost stories. His writings have kept us separated for too long from the love, contributions, and challenges of our brothers and sisters in this wonderful adventure we share together -- life! Like I said, Mr. Mann likes whinges that gag free speech. Could there be a conflict of interest there? This letter has gone on far too long, in my opinion, and probably yours as well. So let me end it by saying merely that Mr. Stik Mann tends to forget what matters most.