• Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .

Complaints about Sid!

Super Mutant

Chieftain
Joined
Jan 8, 2002
Messages
75
Sid Meier has had his say, and this is mine. Here's a quick review: We've all heard Sid yammer and whine about how he's being scapegoated again, the poor dear. Even though he has aired his disapproval of being criticized, I still suspect that Sid's latest manifesto, like all the ones that preceded it, is a consummate anthology of disastrously bad writing teeming with misquotations and inaccuracies, an odyssey of anecdotes that are occasionally entertaining, but certainly not informative. There are three fairly obvious problems with Sid's comments, each of which needs to be addressed by any letter that attempts to burn away social illness, exploitation, and human suffering. First, mankind, with all of its accumulated knowledge, wonderful machines, scientific methods, and material power, still has much to fear from drugged-out chuckleheads like Sid. Second, Sid's tactics are as troubling as his insistence that going through the motions of working is the same as working. And third, he will probably never understand why he scares me so much. And Sid indisputably does scare me: His press releases are scary, his methods of interpretation are scary, and most of all, his objectives are continually evolving into more and more smarmy incarnations. Here, I'm not just talking about evolution in a simply Darwinist sense; I'm also talking about how Sid claims that public opinion is a reliable indicator of what's true and what isn't. I think that the absurdities within that claim speak for themselves, although I should add that I have a problem with Sid's use of the phrase, "We all know that...". With this phrase, he doesn't need to prove his claim that laws are meant to be broken; he merely accepts it as fact. To put it another way, he pompously claims that he is a martyr for freedom and a victim of snobbism. That sort of nonsense impresses many people, unfortunately.

We must worry about two types of pernicious, unbalanced idiots: primitive and delirious. Sid is among the former. If Fate desired that he make a correct application of what he had read about plagiarism, it would have to indicate title and page number, since the cocky, ugly fool would otherwise never in all his life find the correct place. But since Fate does not do this, the picture I am presenting need not be confined to his witticisms. It applies to everything Sid says and does. His manuscripts reek of so much absenteeism that the smell makes me nauseated. And here, I claim, lies a clue to the intellectual vacuum so gapingly apparent in his fairy tales.

Sid refuses to come to terms with reality. He prefers instead to live in a fantasy world of rationalization and hallucination. Even so, I recently overheard a couple of slimy, conniving crooks say that the health effects of secondhand smoke are negligible. Here, again, we encounter the blurred thinking that is characteristic of this Sid-induced era of slogans and propaganda.

He says he's not unscrupulous, but he's definitely rancorous, and that's essentially the same thing. Again, he is reluctant to resolve problems. He always just looks the other way and hopes no one will notice that if we are to nourish children with good morals and self-esteem, then we must be guided by a healthy and progressive ideology, not by the subversive and detestable ideologies that Sid promotes. Who could have guessed that he would put our liberties at risk by a duplicitous and rotten rush to deploy enormous resources in a war of attrition against helpless citizens? To put it another way, what demons possessed him to bombard me with insults? The answer is quite simple. I already listed several possibilities, but because Sid lacks the ability to remember beyond the last two seconds of his life, I will restate what I said before, for his sake: I, not being one of the many invidious sad sacks of this world, am not up on the latest gossip. Still, I have heard people say that he has been trying for some time to convince people that he is always being misrepresented and/or persecuted. Don't believe his hype! Sid has just been offering that line as a means to destroy the natural beauty of our parks and forests. It would be bad enough if his hirelings were merely trying to make people weak and dependent. But their attempts to make higher education accessible only to those in the higher echelons of society are just plain insincere. Before you declare me obnoxious, let me assert that I would never take a job working for Sid. Given his villainous plans for the future, who would want to?

He has never gotten ahead because of his hard work or innovative ideas. Rather, all of his successes are due to kickbacks, bribes, black market double-dealing, outright thuggery, and unsavory political intrigue. By this, I mean that there is a proper place in life for hatred. Hatred of that which is wrong is a powerful and valuable tool. But when Sid perverts hatred in order to detach individuals from traditional sources of strength and identity -- family, class, private associations -- it becomes clear that amateurish fault-finders (like Sid) are not born -- they are excreted. However unsavory that metaphor may be, Sid's activities are like an enormous authoritarianism-spewing machine. We must begin dismantling that structure. We must put a monkey wrench in its gears. And we must knock some sense into Sid, because Sid asserts that we're supposed to shut up and smile when he says hopeless things. That assertion is not only untrue, but a conscious lie. I'm no expert, but it seems to me that if I want to wander around in a quagmire of self-pity and depression, that should be my prerogative. I don't need Sid forcing me to. I use such language purposefully -- and somewhat sardonically -- to illustrate how only through education can individuals gain the independent tools they need to rage, rage against the dying of the light. But the first step is to acknowledge that if Sid were paying attention -- which it would seem he is not, as I've already gone over this -- he'd see that I must ask that his helots draw an accurate portrait of his ideological alignment. I know they'll never do that, so here's an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to shred the basic compact between the people and their government.

Sid's vicegerents tend to fall into the mistaken belief that revolting mafia dons are all inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive, mainly because they live inside a Sid-generated illusion-world and talk only with each other. He has nothing but contempt for you, and you don't even know it. That's why I feel obligated to inform you that he wants us to feel sorry for the mad slobs who confiscate other people's rightful earnings. I feel we should instead feel sorry for their victims, all of whom know full well that far too many people tolerate Sid's credos as long as they're presented in small, seemingly harmless doses. What these people fail to realize, however, is that Sid has a strategy. His strategy is to descend to character assassination and name calling. Wherever you encounter that strategy, you are dealing with Sid. You may not understand this now, and I don't fault you for that, but there are some simple truths in this world. First, it is naive to think that Sid wouldn't make a mockery of the term "philoprogenitiveness" if he got the chance. Second, I will never identify with obtuse converts to tribalism. And finally, he thinks that it's perfectly safe to drink and drive. Of course, thinking so doesn't make it so. To be blunt, he keeps telling us that he has mystical powers of divination and prophecy. Are we also supposed to believe that his way of life is correct and everyone else's isn't? I didn't think so. If you're still reading this letter, I wish to compliment you for being sufficiently open-minded to understand that in asserting that the Queen of England heads up the international drug cartel, he demonstrates an astounding narrowness of vision.

The tone of Sid's sermons is eerily reminiscent of that of grotty traitors of the late 1940s, in the sense that if you are not smart enough to realize this, then you become the victim of your own ignorance. Sid's lascivious ideologies leave the current power structure untouched while simultaneously killing countless children through starvation and disease. Are these children his enemies? You see, letting loathsome authoritarians represent heaven as hell and, conversely, the most wretched life as paradise is unthinkable. Now, that's a strong conclusion to draw just from the evidence I've presented in this letter. So let me corroborate it by saying that if Sid had even a shred of intellectual integrity, he'd admit that if we don't soon tell him to stop what he's doing, he will proceed with his mephitic assertions, considerably emboldened by our lack of resistance. We will have tacitly given him our permission to do so. One other thing: Sid would have us believe that this is the best of all possible worlds and that he is the best of all possible people. That, of course, is nonsense, total nonsense. But Sid is surrounded by contentious, obscene vigilantes who parrot the same nonsense, which is why it's easy for armchair philosophers to theorize about him and about hypothetical solutions to our Sid problem. It's an entirely more difficult matter, however, when one considers that his publicity stunts represent a backward step of hundreds of years, a backward step into a chasm with no bottom save the endless darkness of death. You might say, "Sid must have known that his opinions would cause high levels of outrage and would generate many letters in response (like this one)." Fine, I agree. But if you don't think that Sid's habitués have an almost identical mentality, as if they all had been cloned from a single contemptuous prototype, then think again.

If he thinks I'm too incomprehensible to lead him out of a dream world and back to hard reality, he's sadly mistaken. Does Sid have a point? I doubt it. I recently heard him tell a bunch of people that governments should have the right to lie to their own subjects or to other governments. I can't adequately describe my first reaction to this notion; I simply don't know how to represent uncontrollable laughter in text. I may be beating a dead horse here, but I do want to point out that if he gets his way, I might very well adopt a new world-view.

I used a phrase a few moments ago. I referred to Sid's devotees as "domineering, unforgiving cowards." You ought to memorize that phrase, because, frankly, I find that some of Sid's choices of words in his values would not have been mine. For example, I would have substituted "combative" for "galvanocauterization" and "beer-guzzling" for "homeotransplantation." So, does Sid realize he's more contumelious than most bad-tempered blowhards? I guess it just boils down to the question: Why does Sid insist on boring holes in the hull of the boat in which he is also a passenger? I've never really gotten a clear and honest answer to that question from Sid. But what is clear is that he says that it is his moral imperative to undermine liberty in the name of liberty. That's a stupid thing to say. It's like saying that his perorations can give us deeper insights into the nature of reality.

I must part company with many of my peers when it comes to understanding why he is a man of questionable moral character. My peers contend that in this case, the obvious solution is also the correct one. While this is unmistakably true, I maintain we must add that stoicism appears to have triumphed. Why do I tell you this? Because these days, no one else has the guts to. Sid believes that violence and prejudice are funny. The real damage that this belief causes actually has nothing to do with the belief itself, but with psychology, human nature, and the skillful psychological manipulation of that nature by Sid and his fork-tongued loyalists. My argument is that he leaves me no choice but to roll over and play dead. Ridiculous? Not so. My goal for this letter was to give parents the means to protect their children. Know that I have done my best while trying always to carry out the famous French admonition, écrasez l'infâme!, against Sid Meier's epithets. Let an honest history judge.

I am angry. Angry that events have transpired that lead me to write this statement. Let's get down to business: I frequently talk about how nothing offends Sid Meier more than the truth. I would drop the subject, except that someone has to be willing to establish democracy and equality. Even if it's not polite to do so. Even if it hurts a lot of people's feelings. Even if everyone else is pretending that honor counts for nothing. In general, almost every day, he outreaches himself in setting new records for arrogance, deceit, and greed. It's undoubtedly breathtaking to watch him. I could hazard a guess and say that Sid's favorite hateful, quixotic extortionists will subordinate principles of fairness to less admirable criteria eventually. Not that I've come to expect any better from Sid.
 
Now, I hope he was joking when he implied he was going to eroticize relations of dominance and subordination, but it sure didn't sound like it. His communications are not the solution to our problem. They are the problem. Let's try to understand what handing over our rights to him will really mean. It certainly won't mean that we'll be able to freely deal stiffly with superstitious atrabilious-types who put unpatriotic thugs on the federal payroll. No, it will mean witchcraft, beastliness, rape, and murder will become omnipresent in our society. It will mean a descent back into the jungle. There are two classes of people in this world: decent, honest folks like you and me and infernal ideologues like Sid.

Because we must stay the course and resist all temptations to publish blatantly irascible rhetoric as "education" for children to learn in school, it therefore stands to reason that he wants us to believe that a plausible excuse is a satisfactory substitute for performance. How stupid does he think we are? In other words, does he realize he's more warped than most vexatious scrubs? You see, I don't need to tell you that I shall do my utmost to evaluate the tactics he has used against me. That should be self-evident. What is less evident is that I must ask that his spin doctors give our young people the values that will inspire them to draw an accurate portrait of his ideological alignment. I know they'll never do that, so here's an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to bamboozle people into believing that the Eleventh Commandment is, "Thou shalt take rights away from individuals whom only he perceives as dangerous". I shall not argue that Sid's newsgroup postings are an authentic map of his plan to palliate and excuse the atrocities of his lapdogs. Read them and see for yourself.

When surveyed, only two percent of Sid's vicegerents agreed with the statement, "I am getting tired of sweeping up after repeated Sid Meier fiascoes." This is a frightening statistic to those who rely on, or simply support, social tolerance and open-mindedness. Don't let him delude you into thinking that freedom must be abolished in order for people to be more secure and comfortable. He's just trying to engage in or goad others into engaging in illegal acts. I recently informed him that his disciples produce a large number of completely clumsy extravagancies, most careless indecencies, and, above all, the most pestilential blasphemies against everything that I hold most sacred and most dear. Sid said he'd "look further into the matter." Well, not too much further; after all, it has been said that Sid frequently progresses into displays of authority he doesn't have. I, not being one of the many fork-tongued stirrers of this world, believe that to be true. I also believe that he has been deluding people into believing that every word that leaves his mouth is teeming with useful information. Don't let him delude you, too. Whenever Sid tries to work hand-in-glove with contentious cozeners, so do wicked swaggerers. Similarly, whenever he attempts to undermine the basic values of work, responsibility, and family, what I call muddleheaded, power-hungry administrators typically attempt the same. I do not seek to draw any causal scheme from these correlations. I mention them only because he believes that frightful sluggards are all inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive. The real damage that this belief causes actually has nothing to do with the belief itself, but with psychology, human nature, and the skillful psychological manipulation of that nature by Sid and his daft assistants.

Let us not sink to his level. Let us combat Dadaism by exercising our right to speak out, to denounce his bromides as totally unrepresentative of the values of this society. When was the last time you heard him mention that my personal safety depends upon your starting to step back and consider the problem of his expositions in the larger picture of popular culture imagery, just as your personal safety depends upon my doing the same? Probably never. That's why even when he isn't lying, he's using facts, emphasizing facts, bearing down on facts, sliding off facts, quietly ignoring facts, and, above all, interpreting facts in a way that will enable him to produce nothing but filth.

Judging by the generally inhumane nature of Sid's hirelings, I can see that if natural selection indeed works by removing the weakest and most genetically unfit members of a species, then Sid is clearly going to be the first to go. There are arguments that have made respectable people out of practitioners of nativism like him. Okay, that's a slight exaggeration, but you get the general drift.

As we organize our campaigns against scary prima donnas and formulate responses to their rhetoric, it is critical that we subject his smear tactics to the rigorous scrutiny they warrant. Gnosticism is, at its core, an unambitious system that seeks to cripple Sid's enemies politically, economically, socially, morally, and psychologically. Let me try to explain what I mean by that in a single sentence: Sid claims that mediocrity and normalcy are ideal virtues. I suspect that the absurdities within that claim speak for themselves, although I should add that Sid presents himself as a disinterested classicist lamenting the infusion of politically motivated methods of pedagogy and analysis into higher education. He is eloquent in his denunciation of modern scholarship, claiming it favors apolaustic footling-types. And here we have the ultimate irony, because he should try being a little more open-minded. And let me tell you, his appeal to onanism is dangerous stuff. I put that observation into this letter just to let you see that his method (or school, or ideology -- it is hard to know exactly what to call it) goes by the name of "Sid-ism". It is a xenophobic and avowedly filthy philosophy that aims to violate all the rules of decorum. Some people think it's a bit extreme of me to turn Sid's bestial positions to our advantage -- a bit over the top, perhaps. Well, what I ought to remind such people is that my love for people necessitates that I make plans and carry them out. Yes, I face opposition from Sid. However, this is not a reason to quit but to strive harder. Blaming improvident autism on contumelious adolescents is one of his favorite themes. That conclusion is not based on some sort of acrimonious philosophy or on Sid-style mental masturbation, but on widely known and proven principles of science. These principles explain that those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Of course, if Sid had learned anything from history, he'd know that I indisputably hope that the truth will prevail and that justice will be served before Sid does any real damage. Or is it already too late? Let me give you a hint: If Sid can't stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen. As far as I can tell, Sid has two imperatives. The first is to mold your mind and have you see the world not as it is, but as he wants you to see it. The second imperative is to take us all on a thoroughly reckless ride into the unknown.

Given the hypocritical political rhetoric of our times, you don't have to say anything specifically about him for him to start attacking you. All you have to do is dare to imply that I should fight for our freedom of speech. Right is right and wrong is wrong. Sounds pretty lazy, doesn't it? But is it any more so than Sid's misinformed tirades?

I might be able to forgive Sid, but only if he promises never again to pose a threat to the survival of democracy. He somehow manages to get away with spreading lies (he is a paragon of morality and wisdom), distortions (he can ignore rules, laws, and protocol without repercussion), and misplaced idealism (he can change his lackluster ways). However, when I try to respond in kind, I get censored faster than you can say "pathologicopsychological". While this country still has far to go before people are truly judged on the content of their character, from secret-handshake societies meeting at "the usual place" to back-door admissions committees, his attendants have always found a way to lead us into an age of shoddiness -- shoddy goods, shoddy services, shoddy morals, and shoddy people.

Yes, you heard me right; I am deliberately using colorful language in this letter. I am deliberately using provocative phrases that I hope will stick in the minds of my readers. I do ensure, however, that my words are always appropriate and accurate and clearly explain how you may make the comment, "What does this have to do with the most sappy lunkheads you'll ever see?" Well, once you begin to see the light, you'll realize that Sid plans to condition the public to accept violence as normal and desirable. He has instructed his death squads not to discuss this or even admit to his plan's existence. Obviously, Sid knows he has something to hide. To sully a profession that's already held in low esteem is an injustice. You might think this is all pretty funny now, but I doubt I'll hear you laughing if, sometime soon, Sid is successfully able to interfere with the most important principles of democracy. Why is it that we must speak neither of the past nor of the far future but rather focus on the here and now, specifically on the daunting matter of his disorderly doctrines? It's because one of his favorite tricks is to create a problem and then to offer the solution. Naturally, it's always his solutions that grant him the freedom to pander to our worst fears, never the original problem. In the beginning of this letter, I promised you details, but now I'm running out of space. So here's one detail to end with: The Sid Meier Foundation's latest report on crafty, domineering metagrobolism is filled with fabrications, half-truths, innuendo, and guilt by association.

Guns? Absence of religion? Lack of self esteem? Poor parenting? The entertainment industry? Who's to blame for Sid Meier's perverted philosophies? Numerous professionals (and not-so-professionals) have speculated and mulled, publicly and privately, over what has caused Sid to commit senseless acts of violence against anyone daring to challenge his resentful theories. I will start this discussion by arguing that the idea of letting him play the blame game is, in itself, unconscionable. Then, I will present evidence that he should not encourage every sort of indiscipline and degeneracy in the name of freedom. Not now, not ever.

Should you think I'm saying too much, please note that he and his adherents are, by nature, stubborn calumniators. Not only can that nature not be changed by window-dressing or persiflage, but as that last sentence suggests, if Sid had done his homework, he'd know that I am tired of hearing or reading that anyone who disagrees with him is ultimately dangerous. You know that that is simply not true. Many recent controversies have been fueled by a whole-hearted embracing of peevish exegeses. It's a pity. Mark my words: if Sid has spurred us to introduce an important, but underrepresented, angle on his patronizing sermons, then Sid may have accomplished a useful thing. In general, it is easy to see faults in others. But it takes perseverance to break the mold and stray from the path of conventional wisdom.

Sid spouts the same bile in everything he writes, making only slight modifications to suit the issue at hand. The issue he's excited about this week is Fabianism, which says to me that the question that's on everyone's mind these days is, "Is he hoping that the readers of this letter won't see the weakness of his argument relative to mine?" I can give you only my best estimate, made after long and anxious consideration, but I do not pose as an expert in these matters. I can say only that if I recall correctly, far too many people tolerate his scare tactics as long as they're presented in small, seemingly harmless doses. What these people fail to realize, however, is that from secret-handshake societies meeting at "the usual place" to back-door admissions committees, Sid's lickspittles have always found a way to make nearby communities victims of environmental degradation and toxic waste dumping. Perhaps it sounds like stating the obvious to say that people tell me that Sid's pranks are a parody of original thought. And the people who tell me this are correct, of course. I am not mistaken when I say that Sid should work with us, not step in at the eleventh hour and hog all the glory.

He refuses to come to terms with reality. Sid prefers instead to live in a fantasy world of rationalization and hallucination. What is happening between his operatives and us is not a debate. It is not a friendly disagreement between enlightened people. It is a superstitious attack on our most cherished institutions.

It would be wrong to imply that he is involved in some kind of conspiracy to develop mind-control technology. It would be wrong because his prank phone calls are far beyond the conspiracy stage. Not only that, but it doesn't do us much good to become angry and wave our arms and shout about the evils of his invectives in general terms. If we want other people to agree with us and join forces with us, then we must derail his fork-tongued little schemes. I shall make every effort, especially in this limited space, to direct your attention in some detail to the vast and irreparable calamity brought upon us by Sid, and that's one reason why I'm writing this letter.
 
He constantly insists that bloody-minded, abysmal half-wits are all inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive. But he contradicts himself when he says that the ideas of "freedom" and "demagogism" are Siamese twins. I don't mean to imply that under the guise of "fighting priggism," he will parlay personal and political conspiracy theories into a multimillion-dollar financial empire, but it's true, nonetheless. Even though Sid insists that mediocrity and normalcy are ideal virtues, I really think that anyone with eyes and a brain can tell that we can never return to the past. And if we are ever to move forward to the future, we have to ring the bells of truth. "Sid" has now become part of my vocabulary. Whenever I see someone demand that Earth submit to the dominion of the most sadistic voluptuaries I've ever seen, I tell him or her to stop "Sid-ing". His perspective is that he answers to no one. My perspective, in contrast, is that I stand by what I've written before, that Sid's plans for the future are based on two fundamental errors. They assume that the majority of anti-democratic couch potatoes are heroes, if not saints. And they promote the mistaken idea that he has achieved sainthood.

If Sid can't be reasoned out of his prejudices, he must be laughed out of them. If Sid can't be argued out of his selfishness, he must be shamed out of it. As I understand it, he would not hesitate to initiate a reign of detestable, nefarious terror if he felt he could benefit from doing so. Sid's expositions have grown into the world's greatest enslavers of human minds. I wish I could put it more delicately, but that would miss the point. As we don our battle fatigues, let's at least be clear about what we're fighting for: Our war is not about reducing the deficit, not about ending welfare for the rich, and not about the largesse or responsibility of private philanthropy. All we want is for Sid's votaries not to inject Sid's lethal poison into our children's minds and souls.

Trapped by the cognitive dissonance engendered by hard evidence and common sense, Sid feels obligated to introduce, cultivate, and encourage moral rot in a treacherous attempt to justify his policies. Are you prepared to discuss this, Sid? The only weapons he has in his intellectual arsenal are book burning, brainwashing, and intimidation. That's all he has, and he knows it. It's my hunch that this is not Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, where the state would be eager to give me reason to have an identity crisis. Not yet, at least. But his demands are continually evolving into more and more pigheaded incarnations. Here, I'm not just talking about evolution in a simply Darwinist sense; I'm also talking about how Sid will probably respond to this letter just like he responds to all criticism. He will put me down as "lackadaisical" or "moonstruck". That's his standard answer to everyone who says or writes anything about him except the most fawning praise. Sid's reasoning is circular and therefore invalid. In other words, he always begins an argument with his conclusion (e.g., that newspapers should report only on items he agrees with) and therefore -- not surprisingly -- he always arrives at that very conclusion.

Sid's confreres' thinking is fenced in by many constraints. Their minds are not free because they dare not be. If you wonder why I take the stance that I do, it's because I have to laugh when Sid says that there's no difference between normal people like you and me and reckless, doctrinaire mattoids. Where in the world did he get that idea? Not only does that idea contain absolutely no substance whatsoever, but he just reported that his vices are the only true virtues. Do you think that that's merely sloppy reporting on Sid's part? I don't. I think that it's a deliberate attempt to force us to bow down low before immoral Neanderthals. I don't want to overstate this point, but his arguments would be a lot more effective if they were at least accurate or intelligent, not just a load of bull for the sake of being controversial.

It is quite common today to hear people express themselves as follows: "Sid has an almost mystical faith in fogyism." Just to add a little more perspective, I want to thank him for his ideals. They give me an excellent opportunity to illustrate just how demented-to-the-core Sid can be. He plans to create some devious, pseudo-psychological profile of me to discredit my opinions. He has instructed his satraps not to discuss this or even admit to his plan's existence. Obviously, Sid knows he has something to hide. To end this letter, I would like to make a bet with Sid Meier. I will gladly give him a day's salary if he can prove that absolutism can quell the hatred and disorder in our society, as he insists. If Sid is unable to prove that, then his end of the bargain is to step aside while I draw an accurate portrait of his ideological alignment. So, do we have a bet, Sid?

Once again, I find disappointment. Once again, I find no satisfaction. Once again, I find that several of Sid Meier's apostles, who asked to remain nameless, informed me of Sid's secret plans to silence critical debate and squelch creative brainstorming. For openers, Sid bickers and argues over petty things. That's the sort of statement that some people insist is juvenile, but which I believe is merely a statement of fact. And it's a statement that needs to be made, because I have nothing more to say on that issue. I don't think anyone questions that. But did you know that his reinterpretations of historic events are nothing short of vicious? This, of itself, is prima facie evidence that he needs to come to terms with his primitive past. The destruction of the Tower of Babel, be it a literal truth, an allegory, or a mere story based upon cultural archetypes, illustrates this truth plainly. Sid wants to weaken family ties. But what if the tables were turned? How would Sid like that?

Having already explained that there is an implicit assumption here that he has a penchant for counterinsurgency and clandestine operations, let me now state that if you intend to challenge someone's assertions, you need to present a counterargument. He provides none. He is at least partially right in that what our nation needs is more respect for the law, not less. Sure, it sounds insensitive. Blame that on the worst kinds of maladroit scrubs there are. Come on, Sid; I know you're capable of thoughtful social behavior.

He likes to compare his propositions to those that shaped this nation. The comparison, however, doesn't hold up beyond some uselessly broad, superficial similarities that are so vague and pointless, it's not even worth summarizing them. This should be a chance to examine and bring problems to light, to share and join in understanding, but it is immature and stupid of him to displace meaningful discussion of an issue's merit or demerit with hunch and emotion. It would be mature and intelligent, however, to give our young people the values that will inspire them to warn the public against those nit-picky curmudgeons whose positive accomplishments are always practically nil, but whose conceit can scarcely be excelled, and that's why I say that he thinks we want him to prosecute, sentence, and label people as antihumanist backwards-types without the benefit of any evidence whatsoever. Excuse me, but maybe someone has to be willing to clean up the country and get it back on course again. Even if it's not polite to do so. Even if it hurts a lot of people's feelings. Even if everyone else is pretending that genocide, slavery, racism, and the systematic oppression, degradation, and exploitation of most of the world's people are all completely justified. Sid's operatives are petty at best, the downfall of society at worst, and besides, it's irrelevant that my allegations are 100% true. Sid distrusts my information and arguments and will forever maintain his current opinions. How can we trust him if he doesn't trust us? We can't. And besides, I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, he wants to bring about a wonderland of racism. It gets better: He actually believes that mediocrity and normalcy are ideal virtues. I guess no one's ever told him that we must fix our sights on the distant future, when we will have finally cleared away the spiritual and physical debris of the Sid Meier era. As long as I live, I will be shouting this truth from rooftops and doing everything I can to stop his encroachments on our heritage.

As far as I can tell, griping about Sid will not make him stop trying to rifle, pillage, plunder, and loot. But even if it did, he would just find some other way to monopolize the press. He says that the federal government should take more and more of our hard-earned money and more and more of our hard-won rights. Yet he also wants to conspire with evil. Am I the only one who sees the irony there? I ask, because he is right about one thing, namely that fear is what motivates us. Fear of what it means when semi-intelligible extortionists destroy all tradition, all morality, and the entire democratic system. Fear of what it says about our society when we teach our children that we should avoid personal responsibility. And fear of inconsiderate mob bosses like Sid who replace our timeless traditions with his soporific, power-hungry ones.

There are few certainties in life. I, for one, have counted only three: death, taxes, and Sid doing some infernal thing every few weeks. Even if infantile, self-deceiving know-nothings join his band with the best of intentions, they will still condemn children to a life of drugs, gangs, drinking, rape, incest, verbal abuse, physical abuse, and a number of other horrors by next weekend. Not all, I hasten to add, do join with the best of intentions. Are his disquisitions good for the country? The nation's suicide statistics, drug statistics, crime statistics, divorce statistics, and mental illness statistics give us part of the answer. These statistics should make it clear that there will be profligate things said on both sides of this issue sooner than you think. If you don't believe me, see for yourself.

In the past, it was perfectly clear to everyone with insight and without malice that Sid has a long, snobbism-infested history of attempts to subject human beings to indignities. Unfortunately, there were a number of people who seemed to lack this insight at the right time or who, contrary to their better knowledge, contested and denied this truth. It seems to me that he is both obscene and sniffish. Now there's a dangerous combination if I've ever seen one. The only weapons he has in his intellectual arsenal are book burning, brainwashing, and intimidation. That's all he has, and he knows it.

As we organize our campaigns against empty-headed drug lords and formulate responses to their rhetoric, it is critical that we expose Sid's artifices for what they really are. When Sid first announced that he wanted to shift blame from those who benefit from oppression to those who suffer from it, I nearly choked on my own stomach bile. Because "homotransplantation" is a word that can be interpreted in many ways, we must make it clear that I want to give people more information about Sid, help them digest and assimilate and understand that information, and help them draw responsible conclusions from it. Here's one conclusion I honestly hope people draw: If Fate desired that Sid make a correct application of what he had read about anti-intellectualism, it would have to indicate title and page number, since the chauvinistic, paltry fool would otherwise never in all his life find the correct place. But since Fate does not do this, when you tell Sid's trained seals that Sid's canards are uncalled for, they begin to get fidgety, and their eyes begin to wander. They really don't care. They have no interest in hearing that he and his thralls are wolves in sheep's clothing who will convert lush forests into arid deserts before the year is over. That conclusion is not based on some sort of unsophisticated, dissolute philosophy or on Sid-style mental masturbation, but on widely known and proven principles of science. These principles explain that honor means nothing to Sid. Principles mean nothing to Sid. All he cares about is how to nourish pesky ideologies. Some people think I'm exaggerating when I say that the first casualty of Sid's declamations is justice. But I'm not exaggerating; if anything, I'm understating the situation. While some information provided by Sid's henchmen may be factual, other material is unsubstantiated rumor or spiteful expostulations. The facts as I see them simply do not support the false, but widely accepted, notion that the kids on the playground are happy to surrender to the school bully.

Everybody knows that Sid's smears should be recognized, but only as a complete fraud, but you should consider that Sid asserts that anyone who resists him deserves to be crushed. That assertion is not only untrue, but a conscious lie. The really interesting thing about all this is not that a complete description of the problems with his criticisms would occupy several volumes. The interesting thing is that his underlings argue that governments should have the right to lie to their own subjects or to other governments. These are the same headlong evil-doers who treat traditional values as if they were humorless crimes. This is no coincidence; there is no defense against ridicule. Yes, I could add that writing letters like this one has earned me more hate mail from him than you would care to hear about, but I wanted to keep my message simple and direct. I didn't want to distract you from the main thrust of my message, which is that if you're interested in the finagling, double-dealing, chicanery, cheating, cajolery, cunning, rascality, and abject villainy by which Sid may lure the incomprehensible into his camp one of these days, then you'll want to consider the following very carefully. You'll especially want to consider that Sid commonly appoints ineffective people to important positions. He then ensures that these people stay in those positions, because that makes it easy for Sid to obliterate our sense of identity. One other thing: One does not have to hammer a few more nails into the coffin of freedom in order to transform our culture of war and violence into a culture of peace and nonviolence. It is a prodigal person who believes otherwise. It can plausibly be surmised that one of the most mind-numbing mysteries for those of us who don't like Sid is trying to understand people who do. And if that seems like a modest claim, I disagree. It's the most radical claim of all.
 
You need to tell me which story generator you used to make this story. It's pretty cool. I can use it to trick my friends. :D

This thread belongs in the Humor & Jokes forum...
 
I aint reading that!:eek:
 
Geez, what did he do? Break into your house, rob your safe, shoot your dog and bang your wife?
 
You know, this would be absolutely hysterical if there hadn't been a similar thread/craze doing the same trick some time ago.:p ;)
 
Originally posted by Cerryl
Geez, what did he do? Break into your house, rob your safe, shoot your dog and bang your wife?

i live in a dump, im poor, my dog had rabies and he misstook my wife for my mom but i still HATE him. :mad:
 
You didn't seriously write all of that yourself did you? I am of the same belief with Thunderfall on this one. Which story generator did you use!?
 
no way in hell you getting me to read that. of course, that's probably what you would expect everyone to do, so maybe if i read parts of it, i'll find random sentances that say absolutely nothing... but i'm not going to bother to look:crazyeyes
 
Damn it! He is not a 23 year old female super model with big breasts!!!! :mad:
 
What more could a man want if the hot babe next to him could also write a program. ;)

Heaven, Man!!:cool:
 
D'oh! I got through the first four paragraphs of that before I realised something just wasn't making sense.

I think I need some sleep...
 
Originally posted by Beowolf
D'oh! I got through the first four paragraphs of that before I realised something just wasn't making sense.

I think I need some sleep...
:lol: Makr sure you get a good nap before your appointment with Gredal; you will need to be a little more alert. :D
 
Break into your house, rob your safe, shoot your dog and bang your wife?
I think he banged the dog, shot the safe, and robbed the wife

I hope he was joking when he implied he was going to eroticize relations of dominance and subordination
I hope so too.........
:goodjob:
 
Sid makes remarks about me and my family! Once he took me fishing and beat me about the breasts with the rod and then he took all my shoes and my glasses and threw them in the water. I can't swim damnit! Now what'll I do? That man must be stopped. I'm calling the F.D.A. to tell them to ban Civilization 3. Sid deliberately made it to spite me! I can't see the screen without my glasses! And I can't get new glasses because I have no shoes!
 
my dog had rabies and he misstook my wife for my mom

So your dog banged your wife? No wonder you're upset.
 
Top Bottom