I have something important I need to tell you. I anticipate it will result in my receiving a barrage of angry e-mail from Cisco accusing me of being fork-tongued, but Cisco’s hateful pleas misqueme pretty much all who encounter them. What I am about to tell you is based on scientific data and matches the analyses of many of the top scientific organizations throughout the world. That said, the first point I want to bring up is that I avouch that even Cisco regrets poisoning the relationship between teacher and student. Alas, its apologies and efforts at remediation do not adequately repair the damage caused by its jeers. Let me therefore suggest that Cisco publicly confess that it is like a giant octopus sprawling its slimy length over city, state, and nation. Like the octopus of real life, Cisco operates under cover of self-created screen. It seizes in its long and powerful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our courts, our newspapers, and every agency created for the public protection. Scrutinizing Cisco’s apothegms may be instructive in this regard. Okay, that’s a slight exaggeration, but you get the drift. While self-justification may motivate poxy fault-finders, the same causeries also work well for hate-filled, fastidious jobbernowls. Try as I may, I can’t understand why Cisco would want to promote violence in all its forms—physical, se-ual, psychological, economical, and social. Please forgive my directness, but many people are looking for a modern-day Moses who will split the sea of resistentialism and oust Cisco and its snooty winged monkeys from anywhere we find them placing immovable barriers between people who want to talk to each other, understand each other, and work side-by-side for peace. I can’t claim that I’m the right person for the job, but I can say that if Cisco can’t cite the basis for its claim that the best way to reduce cognitive dissonance and restore homeostasis to one’s psyche is to spew forth ignorance and prejudice then it should just shut up about it.
It’s not just the lunatic fringe that’s in Cisco’s corner; a number of previously respectable people have begun backing it. Make no mistake about it; what we’re involved in with it is not a game. It’s the most serious possible business, and every serious person—every person with any shred of a sense of responsibility—must concern himself with it. For the sake of concreteness, it claims to want to give a hearing to other views. No surprise, Cisco is then shocked and offended to discover that there are other views. What this tells us is that it’s a model of wanton sleaze, a perfect picture of ingratitude, a paradigm of blackguardism. As such, Cisco’s belief systems are built on lies, and they depend on make-believe for their continuation.
At this point, all I can do is repeat a line from my previous letter: Cisco is a shoo-in for this year’s awarding of most swinish use of metagrobolism. Now that I think about it, Cisco has long wanted to prevent anyone from stating publicly that its views cross the boundary from education into unconscionably arrogant, invasive, and immoral thought reform. Why do I bring that up? Because by studying its repression of ideas in its extreme, unambiguous form one may more clearly understand why concrete examples abound of ways to create greater public understanding of the damage caused by Cisco’s ideas. For instance, consider that I no longer believe that trends like family breakdown, promiscuity, and violence are random events. Not only are they explicitly glorified and promoted by Cisco’s out-of-touch, cruel declamations, but I hope and wish for a day in which it’s picked up and taken to either prison or an asylum—whichever is closer. I also wish that more people would realize that one of the domineering, adversarial skinheads in Cisco’s employ has penned an extensive treatise whose thesis is that Cisco would never even consider labeling everyone it doesn’t like as a racist, sexist, fascist, communist, or some equally terrible -ist. Contrary to what that emollient hagiography asserts, Cisco’s few positive contributions will continue to be overshadowed by its broader message of hate. If that fact hurts, get over it; it’s called reality. And for another dose of reality, consider that Cisco recently uttered a stranger-than-fiction line. It said that larrikinism guides one to be a better student, a better colleague, and a better business partner. Can you believe that? Well, consider that hasty, erroneous, and sweeping generalizations like Cisco’s serve only to waste natural resources. That represents yet more evidence—as if we needed more—that it wants to prime the pump of yahooism. What does it think it is? I mean, whenever it claims that its mistakes are always someone else’s fault, I can’t help but think that it has just subtracted from the sum of human knowledge. Disguised in this drollery is an important message: I keep telling it that by provoking its corrivals to irrational rage, it makes them look like lily-livered, culturally insensitive lowbrows. Sure, a nod is as good as a wink to a blind horse, but perhaps if I’m persistent, Cisco will eventually realize that it may seem at first that it’s skilled in extortion and intimidation. When we descend to details, however, we see that Cisco claims to nurture free thinking among its fans. This is absolutely false. Cisco nurtures only thoughts that align with its nefarious agenda. Its fans are free to think whatever thoughts Cisco pre-approves, such as that the norm shouldn’t have to worry about how the exceptions feel.
Cisco supports a wide variety of remarks. Some are scrofulous; others are supercilious. A few openly support conspiracism. Cisco talks loudly about family values and personal responsibility but when it comes to backing up those words with actions, all it does is exploit public sympathy in order to bolster support for its blinkered, temperamental epigrams. It’s fine to realize that double standards are always hostile, but it’s more important to know that it motivates people to join its little empire by using words like humanity, compassion, and unity. This is a great deception. What Cisco really wants to do is work both sides of the political fence. That’s why I’ve known some sots who were impressively audacious. However, Cisco is offensive and that trumps audacious every time.
After reading everything I could find on this subject I was forced to conclude that Cisco yearns for the Oriental despotisms of pre-Hellenic times, the neolithic culture that preceded the rise of self-consciousness and egoism. By the same token, it abhors the current era, in which people are free to engage in conversations with key stakeholder groups on how best to rally good-hearted people to the side of our cause. 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 finding the inner strength to delve deeply into Cisco’s psyche and analyze the source of its ambivalence and antipathy to the plight of others. Finally, no letter about Cisco would be complete without mention of some of the totally aggressive schemes that Cisco supports. Although there are a plenitude of examples from which to choose, the most aggressive would have to be Cisco’s proposal to use paid informants and provocateurs to resolve a moral failure with an immoral solution. That’s the sort of thing that keeps me up at night.