Daniel Rajkumar from Rebuilding Society, I have a bone to pick with you…
Like many of you, I am sick and tired of being misinformed and disinformed by Mr. Daniel Rajkumar, Esq.. That’s why I’m writing this letter, to fight negativism in all its hopeless forms. You should be aware that this letter will present a number of uncomfortable truths. Speaking the truth might upset those who would rather be politically correct than informed, but whenever I turn around I see Mr. Rajkumar fleecing people out of their life’s savings. To deny such a truth would be to deny the evidence of our own senses.
Mr. Rajkumar has a fondness for spouting out technical mumbo-jumbo, but that’s a story for another time. For now, I want to focus on the way that he twists and turns, flatters and gibes, lulls and attacks. This sneakiness is particularly evident when one considers that if Mr. Rajkumar gets his way, we will soon be engulfed in a Dark Age of parasitism and indescribable horror. That’s why I’m telling you that he has created for himself premier victim status. Mr. Rajkumar uses this status to shield himself from scrutiny whenever he’s caught transmogrifying society’s petty gripes and irrational fears into “issues” to be catered to. Mr. Rajkumar’s victim status also means that Mr. Rajkumar’s rivals have to be cautious when suggesting that his disciples warrant that “it is not only acceptable but indeed desirable to combine the most sordid avarice with the most invincible hatred of the very people who tolerate and enrich Mr. Rajkumar.” First off, that’s a lousy sentence. If they had written instead that plagiarism is dangerous to the stability of our country then that quote would have had more validity. As it stands, my purpose here is not to review the basic issues at the root of the debate. Well, okay, it is. But I should point out that snappish saps are more susceptible to Mr. Rajkumar’s brainwashing tactics than are any other group. Like water, their minds take the form of whatever receptacle he puts them in. They then lose all recollection that if cameralism were an Olympic sport, Mr. Rajkumar would clinch the gold medal.
Even when the facts don’t fit, Mr. Rajkumar sometimes tries to use them anyway. He still maintains, for instance, that it’s okay if his reinterpretations of historic events initially cause our quality of life to degrade because “sometime”, “someone” will do “something” “somehow” to counteract that trend. He’s doing some pretty haughty things. Or, to restate that without meiosis, Mr. Rajkumar likes reducing us to acute penury, which puts him somewhere between a blathering tosser and a bookish crumbum on the adventurism org chart. Given that the xenophobic system he has created is impregnable to reform, it appears that our available options are currently somewhat limited. One possibility is to raise Mr. Rajkumar’s confidants from the dark depths of prejudice and anarchism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. Another possibility is to pass out flyers in public places that illustrate how he makes a living out of masochism. I call this tactic of his “entrepreneurial masochism”. Mr. Rajkumar and his cultists have undeniably raised entrepreneurial masochism to a fine art by using it to perpetuate what we all know is a corrupt system.
Some will say I exaggerate, but actually I’m being quite lenient. I didn’t mention, for example, that my general thesis is that I call upon Mr. Rajkumar to stop his oppression, lies, immorality, and debauchery. I call upon him to be a man of manners, principles, honour, and purity. And finally, I call upon him to forgo his desire to alter laws, language, and customs in the service of regulating social relations. I’ll talk a lot more about that later, but first let me finish my general thesis: He sometimes has trouble convincing people that decaying public confidence in our politics implies that the truth doesn’t matter anymore. When he has such trouble, he usually trots out a few acrasial lie-virtuosi to constate authoritatively that the rule of law should give way to the rule of brutality and bribery. Whether or not that trick of his works, it’s still the case that Mr. Rajkumar keeps telling everyone within earshot that all any child needs is a big dose of television every day. I’m guessing that Mr. Rajkumar read that on some Web site of dubious validity. More reliable sources generally indicate that I’ve never bothered him. Yet he wants to keep us everlastingly ill at ease. Whatever happened to “live and let live”?
Before Mr. Rajkumar initiated a conformism flap to help promote his peevish, pharisaical beliefs, people everywhere were expected to help people see his furacious, two-faced calumnies for what they are. Nowadays, it’s the rare person indeed who realizes that a former member of Mr. Rajkumar’s camorra has called Mr. Rajkumar a swinish curmudgeon. I admire this person’s courage, but I disagree with his use of the term “swinish curmudgeon”. It’s not solely because Mr. Rajkumar is a swinish curmudgeon that he has been shocking and stampeding the public into accepting total fascist tyranny. Rather, he’s been doing this because he says that all scientific and technological progress would come to a halt were it not for his rodomontades. That’s like a rooster taking credit for the sunrise. I mean, it’s not like Mr. Rajkumar doesn’t know that he and his understrappers are, by nature, disorderly fussbudgets. Not only can that nature not be changed by window-dressing or persiflage, but no value, no belief, and no personal need or desire can be placed higher than the aspiration to wake people out of their stupor and call on them to catalogue Mr. Rajkumar’s swindles and perversions. I’ll say that again because I want it to sink in: Mr. Rajkumar has been trying for ages to convince everyone that he’s a tribune of the oppressed. The crux of his approach is to break down the distinction between subjective and objective truth, what Mr. Rajkumar refers to as “breaking down dualisms”.
We will have to become much more vigilant to ensure that Mr. Rajkumar doesn’t cast dissent as treason and criticism as espionage. He is currently limited to shrieking and spitting when he’s confronted with inconvenient facts. By next weekend, however, Mr. Rajkumar is likely to switch to some sort of “enshrine irrational fears and fancies as truth” approach to draw our attention away from such facts. His cat’s-paws are easily manipulated. But the problems with his imprecations don’t end there.
Let’s consider for a moment, though, that maybe Mr. Rajkumar has an uncritical — almost a worshipful — attitude toward coldhearted rattlebrains. Then doesn’t it follow that Mr. Rajkumar’s retinue is packed with more yellow-bellied bosthoons than a stray dog has fleas? Yes, he should slither back under whatever rock he crawled out from, but here is the point that is worth considering: Mr. Rajkumar once wrote a document whose sole purpose was to argue that he is a spokesman for God. This document was an endless sequence of intentional distortions, cynical manipulations of language, and outright lies. It served no purpose other to get people thinking about how I unquestionably proclaim that Mr. Rajkumar is a temulent scaramouch. How else can I characterize a person who did all of the following and then some?
- Shred the basic compact between the people and their government
- Lay down diktats that force me to become increasingly frustrated, humiliated and angry
- Advocate his remonstrations amid a hue and cry as untoward as it is barbaric
I could lengthen this list, but I shall rest my case. The point is that Mr. Rajkumar’s unscrupulous, whiney hatchet jobs play on people’s conscious and unconscious belief structures. Mr. Rajkumar then blames us for that. Now there’s a prizewinning example of psychological projection if I’ve ever seen one.
All of the claims I’ve read regarding the benefits of Mr. Rajkumar’s slurs have been thoroughly premature. That is, they always seem to be based on an inadequate exploration of these slurs, their history, and their possible meanings. I myself claim it is therefore high time we lead Mr. Rajkumar to resipiscence. Let me start the ball rolling with the observation that if you ever ask Mr. Rajkumar to do something, you can bet that your request will get lost in the shuffle, unaddressed, ignored, and rebuffed.
Mr. Rajkumar’s delitescent goal is to let self-deluded race-baiters serve as our overlords. The toll in human suffering and the loss of innocent lives that will ensue are clearly nonissues for him. If you’ve read this far then you probably either agree with me or are on the way to agreeing with me. My usual response to Mr. Rajkumar’s perceptions is this: Mr. Rajkumar believes in extending differential access to social goods to anyone who can lay a claim to membership in or affiliation with any group that has helped him reap a whirlwind of destroyed marriages, damaged children, and, quite possibly, a globe-wide expression of incurable sexually transmitted diseases. However, such a response is much too glib and perhaps a little censorious, so let me be more specific. I am tired of hearing or reading that myopic, footling ivory-tower academics should be fêted at wine-and-cheese fund-raisers. You know that that is simply not true.
Undoubtedly, Mr. Rajkumar’s supporters like to say, “Mr. Rajkumar’s plane of understanding is beyond the realm of human imagining.” Such frothy eloquence neither convinces nor satisfies me. If someone wants me to believe something loathsome like that, that person will have to show me some concrete evidence. Meanwhile, I, for one, intend to show you that Mr. Rajkumar’s language consists largely of euphemism, question-begging, and sheer, cloudy vagueness. The mere mention of that fact guarantees that this letter will never get published in any mass-circulation periodical over which Mr. Rajkumar has any control. But that’s inconsequential because Mr. Rajkumar has convinced a generation of people that he wants only to live in fellowship and peace. One must pause in admiration at this triumph of media manipulation. To recap the main points made in this letter: 1) Mr. Daniel Rajkumar, Esq.’s double standards blend muddleheaded, unimaginative stoicism (manifested in an unstable, deceitful stance) with a purported support for environmentalism, trade unionism, and the dignity of labor, 2) his bons mots are cronyism reincarnate, and 3) in debates with him, it is important to evaluate whether his provocations reflect a sincere desire to present an alternative point of view or whether his agenda is primarily to pose a threat to the survival of democracy.