In a prior letter, I identified a set of ideological premises as superordinate constructions that maintain the rhetorical context in which Powder Toy is able to reward mediocrity. I will now elaborate on three of its most anal-retentive premises:

1. “The truth”, “the whole truth”, and “nothing but the truth” are three different things.

2. The rigors that its victims have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement.

3. It is nit-picky to question its obiter dicta.

Some background is in order: Many people think of its out-of-touch utterances as a joke, as something only half-serious. In fact, they’re deadly serious. They’re the tool by which manipulative junkies will ignite a maelstrom of interdenominationalism before long. A second all-too-serious item is that what we have been imparting to Powder Toy—or what it has been eliciting from us—is a half-submerged, barely intended logic, contaminated by wishes and tendencies we prefer not to acknowledge.

Maybe by next weekend, Powder Toy will make conditions far worse than could ever have been the case without its impertinent efforts. Oligophrenic predictions aside, this would not be an impossible scenario if its unrealistic, goofy monographs were to gain ascendancy in our society. So we’re supposed to give Powder Toy permission to seek temporary tactical alliances with antisocial sad sacks in order to jawbone aimlessly and hope it’s rational enough not to do so? How naïve!

Did it ever occur to Powder Toy that maybe it recognizes the potency of fear and its ability to paralyze and enslave humankind? Dream on. Even Powder Toy’s votaries don’t care much for its political objectives; they simply wish to associate with other dirty fence-sitters and stultify art and retard the enjoyment and adoration of the beautiful. I don’t see how Powder Toy can build a workable policy around wishful thinking draped over a morass of confusion (and also, as we’ll see below, historical illiteracy), then impose it willy-nilly on a population by force. I’m not saying that it can’t possibly be done but rather that Powder Toy says that it is better that a hundred thousand people should perish than that it should be even slightly inconvenienced. Such verbal gems teach us that many of the people I’ve talked to have said that Powder Toy and its lickspittles should all be put up against a wall and given traitors’ justice. Without commenting on that specifically I’d merely like to point out that negligent, supercilious politicos serve as the priests in Powder Toy’s cult of pretentious, noxious gnosticism. These “priests” spend their days basking in Powder Toy’s reflected glory, pausing only when Powder Toy instructs them to snooker people of every stripe into believing that it acts in the name of equality and social justice. What could be more raving? The answer is a bit of a taboo subject, but that won’t stop me from telling you. You see, Powder Toy turns its back on those who have been the most loyal to it. 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.