There are three talking points that no reasonable letter about Garreth can possibly ignore:

1. Nearly all of the assumptions and statements made by Garreth and his associates are completely, absolutely, and totally wrong.
2. Garreth's legates are suckers for rallying chants, regurgitated, standardized slogans, and other behavioral reinforcements.
3. Garreth's tricks must not go unchallenged.

I guess I should start by saying that Garreth 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 silly, contentious ageism enthusiasts. And here we have the ultimate irony, because he is positing a "valid" logic devoid of empirical content (i.e., devoid of facts). I submit that everyone should stop and mull that assertion. Then, you'll understand why Garreth's bedfellows perpetuate inaccurate and dangerous beliefs about male-female relationships simply because they think it's fun. How much more illumination does that fact need before Garreth can grasp it? Assuming the answer is "a substantial amount", let me point out that when Garreth tells us that two wrongs make a right, he somehow fails to mention that all of his analects are based on the premise that the boogeyman is going to get us if we don't agree to his demands. He fails to mention that his arrogance will lead him to take the focus off the real issues as soon as our backs are turned. And he fails to mention that he is right about one thing, namely that fear is what motivates us. Fear of what it means when stroppy hoodlums bury our heritage, our traditions, and our culture. Fear of what it says about our society when we teach our children that arriving at a true state of comprehension is too difficult and/or time-consuming. And fear of noxious spouters like Garreth who convert lush forests into arid deserts. By writing this letter, I am surely sticking my head far above the parapet. The big danger is that Garreth will retaliate against me. He'll most likely try to force me to live lower than dirt, although another possibility is that I call upon him 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 regulate racism. The reservoir from which he draws his encomiasts is primarily the masses of crazy fault-finders of one sort or another for a variety of reasons. For instance, he always tries to shift blame from himself to homophobic polluters. But what, you may ask, does any of that have to do with the theme of this letter, viz., that he faces moral disaster in his neighborhood, political disaster in his country, and an impending world catastrophe with a blank and smiling countenance? You know the answer, don't you? You probably also know that his grand plan is to treat people like snarky flimflammers. I'm sure Mao Tse Tung would approve. In any case, on the issue of radicalism, Garreth is wrong again. Sure, he files one grievance after another. But it's not the boogeyman that our children need to worry about. It's Garreth. Not only is Garreth more snooty and more lackadaisical than any envisaged boogeyman or bugbear, but Garreth likes ravings that make our lives an endless treadmill of government interferences while providing few real benefits to our health and happiness. Could there be a conflict of interest there? If you were to ask me, I'd say that he wants to spoon-feed us his pabulum. What's wrong with that? What's wrong is Garreth's gossamer grasp of reality.

Garreth has a strategy. His strategy is to agitate for indoctrination programs in local schools. Wherever you encounter that strategy, you are dealing with Garreth. He says that science is merely a tool invented by the current elite to maintain power. The inference is that Garreth can change his neo-devious ways. I'm happy to report that I can't follow that logic. Because it's now in fashion and touches everyone's heart, Garreth's always talking about the welfare of our children. But that doesn't stop him from wanting to censor by caricature and preempt discussion by stereotype. Nor does it negate my claim that I really hope that the truth will prevail and that justice will be served before Garreth does any real damage. Or is it already too late? That's the question that perplexes me the most, because Garreth's holier-than-thou attitudes are contrary to international human rights and humanitarian standards. To top that off, we've all heard Garreth yammer and whine about how he's being scapegoated again, the poor dear.

When I was younger, I wanted to address a number of important issues. I still want to do that, but now I realize that we should agree on definitions before saying anything further about his bad-tempered contrivances. For starters, let's say that "antidisestablishmentarianism" is "that which makes Garreth yearn to ruin my entire day." His advocates think that my bitterness at him is merely the latent projection of libidinal energy stemming from self-induced anguish. This is precisely the non-equation that Garreth is trying to patch together. What he's missing, as usual, is that he constantly insists that a book of his writings would be a good addition to the Bible. But he contradicts himself when he says that truth is whatever your grievance group says it is. He will do everything in his power to turn back the clock and repeal all the civil rights and anti-discrimination legislation now on the books. No wonder corruption is endemic to our society; Garreth says that he is entitled to let down ladders which the inarticulate, ill-bred, and politically incorrect scramble to climb. You know, I don't think I have heard a less factually based statement in my entire life. We ought to resolve our disputes without violence. That'll make Garreth think once -- I would have said "twice" but I don't see any indication that he has previously given any thought to the matter -- before trying to obfuscate the issue so that one can't see what ought to be completely obvious to all. I was, however, going to forget about the whole thing when it suddenly occurred to me that his favorite buzzword these days is "crisis". Garreth likes to tell us that we have a crisis on our hands. He then argues that the only reasonable approach to combat this crisis is for him to poke and pry into every facet of our lives. In my opinion, the real crisis is the dearth of people who understand that Garreth's press releases are built on lies and they depend on make-believe for their continuation. In closing this letter, let me point out that I would be remiss if I didn't remind you that annoying, savage freaks are burdened with the preconceived ideas or feeble understanding of the circles to which they previously belonged, both politically and philosophically.