This writing is not required reading, nor a response to assignment. It is offered as a critique of theory about my condition and standing as an ongoing student in Tacoma Community College possibly of interest to those who followed my decision to leave Community College of Allegheny County.
A critique seems to me different from analysis in that its point of departure is not knowing quite where to begin, an aporia of being at sea not due to failure to understand, but instead just having so many good points of departure from which to dive in from, it is not, in other words, prescribed by the line of reasoning where best to proceed from, and thus is more likely to leave a listener at a loss at first, as to what they should expect. The license to critique is therefore easily mistaken for disentangling garble rather than being a circumnavigation.
Profe. Ignacio of TCC made a critical observation in a scholarly essay about the state of affairs in El Salvador after the murder of Archbishop Romero about which I asked my Latino Sociology Profe. Doug Avella to comment. It wouldn’t surprise me if someone harbored the complaint that I look for opportunities to exploit something in digest that gives me a sounding board for my obscure notions, but her point seems very direct on its own terms: that the deaths of Martin Luther King and Archbishop Romero led to their exploitation as martyrs in a way that contradicted their goals in life. I asked Profe. Avella if he thought this was unintended, or intended and was asked to clarify, so I asked did he think there was any possibility that the killers murdered Romero in a exploitative way, targeting him to have a topic to make a murder film about, and he said no, it didn’t happen that way.
If that was all there was to it, this wouldn’t be a critique, this would be an essay, one in which I refuted by available evidence his assurance in this regard. I asked my old school to allow me to matriculate with Honors so I didn’t have to pursue this question but it has come up in contexts like this from time to time, arriving at sociological questions pertaining to such things as my academic freedom, corollaries about which Profe. Avella is very forthcoming and learned. Nor does my evidence, which Profe. Avella has never seen ( evidence that a hunter from Hollywood marked these intelligent men-of-the-people for stardom post-mortem) decide in favor of my attending beliefs, since what I think has happened is not mutually exclusive from the first idea; despite the fact rejection of the first idea is often seen as paramount to establishing trust that I am wrong about everything else.
This isn’t to be mysterious, but a double barrier is hardly the limit of this critique, in fact the aporia will reach the reader even advised that the two theses referred to so far can be argued separately: the first being that shootings were done to be put to musical scores with actors filling in, and not a side effect; second, now arriving wire dispatch style that things like Rushdie, Obama and Foucault were part of a full spectrum upload from a publisher’s project behind the AIDS attack. In this context we begin to scrutinize me as a person, and the adjunct of academic dissention surviving as a student with no pretense of professorial duties. This then allows a curiosity, one particularly poignant in a study of Marxist mapping in Latino American studies, for a variety of reasons pertaining to niche exploitation: Section 8 Housing, dishwashing job intervals, which have fieldwork elements, open mic poetry readings, with the socialization processes brought on by watchdog groups and open mic bullies, the disenfranchisement of victimization, the status of victim claims and rivalry, being white and so on.
Arguably reporting what I found, as disturbing as it is would qualify as liberation theology in a sense, since it took tremendous willpower, including long periods of homelessness, to make possible. However it goes beyond explaining that a script about murder King was found, that it earmarked me for future assassination, that it was lied about, that discovery is underway by the authors, protected by the disdain and dismissal of college academicians, that named-in-the-script individual Raymond Mark Mancine’s interest in a short story about a news group staging crimes to be there first for the scoop dovetails exactly with the elements of his sister’s name De De in the script about planning the murder of King, about which a pornography corporation is named, and I am serially degraded as a persona of white devilry, as well as the priority placed on De De Allen in the film made about Officer Frank Serpico during its curtain call, all of which bugles the fact of hunting involvement from Hollywood, but more dire to the fabric of the critique is the idea that we can safely rule out the white devil when, in reality, all of the evidence suggests the philosophy of Adolf Hitler being abetted behind the scenes by Kennedy’s assassins pulled together by King Edward when he was in South America, the extreme racist intelligensia of Oxford.
For example, we know that the philosopher-Fuhrer believed that the abstract code of Western Civilization gave him a wink to do in our names what we would not allow admitting was going on. Soul for him, was a desperate attempt by the weak to escape from reality. Both Martha Gellhorn, following the habit of denial, and Donald Trump, making a mockery of the inner psyche of women in the U.S. of They, if you will, said either, “You don’t mean that,” or “I didn’t really mean it.” But the last gasp of trust involved in Profe. Avella’s dismissal overlooks an insidious point of logical address, the closed forum of inadmissible text. The presence of the same off-limit ideas has prevented Officer Serpico from admitting what really happened on Mt. Desert Island in 1988, while he was online, which proved that AIDS was a planned attack. It would compromise his status in the celluloid world too keenly to admit that the movie made about him was put together by the same people his denials protect for the greatest of infamies.
The content cheated mind turns of course to entertainment, and the structural guidelines of education subordinated to Hollywood, for comfort.
Probably the most incriminating example of the Oxford-Philosopher Fuhrer is the way in which an actor named Bruce Le was recruited after the death of Bruce Lee to cater to the stereotype Bruce Lee occupied, while devoid of his personal code of ethics, which is what made Bruce Lee such a Kennedy era wiz-kid. By removing the celebrities and leaving a void where they once stood, the Oxford-Fuhrer supremacist demonstrated that the murdered men were also wrong, that without them their ideas would never live on, asking only then that we prove this isn’t true by offering more sport for the gentry.