Mister Tredyffrin and Friends

An analogy

Let’s say we’re having an argument. You and I. And we’re both pretty upset.

What if you said, “Hey, you’re being a bit careless with the truth, there! A is not B. It’s C. You’re crazy if you think D is E. It’s not. I have the proof. It’s F. And you can’t possibly say G when it’s well documented that H. I is actually J. And I talked to Mrs. K, and she assures me that when you say L you must have your fingers crossed. It’s actually M. What’s more, you have a cheesy moustache.”

Then, what if I said, “All those claims are false, and I stand wholeheartedly by my original statement. Let me explain. I certainly do not have a cheesy moustache. It is a well-groomed moustache of extraordinary style and panache. In addition, I did N and O, in spite of what your accusations about P and Q. Now that I’ve explained everything, the public can see that you’re a total weenie.”

To make matters worse, let’s say that instead of a couple lines, I spent a whole six-inch paragraph defending my immaculate moustache. Then I added further “responses” to a few other things you never mentioned. And, to top it off, let’s say three other people were arguing with me, too, about the same thing, and I completely ignored their words. Would you be satisfied with my rebuttal? Of course not. You’d be able to see just how purposefully evasive and dishonest it was.

Well, that’s exactly what Mr. Kampf did today in the block of newsprint given to him by both of the local papers. Why does he think he can get away with this? There are very few people who pay close attention to this “discourse", and Kampf knows that. He can thus count on the fact that the average voter reading his latest piece will not be well versed in all that transpired in previous letters. He takes this as license to reframe the argument into whatever form he wants. That’s not fair practice, and is a certain indication that the last thing Kampf is interested in is understanding or addressing Paul Drucker’s complaints. His sole concern is making sure that everyone sees Paul Drucker and Mark DeFeliciantonio in as bad a light as possible.

[continued on next page: Some background, and the letter]

Pages: 1 · 2 · 3