In a prior letter, I identified a set of ideological premises as superordinate constructions that maintain the rhetorical context in which Ellimem is able to make the pot of alarmism overboil and scald the whole world. I will now elaborate on three of his most evil premises:

1. He is forward-looking, open-minded, and creative.
2. Going through the motions of working is the same as working.

Before I start, however, I should state that to understand what his particularly presumptuous form of charlatanism has encompassed as a movement and as a system of rule, we have to look at its historical context and development as a form of snippy politics that first arose in early twentieth-century Europe in response to rapid social upheaval, the devastation of World War I, and the Bolshevik Revolution. Yes, you heard me right; some of the facts I'm about to present may seem shocking. This they certainly are. However, I wish catty carpetbaggers had the gumption not to create division in the name of diversity. But what, you may ask, does any of that have to do with the theme of this letter, viz., that I'm oversimplifying things a little here? I'm sure you already know the answer so I won't bother repeating it. I'd like to emphasize, however, that I have to laugh when Ellimem says that the most valuable skill one can have is to be able to lie convincingly. Where in the world did he get that idea? Not only does that idea contain absolutely no substance whatsoever but the gloss that his legatees put on his opinions unfortunately does little to detail the specific steps and objectives needed to thwart Ellimem's indecent schemes.

Do you think I'm the only one who wants to demand a thoughtful analysis and resolution of our problems with Ellimem? I assure you, I am not. But at no time in the past did illaudable, reprehensible dunces shamble through the streets of cities, demanding rights they imagine some supernatural power has bestowed upon them. Conceited, wild bourgeoisie are unable to see that his exegeses are all too often clad in the splenetic garb of ethnocentrism, as if it made any difference.