Lifestyles of the Mopologetic and Obsequious

[_Gadianton]

A thought-provoking read, professor. Your scholarly output is a force to be reckoned with, for sure. Apparently, there is hope for the junior tier of one day mingling amongst the elite power brokers within the Mopologetic world and participating in projects financed by they wealthy and famous. I would like your professional opinion on something though. I do think you've identified an important social trend here, but I ask myself, what are the ends of Mopologetics?

One possibility seems to be that it's a corollary to any other venue of fame and power, power and fame for its own sake. Another possibility seems to be as a means to an end, to justify the content of Mopologetics by its association with power and success. I've also considered the possibility of the latter, but in course it becomes the former.

For instance, I once read a book about terrorism, this was published pre-2001. The author argued that terrorists used their deeds to get money that ultimately supports idealistic ends. But in course, terrorism had become corrupt in a sense, and failing in that key terrorist organizations seemed content with their success as powerful entities with money and so on, even if they didn't seem to be getting any closer to achieving earlier stated idealistic goals.

Just curious what you make of it.

[_Doctor Scratch]

I do think you've identified an important social trend here, but I ask myself, what are the ends of Mopologetics?

I think that we can divide up the "ends" a bit. Obviously, the "ends" of the people at the top of the hierarchy (e.g., Midgley, DCP, Hamblin) are somewhat different than those of lower-rung Mopologists, such as LoaP or Lamanite.

One possibility seems to be that it's a corollary to any other venue of fame and power, power and fame for its own sake. Another possibility seems to be as a means to an end, to justify the content of Mopologetics by its association with power and success. I've also considered the possibility of the latter, but in course it becomes the former.

Hmm. That's interesting. I don't really think that's the case, though. At base, my belief is that Mopologetics is motivated primarily by revenge and insecurity, not unlike terrorism. And, what do you know! We had the same thing in mind, Dean Robbers! Look at this:

For instance, I once read a book about terrorism, this was published pre-2001. The author argued that terrorists used their deeds to get money that ultimately supports idealistic ends. But in course, terrorism had become corrupt in a sense, and failing in that key terrorist organizations seemed content with their success as powerful entities with money and so on, even if they didn't seem to be getting any closer to achieving earlier stated idealistic goals.

Just curious what you make of it.

Yes. The top-tier apologists crave, above all, the complete crushing and obliteration of their enemies. But, they have been corrupted by hubris, and by the admiration and "slavish praise" that is heaped upon them by the junior apologists. And yet, their very deep insecurity persists---I'm sure you recall the Oxford video that Bill Hamblin took, where he went out of his way to dig out his book at the bookstore, just so he could make some dumb, self-deprecating joke about it.