Substituting one letter for another is the new politics?

Post Reply New Topic

What kind of unmitigated genius came up with the idea of simply exchanging the first letter of a person's name with some other from the infinite 26 letters in the alphabet? (i.e. the endless weird variety on 'Hillary') - if it wasn't so basic it could possibly be funny, perhaps if all died and only amoeba remain. I'm sure, like an old computer, they'd only be able to substitute only one letter too.

Could this be 'satire' in their minds? For someone who's never encountered satire before, perhaps... it's ludicrous. The ancient Greeks and Romans used to have whole plays dedicated to satire, comedy, tragedy... these days we only take away one letter.

Or is it because of the generally uneducated nature of that one country? Her opponent absolutely loves that fact, as if somehow suddenly a lack of any nuance or substantial meaning is power ('alt-right' is firmly in the "ignorance is bliss" camp) and screw Francis Bacon and Thomas Hobbes "tryin' to lecturrre us on the potency of knowledge" (it's not actually easy to come up with 'potency' without a vocabulary though, so I guess it's justifiable that knowledge isn't really considered at all relevant...)

But seriously, is this like the age of post-fact post-post-modernist 'satire' where we can only ever play with 26 letters? Forget the 31,534 words that Shakespeare knew and used! 26 individual units in a single word must be just right for our 'modern' 'civilization'...

But Shakespeare himself said "brevity is the soul of wit".

So its perfectly fine to change only one letter if your intent is to pillory Clinton.

(okay. I had to change two letters there. Close enough. ).

And its okay to subtract just one letter if you need to dump on the Rump!

Not that the Rump doesn't do a fine job of dumping upon himself lately! Lol!