The man who had a dog...
The man who had a dog had a dog. Every day he'd feed his dog, and pat it on the head, and scratch it behind the ears (because the dog had dog ears, from being so much a dog). Sometimes he'd throw a little dog, and the ball would fetch I mean sorry, the other backwards way around : sometimes a little ball would throw the man and the dog would run, fetch and bring it back.
One day, the man who had a dog started reading poetry to it. Nothing much happened, but the man was not one to be discouraged by phenomenology -- he could only be discouraged by the echoes in his own mind. Day after day the man, he persevered, reading poetry to the dog, over and over again, until one day...
Until one day the dog recited back. This happened, fie on unbelievers, the doke spoge clearly and enunciated euphonically, the man heard it and was happy. He was content, his life's work before his eyes : he, the man in question, taught his dog poetry. Let no one daught that all can be done, that if you can dream it you can do it, that indeed reason and clear enunciation conquers all -- difficulties and otherwise, phenomenological, gnoseological or formidontoninical.
Unrelated to the above, the Amerinians had a minority living in their country, they called the Niws. The Romarmans also had a minority living in their country, the Gyggers. Finally, the Gercans also had a minority living in their country : the Jesies. Follow along, it's not that hard (I even made myself a little guide for it : Amerinians/Niws ; Romarmans/Gyggers ; Gercans/Jesies). What all these minorities had in discomon, clearly and neatly distinguishing and diferentiating them from one another was varied, complex and extremely far-reaching, involved minutia of plurious uncountable endlessly complicated and utterly irreducible distinguishing difference : the Gyggers, unlike either Jessies or Niws were an ancient people ; whereas the Jessies, unlike the Gyggers or the Niws were living far from their place of origin, having been historically transported there by historical events, in history ; while finally the Jessies, unlike either Gyggers or Niws, had a peculiar conformation of their brainskin and bellybox, exhuded specific odours (that only a competent, well trained and aculturated nose could discern) and in a word, each were as completely different from one another as pompous cluelessness and inchoate ignorance could ever make it seem the case.
They also had one thing in common, the three minorities, just one thing : they were all hovering around the demographic extinction point, just about a tenth of the majority by headcount. You might not know this, being too young to remember and unskilled in the apeiron, aporisticon and kalemegdan, but there's exactly two things being just over the demographic extinction point does for a minority. Just and precisely two.
One thing is that the minority will never be self-represented ; whatever ideas of it prevailing "in general" being entirely constructed of them and without them. The other thing is that the minority will always be represented in the same exact way : back when the Amerinians were doing things, they thought the Niws universally (and self-evidently) cowards. Because that is the problem of doing things, one has to confront his own cowardice at every step of the way ; and that one decides that cowardice he has to confront every day and every step of the way is specific not merely universally but also self-evidently of... of... well ? Of the Niws, if there's any Niws on hand (but not too many of them such as'd perhaps argue the point). The Gercans meanwhile, not having any Niws on hand at all whatsoever, but just the right amount of Jesies, thought the exact same thing... about the Jesies. Similarily the Gyggers spent a century or more, during the "national formation" of the purely imaginary socio-political construction called Romarmia (just like all the others) being the most self-obviously and also thoroughly & universally cowards there could be had (since there couldn't be had any Jews or Niggers... ahem, I'm so, so sorry, what was I saying, Jiggs or Niwers ? whatever).
Before (or after) ; or rather should I say after (meaning, before) the Amartzipans, Gerzgratiati & Rompompoms did things, they also didn't do anything ; and the respective J-words, N-words an' G-words spent however long the respectives weren't doing things being... oh, you've guessed it (no doubt by ready reference to your official history narrative/storybook, ladden with such much better names made up through more respectable processes exactly in the same way) : for as long as the group was doing things, the minority was being cowardly, and for as long as the group wasn't doing anything, the minority was being dangerous. Bloody fucking assassins in the dark alleys raping our women with their really large hairdos and cutting up our children to make chesspieces out of their toenails. Seriously, this is a fact. You didn't know it was a fact ? Maybe you'd like your passport rescinded, or something -- because my cousin's neighbour's daughter's friend was once hid away on a yacht and the young man in an ascot (too lazy to rape her) made darts of brown paper which he languidly threw at her twat. So there! END OF DISCUNTION!
I could transcribe the story of the Gypster and the thousand wolves, which yes was a thing, as well as countless other stories. There's no point though, they all say the same thing : bugaboo hurr durr deeerp!
Now, confronted with this situation and in consideration of the consequences of circumstance as described (etcetera), the man who had a dog (and so he had a dog) was called in by nobody in particular meaning himself, to make everything right -- because I forgot to mention seeing how it's entirely pointless to repeat, that the man who had a dog (and so he had a dog) taught that it'd be for the best if everything were well. Perhaps I mean tought, though in the end one could just presume as much, on the basis of the foregoing. Yes ?
Moving on : the man who had a dog proceeded to notice that indeed in the course of historical unfolding, being perceived as dangerous by the majority turned out to be quite fucking dangerous for the misfortunate minority so perceived (through no fault, or merit of its own -- being as it is the case that minorities do not in any substantial sense exist, and certainly in no representative sense could ever), so he made a poem about it, on the spot. He titled his poem Hurr Durr Antispunkalism, Meine Damned & Herrein, and he proceeded to teach all dogs, both his own and random women's, the poetic poetry theirein incumbent. It had forceful contents of great socio-politico impact as well as dessert, it was well wrought not to mention autorshippy and quite lengthy, it had, in a word, all that's truly needful as well as necessary of good poetry in the view of men who have a dog.
Coincidentally the majority switched from doing nothing to doing something just about the time the man who had a dog (and his dog) were teaching/learning & thinking in their fashion, and so not only the resistence of the medium happened to momentarily be nil but the man who had a dog also had ample field to be impressed with himself : look, that his taught thoughts have an impact! Change society for the better (and promote the having of dogs)! Quick, quick, a tall triple ristretto and a puppy for everyone! The valuable workings on Antispunkalism by people who have a dog not merely were learned by all the dogs (whether people-had or otherwise) but also produced measurable improvement, change you can believe in, without!
All hail the man who has a dog, for he is truly his brother's keeper, and the finder of lost children. And also God help the misfortunate minorities should the winds change again, because it'll truly be a wonder if there's any blacks outside of taxidermic exhibits by the time your children are old enough to have dogs of their own. I mean, they have big cocks, right ? Or at least they used to ?
