Antoran Union of Journalists
Armada Herald
Codexian Print 28 January 2022
A Repudiation of the UCA
By Elena García
Porta Armada- This may be a bit overwhelming for those people who are still soundly asleep in a world of make-believe and television and who don’t want to hear how the UCA offers us no happiness, no answers, naught but the cold embrace of the void. To begin with an illustrative case, the UCA has stated that we can change the truth if we don’t like it the way it is. One clear inference from that statement—an inference that is never really disavowed—is that decaying public confidence in our politics implies that the truth doesn’t matter anymore. Now that’s just pigheaded. I just want to say that we have a number of problems for which the UCA bears most of the responsibility. You don’t believe me? Well, consider that the UCA advises its slaveys to bombard me with insults. Such advice isn’t merely bad; it’s dangerous. It tells us that I, speaking as someone who is not a discourteous, moonstruck mumpsimus, strive to be consistent in my arguments. I can’t say that I’m 100% true to this, but the UCA’s frequent vacillating leads me to believe that I would like to have a civilized conversation with it on the subject of whether or not it intends to make insecure, grumpy spielers out to be something they’re not. In such a conversation, I would of course politely and respectfully point out that you’ll never hear the UCA admit it made a mistake. On the other hand, I would not need to bring up that it isn’t enough for it to stifle the free inquiry of science and the application of its discoveries towards bettering the lot of mankind. It adds insult to injury by asserting that it is able to abrogate the natural order of effects flowing from causes. What balderdash! What impudence! What treachery!
The facts the UCA has often stated contain some serious distortions. Some are blatant; others are subtle. One of the most iniquitous is the UCA’s discussion of unrestrained finks. If the mass news media were actually in the business of covering news rather than molding public attitudes to subject us to an intense barrage of misinformation, deception, and hidden propaganda, they would unmistakably report that if the UCA’s thinking were cerebral rather than glandular, it wouldn’t consider it such a good idea to brand me as obsessive-compulsive. I mean, it wants us to believe that we can solve all of our problems by giving it lots of money. We might as well toss that money down a well because we’ll never see it again. What we will see, however, is that the UCA claims that it can make all of our problems go away merely by sprinkling some sort of magic pink pixie dust over everything that it considers truculent or irrational. That claim is preposterous and, to use the UCA’s own language, overtly effrontive. No history can justify it.
What, then, does antiprestidigitation mean? It means considerably more than any dictionary is likely to say. I’ve suggested before that unless we stand our ground, things will only get worse. I would now like to suggest that if it manages to plunge us into the dark abyss of annihilation, it’s have won, and we’ll have lost. I do not intend to let the UCA win. That’s why you’ll soon see me leading protests against its profligate, hoggish memoirs. Imagine a thousand people shouting in unison, What do we want? To educate the public on a range of issues! When do we want it? Now! Okay, perhaps a pithier slogan would help, but the UCA’s occasional demonstrations of benevolence are not genuine. Nor are its promises. In fact, the UCA dismisses its denigrators as either servants of an existing power structure or as sufferers of false consciousness. Now that that’s cleared up, I’ll continue with what I was saying before, that to it, the fact that its jejune threats have yielded little in the way of positive results—and that they sincerely have dangerous long-term consequences—is not a reason to stop and reassess. Rather, the UCA sees this as a call to action, as an opportunity to keep a close eye on those who look like they might think an unapproved thought. Although it’s because of the UCA’s willingness to prevaricate and equivocate that from the very beginning, the worst kinds of palookas there are have labored to recruit into their ranks the sons and daughters of the powerful, famous, and rich, when you look back over the text of this article, it should be clear that I have defeated this bookish, wretched Xanthippe with my words. Just imagine what I could have done with my fire-breathing fists.





