In fact, every commenter posting today as "guest" or "Anonymous" for fear they will be SLAPPed, is using anonymity in the same way as Swift, who published his 1726 satire of institutions of government under the name "Lemuel Gulliver." Imagine that!
What was it about Gulliver's Travels that made Swift publish it under a pseudonym?
The work's satirical attacks on English politicians and social practices, as well as its coarse descriptions of bodily functions, provoke much comment and controversy among the reading public. Even the first publisher of the book fears that it is too critical of English society and expurgates the text slightly, over Swift's objections.Oh, so it was biting satire about politicians that some might find vile.
But that was 1726. Haven't we come a long way?
|Turds in an 18th Century Punchbowl|
Twenty-first century emissaries of Hoboken corruption excoriate free speech to discourage others from speaking. Fear of reprisal has driven those who criticize Hoboken's political landscape into one amorphous "guest."
Different century, same sh*t.
What brought this up?
LA is reading the unabridged 4-part (original) version of Gulliver's Travels; she's been entertaining me with passages from the book. It is wicked, hilarious satire, clear mockery of operations of government and particular persons. Yep, Swift would've had the crap SLAPPed out of him by Beth Mason's ancestors and their 18th century minions.
Meanwhile, our politicians who cheer attacks on some free speech enjoy their constitutional freedom to call unpaid public servants "sheep" and incite crowds to chant "Baaaaah."
Of course, the public should feel free to criticize this behavior, and other conduct of our public officials without fear of reprisal from either them or their minions.
That is how it should be.
2015 cannot come soon enough.