October 5, 2013: Camfield’s Fearless Forecast, Immoral By Definition, Think About It

The following was written sometime in the late summer of 1974 during the high tide of the cold war before weapons of mass destruction were a threat in the hands of terrorist groups.  Nevertheless the commentary, here envisioned as a 19^th century poster, contains salient points that I hereby submit for the reader’s consideration.  So, without further ado, here is my composition on why there will be no nuclear war:

 

Camfield’s

Fearless Forecast

By

That all seeing, all knowing

Wonder of Wonders

And

Former soda jerk at Arno’s Take Out

Camfield Himself!!

A mental ejaculation

On

Why there will be no

NUCLEAR WAR!

COMPLETE IN ARISTOTELIAN SYLLOGIMS

For lack of better form

(The Conservative)

Major Premise:  All politicians are self-seeking, power-hungry megalomaniacal alphas by definition

Minor Premise:  Nuclear war tends to liquidate omega populations, fertile sources of ego-gratification,
and incidentally,

***CIVILIZATION***

Conclusion:  Nuclear war is both ego-shattering and inoperative

 OR

As Camfield Himself once said:

“What politician is wont to rule over 2 million square miles of ***RUBBLE?***

 OR

If you don’t accept that,
TRY THIS!!!

 (The Liberal)

For you idealists in the crowd, here’s a bone:

Major Premise:  All politicians are altruistic, self-sacrificing, other-directed DO-GOODERS!!!

Minor Premise:  Nuclear war tends to liquidate the recipients, hence the purpose and goals of

 ***DO-GOODERISM***

 Or

 As both Camfield Himself and P.F. Sloan once said:

 “There’ll be no one to save

With the world in a grave”

Conclusion:  Nuclear war, leaving no one to save, is therefore immoral
 by definition. 
 No matter how we look at it,
we lose. 
Think about it.