An Inquiry into the Nature of Zigliwatz

Since my last discussion regarding the self-replication of zigliwatz, many have been curious to know more. Specifically, they want me to tell them how to take small numbers of zigliwatz and convert them to larger numbers of them. I am rather confused and horrified by this curiosity, as I already explained that no good can come from zigliwatz themselves. This exposes a total misunderstanding of the nature of zigliwatz. Zigliwatz are not tangible themselves, nor influential at all outside the sphere of our understanding/misunderstanding. While fame, profits, and power are usually seen in the proximity of zigliwatz, zigliwatz themselves are a unsavory side-effect of these things, not their source. This topic seems to cause more confusion than I formerly realized, and thus, I take it upon myself to set the record straight regarding the nature of this most deceptive entity. Certainly, the belief that zigliwatz themselves have any real value is a myth that can and should be cleanly and thoroughly dispatched before any more zigliwatzge appears. After all, the proportion of zigliwatz to non-zigliwatz can only be so high before the nature of zigliwatz becomes completely apparent. If the prevalence of zigliwatz becomes apparent too suddenly, the inevitable backlash against zigliwatz could be so severe as to be counterproductive. An unsustainable amount of zigliwatz could result, tipping the scales, emptying a inexhaustible torrent of zigliwatz over our society in a flood of confusion, misery, and death.

Considering this possibility, it is pehaps more important now than ever to expose the perilous ground upon which we tread. Zigliwatz never appear intentionally, but always as a result of some fissure or weakness in our efforts to suppress them. They are always located just beneath the surface. You might imagine we are walking on the caldera of Yellowstone National Park, which is actually an active supervolcano. Hot, sulfuric liquid heated by magma far beneath the Earth's crust is bubbling to the surface all the time. We amble inside this volcano, accompanied by Japanese tourists with expensive cameras, and enjoy the impressive sights and sounds. We proceed on footpaths above roiling, steaming hot springs. We breathe the stench of rotten eggs. We marvel at the clockwork regularity of Old Faithful as it shoots its lethal discharge high into the atmosphere. We hardly consider the possibility we are about to die a swift and horrific death in a bath of molten rock. After all, the last super eruption occurred 630,000 years ago.

An appropriate handling of zigliwatz somewhat resembles the venting of the Yellowstone Supervolcano. We simply cannot plug all the holes. If we did, pressure would build up and cause a deadly eruption. We can't drill down either, releasing a constant flow of magma that might swallow the countryside, converting the central United States into a dark, barren wasteland. No, we must accept a certain degree of zigliwatzge to maintain the delicate balance, so that many more generations of Japanese tourists can take pictures.

Of course, unlike steaming hot springs, zigliwatz are invisible. And, in a world rife with zigliwatz, we do not perceive them as something threatening, but quite the opposite. In fact, many things that we consider good are themselves almost entirely zigliwatz.

Disclaimer: The morpheus nature of zigliwatz means that any specific characterization will perhaps serve to mislead. The following example is quite crude I submit it for expedience, hoping the reader does not limit the definition of zigliwatz to the following example...

Also for expedience, I will use the abstraction of economics: A 6.5% sales tax is an example of zigliwatz. In order to understand why, I ask you to make some assumptions. First, assume that the tax is paid voluntarily and with adequate representation from the tax payers. Second, assume that all revenue from sales taxes is spent responsibly, and the product of the tax provides a benefit for all tax payers evenly. In other words, assume that the tax revenue is being handled by an omnipotent, shrewd, philanthropic, compassionate entrepreneur. The tax is still zigliwatz to the extent that .5 cents is a denomination that is not available in our currency system. On a $1 purchase, I do not pay 6.5 cents, but 7 cents. Why is this a good example of zigliwatz? Because, relabeling is used so that we may believe that our possessions/time/labor is not ours. We earned that whole penny with our labor and time, and not only half of it. And, albeit a very small amount, there is an assumption made that whatever portion of our lives from which that .5 cents derived is under another person's discretion. Namely, whoever decides how to handle the accumulation of extra one cent pieces that piles up behind a merchant's register, whether that be a person working publicly or privately. To be clear, zigliwatz is not negotiable or loosely defined. To remove zigliwatz from this situation would be rather simple. Either round the tax to the nearest penny (7%), or introduce a .5 cent piece so that tax payers can submit their fair share, no more or less.

Why is a definition of zigliwatz important? Because almost no one identifies zigliwatz for what it actually is. The customer assumes the tax rate is fair, and either that the extra .5 cents will be somehow returned through public work or that it is simply waste too insignificant to think about. They trust that this minor oversight/inconsistency is just a natural part of commerce and society. There is an assumption that .5 cents is no big deal. Well, if you have seen Office Space or Superman III, you know that an accumulation of .5 cents over many transactions adds up to millions, which is beside the point, but does indicate the inevitable consequences of zigliwatz.

The point is not that someone is quietly robbing people .5 cents at a time. Stealing itself is not zigliwatz. Zigliwatz is related to the conditions necessary for stealing to occur. Zigliwatz can perpetuate stealing and more zigliwatz. I don't want to give zigliwatz too bad a rap. Unintentional and unexploited zigliwatzge is a natural and unavoidable consequence of life. The problem is, when excessive zigliwatz appears, there is a temptation to employ zigliwatz for personal and often malevolent purposes. For example, while perhaps this tax was introduced innocently, (to pay for parade-ready, inflatable Spongebobs), the person on the sidelines (in the shadow of our giant, floating Spongebob) benefiting from millions in transactions of .5 cent payments does not want this policy to end. In fact, this person will likely spend effort, even millions, to ensure those who might renew the .5 cent increment are elected/appointed to power. This is getting closer to larger floating Spongebobs, and the true nature of zigliwatz.

Forgive my focus on economics. I only use this example to avoid the more inflammatory examples of zigliwatz easily accessible in government and religion. It is currently not very popular to attack zigliwatz in any redistributive economy, because, for our purposes, its fruits (this case, millions of dollars) are not only being paid to policy makers, but anyone who threatens system and is willing to be paid off in one way or another. This is nothing uncommon, and nothing outside the realm of everyone's experience. I have benefited from the existence of zigliwatz, and I have suffered from it. In fact, there is a possibility that a good portion of what success I have had related to economics has resulted from some manifestation of zigliwatz. But, economics is only a minor example, and really only hints at the true nature and prevalence of zigliwatz. I feel there is little that can be done overtly. The deflation of our floating Spongebob will not diminish zigliwatz.

I leave you with scarcely more information regarding zigliwatz than you may have had before. Zigliwatz are to be avoided at all costs. But, on a positive note, everything other than zigliwatz should be indulged in without restraint. This is very good news, as all truly good things exist despite zigliwatz, and this includes many, many things. Perhaps a discussion of things opposite zigliwatz will be another discussion. Although, in such a discussion, it is very easy for zigliwatz to creep in. I will do my best...