Reply #10: I'm not sure I agree with that analysis.

[frustrated_lefty]

The letter appeals to the gut, and, I would argue, effectively expresses outrage. The outrage is justified. If its sole purpose is to draw attention to the basis for that outrage, or to inspire similar outrage within the reader, it does what it was designed to do. The point to communication is to convey your intent, not prove your intelligence. Sometimes that intent is base and raw, and lofty language provides a poor tool for its expression.

I'm honestly on the fence about it. The letter does read as though it could simply be a poorly conceived rant by an excitable young guy in the heat of passion. But, it would probably have come off as pompous, presumptuous, and quite possibly ineffective, were the letter written as a cold, logical indictment.