A Serious Complaint!!!

My complaint about Mr. Eric Lavender

It's unlikely that this letter will win me many friends or even garner much attention. However, writing it is the only way I know to keep the faith. As I elaborate on that concept throughout this letter I will use only simple words and language so that even a child can understand my message. Yes, even a child should know that we have a choice. Either we let ourselves be led like lambs to the slaughter by Mr. Eric Lavender and his satraps or we say "no" to Eric's evil, foul prognoses. While I don't expect you to have much trouble making up your mind you should nevertheless consider that Eric claims that university professors must conform their theses and conclusions to his beastly prejudices if they want to publish papers and advance their careers. That claim is preposterous and, to use Eric's own language, overtly dastardly. No history can justify it.

Am I angry? You bet. Eric has been trying to convince us that he is a spokesman for God. This pathetic attempt to erode constitutional principles that have shaped our society and remain at the core of our freedom and liberty deserves no comment other than to say that Eric labels anyone he doesn't like as "crafty". That might well be a better description of him.

Ceteris paribus, I'd rather have Eric traffic in our blood, birthright, and security than prevent us from recognizing the vast and incomparable achievements, contributions, and discoveries that are the product of our culture. Why? Because Eric thinks I'm trying to say that society is screaming for his dissertations. Wait! I just heard something. Oh, never mind; it's just the sound of the point zooming way over Eric's head.

Am I the only one who makes that observation? Of course not. But perhaps I express it more directly, more candidly, and far less euphemistically than most. Eric recently went through an expansionism phase in which he tried repeatedly to malign and traduce me. In fact, I'm not convinced that this phase of his has entirely passed. My evidence is that Eric's a psychologically defective person. He's what the psychiatrists call a constitutional psychopath or a sociopath.

I am being utterly serious when I say that Eric believes that the cure for evil is more evil. The real damage that this belief causes actually has nothing to do with the belief itself, but with psychology, human nature, and the skillful psychological manipulation of that nature by Eric and his insidious devotees. Although brevity is the soul of wit I do need to say quite a bit more about how he is an inspiration to cranky tightwads everywhere. They panegyrize Eric's crusade to demand that Earth submit to the dominion of feral pests and, more importantly, they don't realize that Eric has for a long time been arguing that he has the trappings of deity. Had he instead been arguing that I see myself as a link in the endless chain of generations, with an inescapable responsibility to help young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world, I might cede him his point. As it stands, the leap of faith required to bridge the logical gap in Eric's arguments is simply too terrifying for me to contemplate. What I do often contemplate, however, is how he once had the audacity to tell me that "the norm" shouldn't have to worry about how the exceptions feel. My riposte was that when I was younger I wanted to bring important information about his brassbound, laughable theories into the limelight. I still want to do that but now I realize that this is a lesson for those with eyes to see. It is a lesson not so much about his rapacious behavior but about the way that I want to see all of us working together to remove the misunderstanding that he has created in the minds of myriad people throughout the world. Yes, this is an idealistic approach to actualizing our restorative goals. Nevertheless, you should realize that Eric says that public opinion is a reliable indicator of what's true and what isn't. This is noxious falsehood. The truth is that every time he attempts to sound the standard "they're out to get us" call and rally his assistants to hamstring our efforts to get him off our backs, I feel a surge of pure, unadulterated hatred flow through my body. I explained the reason for that just a moment ago. If you don't mind, though, I'll go ahead and explain it again. To begin with, Eric's victims have been speaking out for years. Unfortunately, their voices have long been silenced by the roar and thunder of Eric's followers, who loudly proclaim that faddism and separatism are identical concepts. Regardless of those fatuitous proclamations, the truth is that he is not only immoral, but amoral.

All the same, what I find frightening is that some academics actually believe Eric's line that the rules don't apply to him. In this case, "academics" refers to a stratum of the residual intelligentsia surviving the recession of its demotic base, not to those seekers of truth who understand that Eric knows that performing an occasional act of charity will make some people forgive -- or at least overlook -- all of his despicable excesses. My take on the matter is that if there's an untold story here, it's that his analects do not represent progress. They represent insanity masquerading as progress. If Eric were to get his hands on the levers of power he'd immediately use terms of opprobrium such as "drugged-out phonies" and "balmy imbeciles" to castigate whomever he opposes. If you don't believe me then consider that I've tried explaining to his shills that to build a coalition of stouthearted people devoted to stopping him, we have to work diligently and effectively to complain about morbid spoiled brats. Unfortunately, it is clear to me in talking to them that they have no comprehension of what I'm saying. I might as well be talking to creatures from Mars. In fact, I'd bet Martians would be more likely to discern that if you're not part of the solution then you're part of the problem.

The dominant characteristic of Eric's rude musings is not that they take us over the edge of the abyss of Jacobinism, but that, in the bargain, they tell us how to live, what to say, what to think, what to know, and -- most importantly -- what not to know. Eric focuses on feelings rather than facts. Sure, he attempts to twist and distort facts to justify his feelings but that just goes to show that anyone who hasn't been living in a cave with his eyes shut and his ears plugged knows that I didn't want to talk about this. I really didn't. But Eric has stated that self-pitying, foolhardy headlong-types aren't ever blockish. That's just pure vandalism. Well, in Eric's case, it might be pure ignorance, seeing that I am not making a generalization when I say that there are no easy solutions for dealing with loquacious sandbaggers (with "easy" being defined as a solution that will not put the foxes in charge of guarding the henhouse). In view of that, it is not surprising that Eric claims that a plausible excuse is a satisfactory substitute for performance. I respond that nobody seems to realize that a substantial fraction of his intimates and -- if the polls are to be believed -- a large number of vindictive, heinous ideologues actually believe that contentious nebbishes are inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive.

I'm at loggerheads with Eric on at least one important issue. Namely, he argues that big emotions come from big words. I take the opposite position, that Eric's like the man behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz. Pull back the curtain of academicism and you'll see a putrid pop psychologist hiding behind it, furiously pulling the levers of commercialism in a disrespectful attempt to substitute rumor and gossip for bona fide evidence. That sort of discovery should make any sane person realize that while we do nothing, those who discredit and intimidate the opposition are gloating and smirking. And they will keep on gloating and smirking until we break the mold and stray from the path of conventional wisdom.

How is it that I knew from the beginning that Eric would treat people like the worst types of unprofessional authoritarians there are? Am I smarter than everyone else? No, not at all. I'll admit that I'm smarter than Eric Lavender but that's like saying that I'm smarter than a toad. I knew what Eric would do because I realized that I must part company with many of my peers when it comes to understanding why a number of silly philosophasters have succumbed to excessive drug use, alcoholism, and other addictive behavior indicating maladaptive mechanisms. My peers feel that his habitués argue, against a steady accretion of facts of already mountainous proportions, that we'd all be better off if they'd just use scapegoating as a foil to draw anger away from more accurate targets. While this is undoubtedly true, I claim we must add that bookish and stinking, his stratagems resemble a dilapidated shed. Kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will collapse, proving my claim that Eric keeps stating over and over again that he is cunctipotent. This drumbeat refrain is clearly not consistent with the facts on the ground -- facts such as that Eric's hortatory exclamation that it would be beneficial for him to jawbone aimlessly makes me think that it is appalling to me that Eric has managed to force us to bow down low before militant moral weaklings. There's nothing controversial about that view. It's a fact, pure and simple. It was a fact long before anyone realized that Eric used to complain about being persecuted. Now he is our primary persecutor. This reversal of roles reminds me that Eric likes ballyhoos that infiltrate the media with the express purpose of disseminating lamebrained information. Could there be a conflict of interest there? If you were to ask me, I'd say that some people have said that his supporters lie about their slogans, and then, when we're all convinced that no harm will be done, they cause pain and injury to those who don't deserve it. Maybe. But I'm more inclined to believe that Eric is missing not only the point, but also the whole paradigm shift and huge sociological implications. (Actually, it is easier to get a camel through the eye of a needle than it is to convince Eric's helpers to bring the communion of knowledge to all of us, but that's not important now.)

I admit I have a tendency to become a bit insensitive whenever I rebuke Eric for trying to grasp at straws, trying to find increasingly moonstruck ways to inculcate the hermeneutics of suspicion in otherwise open-minded people. While I am desirous of mending this tiny personality flaw, I want to fight the warped, distorted, misshapen, unwholesome monstrosity that Eric's newsgroup postings have become. I want to do this not because I need to tack another line onto my résumé but because for the nonce, Eric is content to cause this country to flounder on the shoals of self-interest, corruption, and chaos. But eventually, he will rot out the foundations of our religious, moral, and political values. While the question of who is right and who is wrong in this case is an interesting one, it is also something that I cannot and will not comment on, and not just because I wish that one of the innumerable busybodies who are forever making "statistical studies" about nonsense would instead make a statistical study that means something. For example, I'd like to see a statistical study of Eric's capacity to learn the obvious. Also worthwhile would be a statistical study of how many amoral spivs realize that Eric upholds sin as sacred. Now, I could go off on that point alone, but he may waste everyone else's time right after he reads this letter. Let him. In the near future, I will compile readers' remarks and suggestions and use them to embrace diversity. A final word: Mr. Eric Lavender's a social liability.











































If you've just read through the whole of this and thought I'm either a treacherous bastard, or simply insane, you've all just been the guinea Pigs of a site my friend just humourously Got me with... XD

Guy actually made me think he hated me... LOL

Feel free to enjoy! It's actually quite amusing.


Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator

I'm not going to lie, I was pretty intrigued at first. I realized by the end of the first paragraph that something was up. It was a good one though, whoever had the time to create that kind of script had a lot of free time.

Lol... it's randomly generated paragraphs... Thought having a few things members can just play around with would be fun... Lol...

This can actually be Hysterical under certain circumstances.

i realised something was wrong when i saw the length of the letter

I knew Killak couldn't complain about anything Eric does, even before I opened the thread. Scrolled down to the bottom fo the post before I read anything. You suck.

I knew Killak couldn't complain about anything Eric does, even before I opened the thread. Scrolled down to the bottom fo the post before I read anything. You suck.

Originally Posted by Jonny

Haha! Thanks for the vote of confidence, mate!

I just thought it was kinda funny...

Well done, Killak. I almost thought you were serious for a second, but then I recognized the script. I've used it many, many times before. It's always fun to catch someone off-guard, haha.

Well done, Killak. I almost thought you were serious for a second, but then I recognized the script. I've used it many, many times before. It's always fun to catch someone off-guard, haha.

Originally Posted by Abel

Haha! Well, I suppose "almost" getting you is something"



Nice one, Abes.