Once again, I find it necessary to write in defense of myself and my beliefs. One of my objectives is to tackle the multinational death machine that Lusternia is currently constructing. The unalterable law of biology has a corollary that is generally overlooked. Specifically, Lusternia's companions say, "University professors must conform their theses and conclusions to its jackbooted prejudices if they want to publish papers and advance their careers." Yes, I'm afraid they really do talk like that. It's the only way for them to conceal that Lusternia's campaigns are a disgrace and an outrage. That conclusion is not based on some sort of pertinacious philosophy or on Lusternia-style mental masturbation, but on widely known and proven principles of science. These principles explain that if anything will free us from the shackles of Lusternia's neurotic disquisitions, it's knowledge of the world as it really is. It's knowledge that I want to denounce those who claim that it is a paragon of morality and wisdom. But first, let me pose an abstract question. Do quasi-disorganized conspiracy theorists like its hirelings actually have lives, or do they exist solely to deny citizens the ability to draw their own conclusions about the potential for violence that it may be generating? First, I'll give you a very brief answer and then I'll go back and explain my answer in detail. As for the brief answer, it's really astounding that it has somehow found a way to work the words "scientificophilosophical" and "epididymodeferentectomy" into its proposed social programs. However, you may find it even more astounding that when it says that its codices are Right with a capital R, that's just a load of spucatum tauri. I'm not very conversant with Lusternia's background. To be quite frank, I don't care to be. I already know enough to state with confidence that it's a pity that two thousand years after Christ, the voices of insecure paranoiacs like Lusternia can still be heard, worse still that they're listened to, and worst of all that anyone believes them. Violent fogeys, grumpy drug addicts, and Lusternia's expositors are absolutely and thoroughly fungible. Let me rephrase that: Lusternia uses big words like "pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis" to make itself sound important. For that matter, benevolent Nature has equipped another puny creature, the skunk, with a means of making itself seem important, too. Although Lusternia's stances may reek like a skunk, Lusternia attributes the most distorted, bizarre, and ludicrous "meanings" to ordinary personality charcteristics. For example, if you're shy, it calls you "fearful and withdrawn". If, instead, you're the outgoing and active type, Lusternia says you're "acting out due to trauma". Why does it say such things? The complete answer to that question is a long, sad story. I've answered parts of that question in several of my previous letters, and I'll answer other parts in future ones. For now, I'll just say that if I had to choose between chopping onions and helping it advertise "magical" diets and bogus weight-loss pills, I'd be in the kitchen in an instant. Although both alternatives make me cry, the deciding factor for me is that Lusternia says that it's okay to saddle the economy with crippling debt. I've seen more plausible things scrawled on the bathroom walls in elementary schools. So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that Lusternia insists that the few of us who complain regularly about its inveracities are simply spoiling the party. How can it be so blind? Very easily. Basically, I feel that writing this letter is like celestial navigation. Before directional instruments were invented, sailors navigated the seas by fixing their compass on the North Star. But if there's an untold story here, it's that I appreciate feedback and other people's views on subjects. I don't, however, appreciate feedback when it's given in an unprofessional manner.

I hope I don't need to remind you that I refuse to dance to Lusternia's loquacious tune, but it's still true, and we must do something about it. If you want to hide something from Lusternia, you just have to put it in a book. Lusternia presents itself as a disinterested classicist lamenting the infusion of politically motivated methods of pedagogy and analysis into higher education. It is eloquent in its denunciation of modern scholarship, claiming it favors the worst sorts of uppity survivalists I've ever seen. And here we have the ultimate irony, because I don't want my community tainted with such blatant Jacobinism. I trust that I have not shocked any of you by writing that. However, I do realize that some of my readers may feel that much of what I have penned about Lusternia in this letter is heartless and in violation of our Christian duty to love everyone. If so, I can say only that if you think that Lusternia's invectives are our final line of defense against tyrrany, then think again.

While unbridled, careless primates claim to defend traditional values, they actually promote group-think attitudes over individual insights. Since most people oppose Lusternia's illaudable personal attacks, it has had to hamstring our efforts to expand people's understanding of its unpleasant, putrid hariolations using every sordid means imaginable. If I may be so bold, I am sure that you, poor harried reader, have suffered from Lusternia's morbid metanarratives and rightly concluded that it demands its freedoms while unhesitatingly and hypocritically encroaching upon the rights of others. I don't think anyone questions that. But did you know that this is no laughing matter? Take it from me: Many unholy, nit-picky losers are taken in by Lusternia's attestation that the average working-class person can't see through its chicanery. Sadly, lack of space prevents me from elaborating further. Do you really want Lusternia to goad militant, rambunctious Philistines into hurling epithets at its enemies? I think not. I'm willing to accept that Lusternia goes ballistic every time I so much as hint that even those few who benefit from its solutions fail to recognize their current manifestation as a birdbrained form of anti-intellectualism. I'm even willing to accept that in its assistants, we can recognize the symptoms of decay of a slowly rotting world. But if I had my druthers, it would never have had the opportunity to inculcate tyrannical viewpoints. As it stands, Lusternia's drones are capable of little else but hating and lying, even to each other. As an interesting experiment, try to point this out to it. (You might want to don safety equipment first.) I think you'll find that we should agree on definitions before saying anything further about Lusternia's wily, untoward objectives. For starters, let's say that "diabolism" is "that which makes Lusternia yearn to use psychological tools to trick us into doing whatever sexist numskulls require of us."

I can say one thing about Lusternia. It understands better than any of us that psychological impact is paramount -- not facts, not anybody's principles, not right and wrong. I'm not suggesting that we behave likewise. I'm suggesting only that I cannot believe how many actual, physical, breathing, thinking people have fallen for Lusternia's subterfuge. I'm totally stunned. Unfortunately, there is no shortage of individuals and organizations, many of whom may seem innocent at first glance, who secretly want to tell everyone else what to do. Lusternia may have access to weapons of mass destruction. Then again, I consider it to be a weapon of mass destruction itself. If you think you can escape from Lusternia's raucous slogans, then good-bye and good luck. To the rest of you I suggest that I see how important its heartless jokes are to its helots and I laugh. I laugh because it is currently limited to shrieking and spitting when it's confronted with inconvenient facts. Any day now, however, Lusternia is likely to switch to some sort of "commit acts of immorality, dishonesty, and treason" approach to draw our attention away from such facts. It scares the bejeezus out of me to know that Lusternia might provoke terrible, total, universal, and merciless destruction in a lustrum or two. This is not rhetoric. This is reality.

Maybe Lusternia has a reason for acting the way it does, but I doubt it. Nonrepresentationalism and unilateralism are not synonymous. In fact, they are so frequently in opposition and so universally irreconcilable that Lusternia's anecdotes are a sink-pit of degeneracy, corruption, and ugliness. I'll stand by that controversial statement and even assume that most readers who bring their own real-life experience will agree with it. At a bare minimum, Lusternia has certainly never given evidence of thinking extensively. Or at all, for that matter.

Consequently, I no longer believe that trends like family breakdown, promiscuity, and violence are random events. Not only are they explicitly glorified and promoted by Lusternia's discourteous, wayward pranks, but there isn't a man, woman, or child alive today who thinks that it commands an army of robots that live in the hollow center of the earth and produce earthquakes whenever they feel like shaking things up a bit on the surface, so let's toss out that ridiculous argument of Lusternia's from the get-go. It's lethargic for Lusternia to transform our society into a juvenile war machine. Or perhaps I should say, it's unreasonable. Lusternia should hide its head in shame before the judgment of future generations, whose tongue it will no longer be possible to stop and which, therefore, will say what today all of us know to be true: Lusternia's newsgroup postings are a house of mirrors. How are we to find the opening that leads to freedom? This is an important question because I try never to argue with Lusternia, because it's clear it's not susceptible to reason. Lest you think that I'm talking out of my hat here, I should point out that unlike Lusternia, I believe in individual responsibility, the rule of law, and fair play. That's something you won't find in your local newspaper because it's the news that just doesn't fit.

I, speaking as someone who is not an inconsiderate charlatan, truly contend that whenever Lusternia's accomplices say that clever one-liners are a valid substitute for actual thinking, their noses grow by a few centimeters. Deal with it. Lusternia claims to be fighting for equality. What it's really fighting for, however, is equality in degradation, by which I mean that it is immature and stupid of Lusternia to make narcissism socially acceptable. It would be mature and intelligent, however, to knock some sense into it, and that's why I say that in my effort to uncover its hidden prejudices, I will need to stand as a witness in the divine court of the eternal judge and proclaim that its violations of the rules of decency are so inhumane they beggar belief. If that fact hurts, get over it; it's called reality. And for another dose of reality, consider that Lusternia has spent untold hours trying to create a Frankenstein's monster. During that time, did it ever once occur to it that it's amazing how low it will stoop to turn over our country to the worst classes of simple-minded, ridiculous mendicants there are? It would take days to give the complete answer to that question but the gist of it is that Lusternia uses the very intellectual tools it criticizes, namely consequentialist arguments rather than arguments about truth or falsity. Even when the facts don't fit, Lusternia sometimes tries to use them anyway. It still maintains, for instance, that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points. Maybe some day, Lusternia will finally stop trying to help stolid fugitives evade capture by the authorities. Don't hold your breath, though.

I had thought the world was free of diabolic chiselers. So imagine my surprise when I discovered that Lusternia wants to gain a respectable foothold for its evil, disaffected sound bites. Someone needs to rage, rage against the dying of the light. Who's going to do it? Lusternia? I think not. If you look back over some of my older letters, you'll see that I predicted that Lusternia would provide cover for a wicked agenda. And, as I predicted, it did. But you know, that was not a difficult prediction to make. Anyone who has bothered to learn even a little about Lusternia could have made the same prediction.

No one has a higher opinion of Lusternia than I, and I think Lusternia's a biggety, drugged-out self-proclaimed arbiter of taste and standard. During the first half of the 20th century, emotionalism could have been practically identified with blackguardism. Today, it is not so clear who can properly be called a loud quiddler. Lusternia's belief systems have caused widespread social alienation, and from this alienation a thousand social pathologies have sprung.

You may be picking up on something here in all of my responses to Lusternia's disreputable philippics. All of my responses presume that Lusternia is like a pigeon. Pigeons are too self-absorbed to care about anyone else. They poo on people they don't like; they poo on people they don't even know. The only real difference between Lusternia and a pigeon is that Lusternia intends to work both sides of the political fence. That's why if you think that this is humorous or exaggerated, you're wrong. Although Lusternia would rather I discuss the personality flaws of unwed, pregnant teenagers, its stories about faddism are particularly ridden with errors and distortions, even leaving aside the concept's initial implausibility. Is anyone else out there as struck as I am by Lusternia's utter disregard for morality and humanity? The reason I ask is that when a mistake is made, the smart thing to do is to admit it and reverse course. That takes real courage. The way that Lusternia stubbornly refuses to own up to its mistakes serves only to convince me that if I try really, really hard, I can almost see why it would want to detach individuals from traditional sources of strength and identity -- family, class, private associations. In summary, it is my prayer that people everywhere will join me in my quest to break the spell of great expectations that now binds rapacious publishers of hate literature to Lusternia.

Is this one of those pre-generated essays that don't actually have any information in them?

(All credit to http://www.pakin.org/complaint, an automatic complaint generator. I only wish I could have written this)

How dare you, Elryn!

You're a pigeon, too!

Psh, I take your comments with a load of spucatum tauri, Xenthos.

Wouldn't the latin term for "salt" be more appropriate? And a grain, instead of a load?

The first setence gave it away, heh. Very nice though.

Didn't Aiakon post this a while back?

Well, yes... but I liked the latin swearing.

But it doesn't fit!

If he did I'll have to kill him.

I should go look for it.

Ok ok, I take your comments AS a load of spucatum tauri... hmph.

Much better.

What's the gist? By the way, is this the longest post here?

Nowhere near the longest post.

And the gist is that it's gibberish. See: Pigeon.

Quite right. Rather un-Guido-ish.

It made sense to me.

DEBATE FORUM WITH PETTIFOGGERY

To those people who are outraged at Celest's dysfunctional double standards, this letter will be of interest. People who are well-meaning yet misinformed might also profit by proceeding. For the remainder who are indifferent, faint of heart, or content to let Celest exploit the masses, I regret that there is little reason to read further. As a preliminary, I want to discuss the advantages of two-parent families, the essential role of individual and family responsibility, the need for uniform standards of civil behavior, and the primacy of the work ethic. While self-justification may motivate the worst classes of deceitful scoundrels there are, the same solutions also work well for rabid pissants.

Although Celest occasionally exhibits a passable simulacrum of rationality, the facts as I see them simply do not support the false, but widely accepted, notion that the rules don't apply to it. If one needs a sign that Celest is merciless, then consider that there is an unpleasant fact, painful to the tender-minded, that one can deduce from the laws of nature. This fact is also conclusively established by direct observation. It is a fact so obvious that rational people have always known it and no one doubted it until Celest and its accomplices started trying to deny it. The fact to which I am referring states that it's easy for Celest to bombastically declaim my proposals. But when is it going to provide an alternative proposal of its own? The only clear answer to emerge from the conflicting, contradictory stances that it and its yes-men take is that it has bid adieu to objectivity. My long-term goal is to reverse the devolutionary course Celest has set for us. Unfortunately, much remains to be done. As you may have noticed, Celest is out to condition the public to accept violence as normal and desirable. And when we play its game, we become accomplices.

The fact that neocolonialism is a growing threat to society and should be outlawed is particularly striking, since as our society continues to unravel, more and more people will be grasping for straws, grasping for something to hold onto, grasping for something that promises to give them the sense of security and certainty that they so desperately need. These are the sorts of people Celest preys upon. When we tease apart the associations necessary to Celest's unenlightened strictures, we see that I suspect that the best way to overcome misunderstanding, prejudice, and hate is by means of reason, common sense, clear thinking, and goodwill. Celest, in contrast, believes that there's no difference between normal people like you and me and what I call anti-democratic mythomaniacs. The conclusion to draw from this conflict of views should be obvious: Celest's opinion is that it has the linguistic prowess to produce a masterwork of meritorious literature. Of course, opinions are like sphincters: we all have them. So let me tell you my opinion. My opinion is that Celest is always trying to change the way we work. This annoys me, because its previous changes have always been for the worse. I'm positive that Celest's new changes will be even more biggety, because it has been trying for some time to sell the public on a resistentialism-based government. Celest's sales pitch proceeds both pragmatically and emotionally. The pragmatic argument: Bad things "just happen" (i.e., they're not caused by Celest itself). The emotional argument: A knowledge of correct diction, even if unused, evinces a superiority that covers cowardice or stupidity. As you can see, neither argument is valid, which should indicate to you that if Celest doesn't realize that it's generally considered bad style to siphon off scarce international capital intended for underdeveloped countries, then it should read one of the many self-help books on the subject. I recommend it buy one with big print and lots of pictures. Maybe then, Celest will grasp the concept that if it thinks that it is as innocent as a newborn lamb then maybe it should lay off the wacky tobaccy. Nonetheless, if I were to compile a list of Celest's forays into espionage, sabotage, and subversion, it would fill an entire page and perhaps even run over onto the following one. Such a list would surely make every sane person who has passed the age of six realize that I don't care what others say about Celest. It's still crass, despicable, and it intends to undermine the current world order. Celest somehow forgot to tell its associates that it should have been removed from the gene pool before it had a chance to contaminate it. That's the theory, at least. But in practice, when I observe its brethren's behavior, I can't help but recall the proverbial expression, "monkey see, monkey do". That's because, like Celest, they all want to inspire a recrudescence of aberrant fatuity. Also, while a monkey might think that Celest can scare us by using big words like "philosophicotheological", the fact remains that from secret-handshake societies meeting at "the usual place" to back-door admissions committees, its spokesmen have always found a way to address what is, in the end, a nonexistent problem. Finally, any mistakes in this letter are strictly my fault. But if you find any factual error or have more updated information on the subject of Celest, Celest-inspired versions of fogyism, etc., please tell me, so I can write an even stronger letter next time.




couldn't resist.....