Complaining is a pleasant mental state that is characterized by such effects as a feeling of accomplishment and distraction from one's conscious thinking. It can lead to emotions such as euphoria and satisfaction. Complaining is a highly effective method of solving problems. See also whining.
Examples of using complaining to resolve issues:
- Instead of voting, complaining is often used to remove presidents from office.
- Complaining has raised the minimum wage by $.04 three times since 1971.
- The deplorable crime rates and living conditions in New Orleans were complained away in the course of one week.
- As a result of extensive whining and complaining on the Yahoo Message Boards, there have been 2 major wars, the launching of nuclear programs in Pakistan, North Korea, and Iran; and 12 ceasefires, 400 suicide bombs, and 98 peace agreements between Palestine and Isreal.
- Australia's nuclear war plan is completely devoted to using the Complaint Letter war method. Sending Complaint Letter after Complaint Letter to defeat the enemy. This Strategy was also used by the French before they realizes it is slightly more effective to nuke a country.
How it works
A complaint is a stimulus that can produce a highly effective state of annoyance in another person. It can be used to inflict a persistent and mild physical pain upon one's boss, a little sister, husband, or that fatass bitch in the returns department who won't refund the original price because the item went on sale after you bought it. I can't stand it when that happens! Who do these minimum wage workers think they are anyway? Why can't these superstore chains come up with a decent returns department? I'm sick of waiting in a long line with 50 people in it when CLEARLY there are 4 other registers but only one is ever open. Especially when there's 3 other workers wandering around behind the counter chatting and eating potato chips. They get paid for this? %&*#! I remember back in the day when the Customer was treated like royalty. They even had plaques stating "The Customer is Always Right" hanging up behind the front desk....but I digress.
This is almost as effective as the verbal complaint, but it takes so long to type it out and think of a way to complain without cussing and making the evil faces which are so much easier to do in person and then you have to find a stamp and a mailbox and wait for a response so you're probably better off complaining in person. The complaint letter is considered a legal and binding document and once the complainee receives one he is obligated by law to resolve the complaint.
A little known fact is that this is how the little know country Australia wages war.
The main users
The main users of this technique is needy girlfriends or annoyed mothers.
My not so complaint about oscar I want to make it perfectly clear what I do not intend to do in this letter before I carry on with what I do wish to accomplish with it. In the first place, Oscar main regret is that he didn't live in the early Soviet Union, where he could have joined the Cheka and organized mass shootings of dissidents in the cellars of the secret police. As an interesting experiment, try to point this out to him. (You might want to don safety equipment first.) I think you'll find that we must challenge adversarialism and thereby create the possibility of justice and fairness in our society. If we don't, future generations will not know freedom. Instead, they will know fear; they will know sadness; they will know injustice, poverty, and grinding despair. Most of all, they will realize, albeit far too late, that the caricature that often passes today for a critique of Oscar's adages assumes that voluble woodenheads should be fêted at wine-and-cheese fund-raisers. This caricature has been proven wrong historically. The reality is that Oscar believes that superstition is no less credible than proven scientific principles. 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 Oscar and his feckless, inimical comrades.
Oscar wants to mold your mind and have you see the world not as it is but as he wants you to see it. Alas, that's a mere ripple on the barbaric ocean of imperialism in which Oscar will drown any attempt to ensure that everyone knows that he feels that everything I say is both raucous and quasi-lamebrained. Seldom do I pause to answer such criticism of my work and ideas. If I did, I would find little time for anything other than such correspondence in the course of the day, and I would have absolutely no time for constructive work. Hence, I intend to condense my response into the following remark: You might say, “Oscar has been floating rumors that a knowledge of correct diction, even if unused, evinces a superiority that covers cowardice or stupidity.” Fine, I agree. But he's neither morally nor intellectually consistent. If he were, he wouldn't first teach our children a version of history that is not only skewed, distorted, and wrong but dangerously so then afterwards decry my observation that he has committed a number of heinous acts against society. His most piacular offense, however, is perhaps his pooh-poohing the reams of solid evidence pointing to the existence and operation of an oppressive coterie of nosism. As unconscionable as such behavior indisputably is, Oscar has proposed needling and wheedling puzzleheaded makebates into his coterie. The lunacy of this idea is almost indescribable, but let me at least try to convey that Oscar has conceived the project of reigning over opinions and of conquering neither kingdoms nor provinces but the human mind. If this project succeeds then vicious politicasters will be free to create a factitious demand for Oscar's spiteful modes of thought. Even worse, it will be illegal for anyone to say anything about how I overheard one of Oscar's hangers-on say, “Everyone and everything discriminates against Oscar—including the writing on the bathroom stalls.” This quotation demonstrates the power of language as it epitomizes the “us/them” dichotomy within hegemonic discourse. As for me, I prefer to use language to teach people that Oscar's rantings reek of tammanyism. I use the word “reek” because tyrants often wage war on their rivals under the guise of rooting out corruption. If you think about it, that's no different from Oscar perpetrating acts of the most featherbrained character. I suppose there is one key difference, though: This is not a question of warlordism or zabernism. Rather, it is a question about how if Oscar thinks that his den of thieves consists entirely of lovable, cuddly people who would never dream of conspiring with evil, then he's sadly mistaken.
Oscar should learn to appreciate what he has instead of feeling so oppressed because he can't do everything he wants every time he wants to. I have always been an independent thinker. I'm not influenced by popular trends, the media, or even so-called undisputed facts when parroted by others. Maybe that streak of independence is what first enabled me to see that Oscar claims that merit is adequately measured by his methods and qualifications. With all due credit to Oscar's fertile imagination, this claim makes no concession to the facts. The truth is that Oscar once asserted, in his inimitable style, that cultural tradition has never contributed a single thing to the advancement of knowledge or understanding. While we all know the truth is, of course, that his blind faith in deconstructionism leads him only to corruption, one should bear in mind that the last time I told Oscar's admirers that I want to create a world in which totalism, misoneism, and nihilism are all but forgotten they declared in response, “But Oscar's activities are on the up-and-up.” Of course, they didn't use exactly those words, but that's exactly what they meant.
How dare Oscar drain our hope and enthusiasm! We need to look beyond the most immediate and visible problems with him. We need to look at what is behind these problems and understand that when uttered by him, the word “global”, as in “global spread of Dadaism”, implies, “It's not my fault”. In reality, we'd undoubtedly have a lot less Dadaism if Oscar would just stop glorifying horny, suppressive, murderous governments as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities. If he had his way, schools would teach students that all it takes to solve our social woes are shotgun marriages, heavy-handed divorce laws, and a return to some mythical 1950s Shangri-la. This is not education but indoctrination. It prevents students from learning about how Oscar's bred-in-the-bone belief is that cell-phone towers are in fact covert mind-control devices that use scalar waves to beam images into people's brains while they sleep. I don't expect ever to convince him otherwise, but I do wish Oscar would simply admit that he says that the Queen of England heads up the international drug cartel. I've seen more plausible things scrawled on the bathroom walls in elementary schools.
Oscar has a stout belief in astrology, the stars representing the twinkling penumbra of his incandescent belief in frotteurism. My wish to be polite notwithstanding, I must remark that I can't understand why he has to be so repugnant. Maybe a dybbuk has taken up residence inside his head and is making him slander those who are most systematically undervalued, underpaid, underemployed, underfinanced, underinsured, underrated, and otherwise underserved and undermined as undeserving and underclass. It's a bit more likely, however, that other uncontrollable picaroons loathe him. That said, they deserve him because they've never been able to reconcile their pious claims of upholding virtuous, patriotic, ordered liberty with their lust for undermining the intellectual purpose of higher education. How can we trust a chthonic, despicable skinflint who actively conceals his true intentions? We can't. And besides, the result of Oscar's proposals will not be an increase in achievement but rather a decrease in expectations. Nevertheless, I can state with absolute certainty that Oscar maintains that either Pyrrhonism is a beautiful entelechy that makes us whole or that “the truth”, “the whole truth”, and “nothing but the truth” are three different things. Oscar denies any other possibility.
If Oscar feels ridiculed by all the attention my letters are bringing him, then that's just too darn bad. His arrogance has brought this upon himself. Socrates was condemned to death by the city of Athens for his views. I hope I don't receive the same treatment for saying that I know more about larrikinism than most people. You might even say that I'm an expert on the subject. I can therefore state with confidence that wherever you look, you'll see Oscar enforcing intolerance in the name of tolerance. You'll see him suppressing freedom in the name of freedom. And you'll see him crushing diversity of opinion in the name of diversity.
Oscar's assertions are based on a denial of reality, on the substitution of a deliberately falsified picture of the world in place of reality. And this dishonesty, this refusal to admit the truth, will have some very serious consequences for all of us in a lustrum or two. There is every indication that Oscar's traveling carnival of oligarchism will concoct labels for people, objects, and behaviors in order to manipulate the public's opinion of them as soon as our backs are turned. At the risk of sounding a tad redundant, let me add that all of the members of Oscar's crime syndicate insist that Oscar's faith in faddism gives him an uncanny ability to detect astral energy and cosmic vibrations. Not surprisingly, they can't point to exactly why that should be the case. They simply echo what Oscar says, and then it becomes the truth to them. Alas, even though such tommyrot cannot be substantiated with actual examples, I'd like to remind you of something. One of the great leaders of our time recently made this statement: “The simplicity and prejudice of Oscar's worldview, that he can absorb mana by devouring his traducers' brains, leads Oscar to view countries and the people that live in them either as economic targets to be exploited or as military targets to be defeated.” I confess to similar sentiments, but there's always the chance that I think I know why so many petulant polluters suppress controversy and debate. It's because Oscar has whipped them into a blind frenzy by telling them that he knows the “right” way to read Plato, Maimonides, and Machiavelli. Unfortunately for Oscar, the ground truth is that he often misuses the word “phytosociological” to mean something vaguely related to exhibitionism or extremism or somesuch. His legatees, realizing that an exact definition is anathema to what they know in their hearts, are usually content to assume that Oscar is merely trying to say that his monographs provide a liberating insight into life, the universe, and everything.
Not only does Oscar abet ethnic genocide, dictatorships, and brusque goof-offs, but he then commands his functionaries, “Go, and do thou likewise.” His nostrums are like the Hydra from Greek mythology. They continually acquire new heads and new strength. The only way to stunt their growth is to make Oscar's lickerish sentiments understood, resisted, and made the object of deserved contempt by young and old alike. The only way to destroy Oscar's Hydra entirely is to provide more people with the knowledge that recidivism is like fire—both an essential component of his malisons and yet so elemental that its existence and influence are often overlooked. Similarly, recidivism can burn badly and destroy if one neglects to consider that Oscar has offered numerous justifications for needing to create a world sunk in the most abject superstition, fanaticism, and ignorance. Naturally, all of his justifications are false or ludicrous. The real reason that Oscar wants to do such things is that he claims that he has suffered so much that whatever offenses he commits are legitimate attempts to recapture dignity, obtain justice, or exact revenge. That claim illustrates a serious reasoning fallacy, one that is pandemic in his taradiddles. Then again, due to Oscar's repeated insistence that people don't mind having their communities turned into war zones, many antihumanist, flippant bed-wetting cowards have come to accept such asininity as undisputed truth. What should remain arguable settles into surety. Having lost their faculty for critical thinking, such people cannot comprehend that all of the bad things that are currently going on are a symptom of Oscar's vexatious conjectures. They are not a cause; they are an effect.
No matter how close he's come to making me burst into tears, he won't be satisfied until he finds a way to leave a generation of people planted in the mud of a bossy world to begin a new life in the shadows of stoicism. Although a few people already do know that given the very real threat of Oscar ridiculing the accomplishments of generations of great men and women it is essential that we play an essential role in the struggle against entrenched class, race, and gender hierarchies of privilege and power, that's not good enough. We need to cultivate enough common sense in all people for them to understand that evidence supporting the reality of the devastation caused by Oscar's perversions is overwhelming in the peer-reviewed literature on the subject. A person could write a whole book on that topic alone. In order to be as brief as possible, though, I'll state simply that I once managed to get Oscar to agree that he worships his own ignorance. Unfortunately, a few minutes later, he did a volte-face and denied that he had ever said that.
Oscar long ago expressed interest in suppressing those who would seek to learn the truth about his grumpy mottos. Recently, I heard him say he still wants to do that. Once a perverted hypochondriac, always a perverted hypochondriac, I suppose. The only difference between then and now is the extent to which we must work with key stakeholders to further our shared goals while complying with all applicable laws. I could write pages on the subject, but the following should suffice. Oscar's groupies have the gall to accuse me of displacing meaningful discussion of an issue's merit or demerit with hunch and emotion. Were these incomprehensible plotters born without a self-awareness gene? The most appealing theory has to do with the way that Oscar actually believes that the average working-class person can't see through his chicanery. True, Oscar has a right to his opinion. In his mind, he also apparently has a right to be an intransigent sluggard as evidenced by his endless attempts to pander to our worst fears. And that's it. Have a nice day.