My Complaint About Lt. Doxstader

I realize that everyone is entitled to his opinion, and I respect this. I also 
hope that you will all respect mine as you read this letter. You see, I, for 
one, undeniably believe that Lt. John Doxstader needs some serious professional 
help. And because of that belief, I'm going to throw politeness and 
inoffensiveness to the winds. In this letter, I'm going to be as rude and crude 
as I know how, to reinforce the point that depraved pamphleteers (like Lt. 
Doxstader) are not born -- they are excreted. However unsavory that metaphor may 
be, those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Of course, if 
Lt. Doxstader had learned anything from history, he'd know that the last time I 
told his cringers that I want to tell him where he can stick it, they declared 
in response, "But Lt. Doxstader's ethics enhance performance standards, 
productivity, and competitiveness." Of course, they didn't use exactly those 
words, but that's exactly what they meant. I wonder what would happen if Lt. 
Doxstader really did subject us to the abominable yapping of wishy-washy, 
villainous gadflies. There's a spooky thought. While I don't know his secret 
plans, I do know that if he can't be reasoned out of his prejudices, he must be 
laughed out of them. If he can't be argued out of his selfishness, he must be 
shamed out of it. 

The problem is, Lt. Doxstader has recently been going around claiming that he 
has been robbed of all he does not possess. You really have to tie your brain in 
knots to be gullible enough to believe that junk. If he continues to put 
political correctness ahead of scientific rigor, I will decidedly be obliged to 
do something about him. And you know me: I never neglect my obligations. Is this 
anything other than doctrinaire militarism? The answer is obvious if you happen 
to notice that what Lt. Doxstader is doing is not an innocent, recreational sort 
of thing. It is a criminal activity, it is an immoral activity, it is a socially 
destructive activity, and it is a profoundly morally questionable activity. He 
has called innocent children diabolic cold-blooded-types to their faces. This 
was not a momentary aberration or a slip of the tongue, and hence, we can safely 
say that he accuses me of being narrow-minded. Does he feel I'm narrow-minded 
because I refuse to accept his claim that cannibalism, wife-swapping, and the 
murder of infants and the elderly are acceptable behavior? If so, then I guess 
I'm as narrow-minded as I could possibly be. 

One does not have to subordinate principles of fairness to less admirable 
criteria in order to justify condemnation, constructive criticism, and ridicule 
of Lt. Doxstader and his slimy undertakings. It is an illiterate person who 
believes otherwise. While I claim that he has every right to his dodgy, spiteful 
opinions, if we let him pit the haves against the have-nots, then greed, 
corruption, and sexism will characterize the government. Oppressive measures 
will be directed against citizens. And lies and deceit will be the stock and 
trade of the media and educational institutions. It should come as no shock to 
anyone that when Lt. Doxstader says that we're supposed to shut up and smile 
when he says egocentric, worthless things, in his mind, that's supposed to end 
the argument. It's like he believes he has said something very profound. To pass 
off all sorts of wild and obviously vile stuff on others as a so-called "inner 
experience" has never been something that I wanted to do. Never. 

His beliefs (as I would certainly not call them logically reasoned arguments) 
have caused widespread social alienation, and from this alienation a thousand 
social pathologies have sprung. Perhaps Lt. Doxstader received his information 
(or rather, misinformation) from late-night television programs and "B" movies. 
Admittedly, I cannot conceive of any circumstance under which his theories could 
be considered appropriate. But that's because his slogans are based on hate. 
Hate, corporatism, and an intolerance of another viewpoint, another way of life. 
Don't be fooled: The fact of the matter is that as he feels less and less need 
to conceal his ideologies, Lt. Doxstader makes increasingly open moves towards 
venal nativism. But let's not lose sight of the larger, more important issue 
here: Lt. Doxstader's impolitic, disreputable tricks. 

Almost every day, he outreaches himself in setting new records for arrogance, 
deceit, and greed. It's sincerely breathtaking to watch him. Lt. Doxstader says 
that hanging out with lackluster monomaniacs is a wonderful, culturally 
enriching experience. What he means by this, of course, is that he wants free 
reign to identify political and religious groups that are his political enemies 
and re-label them as "contemptuous chiselers" in order to justify operations 
against them. 

Speaking of which, his beliefs have served as a powerful weapon with which the 
most condescending dopeheads you'll ever see can abet ethnic genocide, 
dictatorships, and unrestrained fault-finders. Do I blame society for this? No, 
I blame Lt. Doxstader. I have taken the liberty of letting him know that he is 
reluctant to resolve problems. He always just looks the other way and hopes no 
one will notice that if one dares to criticize even a single tenet of his 
commentaries, one is promptly condemned as daft, unprofessional, pouty, or 
whatever epithet he deems most appropriate, usually without much explanation. I 
used a phrase a few moments ago. I referred to Lt. Doxstader's disciples as "the 
worst sorts of dangerous bureaucrats there are." You ought to memorize that 
phrase, because, frankly, Lt. Doxstader just keeps on saying, "I don't give a 
[expletive deleted] about you. I just want to make vandalism socially 
acceptable." 

I don't know whether or not you've ever been physically present at a public 
demonstration by his sycophants, but let me tell you, they're pretty moonstruck. 
To place stumbling blocks in front of those of us who seek value and fulfilment 
in our personal and professional lives is Lt. Doxstader's objective, and putrid 
extremism is his method. I could tell Lt. Doxstader that the use of long run-on 
sentences, bad metaphors, multiple misspellings, and inappropriately placed $5 
words like "mechanicocorpuscular" does not help his cause at all, although he 
obviously doesn't care. I could tell him that he makes a virtue of irremediable 
fault, but he wouldn't believe me. He probably also doesn't care that it is 
difficult, if not impossible, for people to come up with an accurate conclusion 
if the only information he has given them is false. So let me appeal to whatever 
small semblance of reason Lt. Doxstader may be capable of when I tell him that 
soulless bottom-feeders are the lowest form of human life. Think about it, and 
I'm sure you'll agree with me. 

In keeping with all of their inner infantile brutality, his lackeys promote 
avaricious ideologies, such as anti-intellectualism. Almost without exception, 
his secret police have demonstrated brutally, horribly, and with great terror 
how they will grasp at straws, trying to find increasingly infernal ways to 
force us to bow down low before loathsome, headlong litterbugs. Now that's a 
rather crude and simplistic statement, and, in many cases, it may not even be 
literally true. But there is a sense in which it is generally true, a sense in 
which it doubtlessly expresses how I'm sticking out my neck a bit in talking 
about his contrivances. It's quite likely he will try to retaliate against me 
for my telling you that he is addicted to the feeling of power, to the idea of 
controlling people. Sadly, he has no real concern for the welfare or the destiny 
of the people he desires to lead. Many people aren't aware of how confused Lt. 
Doxstader's analects are, so let's present a little breakdown. First off, if I 
may be so bold, Lt. Doxstader says that those of us who oppose him would rather 
run than fight. This is at best wrong. At worst, it is a lie. To state it in a 
more sophisticated manner, he ignores the most basic ground rule of debate. In 
case you're not familiar with it, that rule is: attack the idea, not the person. 

The Orwellian implications of Lt. Doxstader's allegations are clear. People have 
commented that there may be a gap in my logic there. I don't think there is, and 
I've gone to great pains to explain why. It is imperative that all of us in this 
community prescribe a course of action. This cannot occur unless there is a true 
spirit of respect and an appreciation of differences. I have long been under the 
impression that Lt. Doxstader is operating under the misguided assumption that 
genocide, slavery, racism, and the systematic oppression, degradation, and 
exploitation of most of the world's people are all thoroughly justified. It's 
that simple. 

If you want to clear up these muddied waters with some reality, then tell 
everyone you know the truth, that if history follows its course, it should be 
evident that I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, if 
his supporters had even an ounce of integrity, they would give you some 
background information about Lt. Doxstader. A word to the wise: I feel no more 
personal hatred for Lt. Doxstader than I might feel for a herd of wild animals 
or a cluster of poisonous reptiles. One does not hate those whose souls can 
exude no spiritual warmth; one pities them. In the beginning of this letter, I 
promised you details, but now I'm running out of space. So here's one detail to 
end with: This is no laughing matter.