My complaint against Navaros

[ChampionMrSocks]

As a citizen of this country, which I believe in and which I have seen Mr. Navaros tear apart, I must tell Navaros where he can stick it. To begin with, I believe I have finally figured out what makes people like Navaros use our weaknesses to his advantage. It appears to be a combination of an overactive mind, lack of common sense, assurance of one's own moral propriety, and a total lack of exposure to the real world. An inner voice tells me that after hearing about his socially inept attempts to lionize sophomoric extremists, I was saddened. I was saddened that he has lowered himself to this level. Even though supposedly distancing himself from the most footling finks I've ever seen, Navaros has really not changed his spots at all.

 

The baleful influence of anti-intellectualism is plainly evident in the palpable one-sidedness of his reinterpretations of historic events. The destruction of the Tower of Babel, be it a literal truth, an allegory, or a mere story based upon cultural archetypes, illustrates this truth plainly. I undoubtedly reject his demands, yes. But the pen is a powerful tool. Why don't we use that tool to keep our courage up?

 

Is it any wonder that Navaros's snow jobs bespeak a spiritual crassness, a materialistic and short-sighted stupidity that will feed information from sources inside the government to organizations with particularly domineering agendas before the year is over? I'm giving Navaros the benefit of the doubt, which is more than he's given me, and I'm not making that up! What he is incapable of seeing is that he and his collaborators are, by nature, ostentatious opportunists. Not only can that nature not be changed by window-dressing or persiflage, but Navaros does not merely grant fatuitous fence-sitters the keys to the kingdom. He does so consciously, deliberately, willfully, and methodically.

 

He may be sincere, but he is also sincerely naive. There is a format Navaros should follow for his next literary endeavor. It involves a topic sentence and supporting facts.

 

Even his backers couldn't deal with the full impact of his antics. That's why they created "Navaros-ism," which is just a fickle excuse to change the course of history. Some will say I exaggerate, but, actually, I'm being quite lenient. I didn't mention, for example, that I have to laugh when he says that this is the best of all possible worlds and that he is the best of all possible people. Where in the world did he get that idea? Not only does that idea contain absolutely no substance whatsoever, but every time he gets caught trying to make higher education accessible only to those in the higher echelons of society, he promises he'll never do so again. Subsequently, his expositors always jump in and explain that he really shouldn't be blamed even if he does, because, as they contend, snobbism is a be-all, end-all system that should be forcefully imposed upon us. Though many people agree that we must work together against antipluralism, totalitarianism, solecism, etc., only what I call piteous bottom-feeders are capable of imagining that the purpose of life is self-gratification. If you doubt this, just ask around.

 

For better or for worse, Navaros's adherents are unified under a common goal. That goal is to relabel millions of people as "officious". I oppose Navaros's modes of thought because they are jejune. I oppose them because they are drugged-out. And I oppose them because they will spawn delusions of antagonism's resplendence in the blink of an eye. Do you ever get the feeling that I don't much care to share the same planet as Navaros? Well, you should, because no matter how bad you think Navaros's ultimata are, I assure you that they are far, far worse than you think.

 

He can fool some of the people all of the time. He can fool all of the people some of the time. But Navaros can't fool all of the people all of the time. I sometimes joke about how my prayers go out to everyone who was hurt by him. But seriously, if I have a bias, it is only against homophobic antagonists who twist the teaching of history to suit his abhorrent, superstitious purposes. Navaros's foot soldiers acquiesce with bovine stolidity when he instructs them to destroy our sense of safety in the places we ordinarily imagine we can flee to. Surprised? You shouldn't be, because I once told him that we are being insidiously, conspiratorially, and treasonously led by deception, by bribery, by coercion, and by fear to use paid informants and provocateurs to display an irreconcilable hatred toward all nations. How did he respond to that? He proceeded to curse me off using a number of colorful expletives not befitting this letter, which serves only to show that Navaros is out to represent heaven as hell and, conversely, the most wretched life as paradise. And when we play his game, we become accomplices.

 

Listen up: This letter is written with the hope that readers will think for a minute about the situation at hand. For proof of this fact, I must point out that his cajoleries all stem from one, simple, faulty premise -- that his doctrines are our final line of defense against tyrrany. Navaros's associates' thinking is fenced in by many constraints. Their minds are not free because they dare not be. What I just wrote is not based on merely a single experience or anecdote. Rather, it is based upon the wisdom of accumulated years, spanning two continents, and proven by the fact that Navaros has, on a number of occasions, expressed a desire to bad-mouth worthy causes. On all of these occasions, I submitted to the advice of my friends, who assured me that it breaks my heart and fills my chest with agonizing pain when I see him put increased disruptive powers in the hands of wrongheaded virulent-types. It's that simple. It's undeniably astounding that Navaros has somehow found a way to work the words "hyperconscientiousness" and "lithochromatographic" into his musings. However, you may find it even more astounding that his claim that violence and prejudice are funny is not only an attack on the concept of objectivity, but an assault on the human mind. Irrespective of one's feelings on the subject, he is a man of questionable moral character. That's the sort of statement that some people believe is effrontive, but which I believe is merely a statement of fact. And it's a statement that needs to be made, because he thinks that everything is happy and fine and good. Of course, thinking so doesn't make it so.

 

Is it important that a real fight against craven, iconoclastic nepotism can be undertaken only if a basic change in social conditions makes it possible to solve the problems that are important to most people? Of course it's important. But what's more important is that there is a proper place in life for hatred. Hatred of that which is wrong is a powerful and valuable tool. But when Navaros perverts hatred in order to force us to bow down low before unrealistic puerile-types, it becomes clear that if we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to carry out this matter to the full extent of the law.

 

I must ask that his understrappers compile readers' remarks and suggestions and use them to give him a rhadamanthine warning not to perpetuate the nonsense known technically as the analytic/synthetic dichotomy. I know they'll never do that, so here's an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to work hand-in-glove with reprehensible, belligerent slumlords. Navaros's ploys are popular among demented, gormless smart alecks, but that doesn't mean the rest of us have to accept them. Only through education can individuals gain the independent tools they need to discuss, openly and candidly, a vision for a harmonious, multiracial society. But the first step is to acknowledge that what he 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 materialistic activity. For brevity, I won't comment further on that, but rather on the way that Navaros says he's going to tear down everything that can possibly be regarded as a support of cultural elevation by next weekend. Is he out of his mind? The answer is fairly obvious when you consider that his victims have been speaking out for years. Unfortunately, their voices have long been silenced by the roar and thunder of Navaros's chums, who loudly proclaim that if Navaros kicks us in the teeth, we'll then lick his toes and beg for another kick. Regardless of those pesky proclamations, the truth is that he needs to come to terms with his disorganized past. I always catch hell whenever I say something like that, so let me assure you that if we raise power-hungry big-labor bosses out of their cultural misery and lead them to the national community as a valuable, united factor, then the sea of hedonism, on which he so heavily relies, will begin to dry up. I myself challenge you to ponder this subject with the broadest vision possible.

 

One of the great mysteries of modern life is, In view of his lackadaisical teachings, what does it make sense for us to do now? The answer to this question gives the key not only to world history, but to all human culture. When I first became aware of Navaros's covert invasion into our thought processes, all I could think was how if Navaros is going to make an emotional appeal, then he should also include a rational argument. By an odd twist of fate, his obiter dicta have earned him opprobrium, suspicion, resentment, and hatred. The best example of this, culled from many, would have to be the time he tried to put a headstrong spin on important issues. Navaros offers two principal reasons as to why "the norm" shouldn't have to worry about how the exceptions feel. He argues that (1) all major world powers are controlled by a covert group of "insiders", and (2) the best way to serve one's country is to commit senseless acts of violence against anyone daring to challenge his evil shenanigans. These arguments are invalid for the following reasons: First, the gloss that his operatives put on his contrivances unfortunately does little to bring strength to our families, power to our nation, and health to our cities.

 

Far be it for me to instill distrust and thereby create a need for his uncivilized views. He is locked into his present course of destruction. He does not have the interest or the will to change his fundamentally dissolute outbursts. Is it any wonder that Navaros and several groups of careless dotty-types are in cahoots to make a mockery of the term "uncontrovertibleness"? Do you understand the implications of what I have been telling you? Are you awake? Then you probably realize that he would have us believe that the sky is falling. Yeah, right.

 

Let's be frank: We must indubitably lend support to the thesis that his zingers appeal to people who are fearful about the world's political and economic situation and long for simple solutions to complex problems. Does that sound extremist? Is it too self-aggrandizing for you? I'm sorry if it seems that way, but that's life. Despite Navaros's evident lack of grounding in what he's talking about, the baneful nature of Navaros's proposed social programs is not just a rumor. It is a fact to which I can testify. Many people who follow Navaros's doctrines have come to the erroneous conclusion that we should avoid personal responsibility. The truth of the matter is that this screams of the old belief that tendentious menaces are merely fatuitous amnesiacs. Navaros vehemently denies that, of course. But he obviously would, because his idiotic claim that vigilantism is the only alternative to militarism is just that, an idiotic claim. Navaros's fierce passions and fiendish cunning, combined with abnormal powers of intellect, with intense vitality, and with a persistency of purpose which the world has rarely seen, and whetted moreover by a keen thirst for blood engendered by defeat and subjection, combine to make him the deadly enemy of all mankind, while his self-satisfied claims contribute to inflame his wild lust of pelf, and to justify the crimes suggested by spite and superstition. Admittedly, Navaros's insinuations are mired in ghastly despotism. But that's because I and Navaros part company when it comes to the issue of classism. He feels that society is supposed to be lenient towards unbridled warmongers, while I maintain that his flimflams celebrate deception, diversion, and fashion. Now, I could go off on that point alone, but he somehow manages to get away with spreading lies (his dissertations are our final line of defense against tyrrany), distortions (cannibalism, wife-swapping, and the murder of infants and the elderly are acceptable behavior), and misplaced idealism (75 million years ago, a galactic tyrant named Xenu solved the overpopulation problem of his 76-planet federation by transporting the excess people to Earth, chaining them to volcanoes, and dropping H-bombs on them). However, when I try to respond in kind, I get censored faster than you can say "anthropoteleological".

 

The facts as I see them simply do not support the false, but widely accepted, notion that Navaros's decisions are based on reason. Navaros seems completely incapable of understanding that it's easy for armchair philosophers to theorize about him and about hypothetical solutions to our Navaros problem. It's an entirely more difficult matter, however, when one considers that even his yes-men are afraid that he will violate strongly held principles regarding deferral of current satisfaction for long-term gains by next weekend. I, not being one of the many worthless lummoxes of this world, have seen their fear manifested over and over again, and it is further evidence that if you've read this far, then you probably either agree with me or are on the way to agreeing with me. I am tired of hearing or reading that Navaros's mistakes are always someone else's fault. You know that that is simply not true.

 

Someone has been giving Navaros's brain a very thorough washing, and now Navaros is trying to do the same to us. With an enormous expenditure of words, unclear in content and incomprehensible as to meaning, he frequently stammers an endless hodgepodge of phrases purportedly as witty as in reality they are inhumane. Only brown-nosing stool pigeons (especially the prurient type) can feel at home in this maze of reasoning and cull an "inner experience" from this dung heap of dirty elitism.

 

His vassals are easily manipulated. How does he deal with this fascinating piece of information? He utterly ignores it. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that it strikes me as amusing that Navaros complains about people who do nothing but complain. Well, news flash! He does nothing but complain. However deep one delves into the citations and footnotes of his announcements, and however poised and "mainstream" Navaros's cringers appear once challenged, there is no way to forget that Navaros has found a way to avoid compliance with government regulations, circumvent any further litigation, and scrawl pro-anti-intellectualism graffiti over everything -- all by trumping up a phony emergency. The funny thing is, he wants us to feel sorry for the bitter, huffy clods who crush people to the earth and then claim the right to trample on them forever because they are prostrate. I insist we should instead feel sorry for their victims, all of whom know full well that as soon as Navaros's hangers-on up the ante considerably, their put-downs will cease to overcome the obstacles that people like Navaros establish and instead will use our weaknesses to Navaros's advantage. Let me try to explain what I mean by that in a single sentence: Navaros has no moral qualities whatsoever. That's pretty transparent. What's not so transparent is the answer to the following question: What will be the next object of attack from Navaros's camp? A clue might be that one does not have to scapegoat easy, unpopular targets, thereby diverting responsibility from more culpable parties, in order to view the realms of oligarchism and Maoism not as two opposing poles, but as two continua. It is an effete person who believes otherwise.

 

An ancient Greek once wrote something to the effect of, "I got off on a tangent." Today, the same dictum applies, just as clearly as when it was first written over two thousand years ago. Given the tenor of our times, we must do something good for others. As mentioned above, however, that is not enough. It is necessary to do more. It is necessary to clean up the country and get it back on course again.

 

Often, the lure of an articulate new pundit, a well-financed attention-getting program, an effective audience generator, hot new "inside" information, or a professionally produced exposé is irresistible to deluded, mudslinging worrywarts who want to scorn and abjure reason. If history follows its course, it should be evident that Navaros's apparatchiks are unified under a common goal. That goal is to replace discourse and open dialogue with callow machinations and blatant ugliness. If Navaros thinks that all minorities are poor, stupid ghetto trash, then he's sadly mistaken. The objection may still be raised 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. At first glance, this sounds almost believable. Yet the following must be borne in mind: Only the impartial and unimpassioned mind will even consider that I shall not argue that his newsgroup postings are an authentic map of his plan to impose tremendous hardships on tens of thousands of decent, hard-working individuals. Read them and see for yourself. To trample over the very freedoms and rights that Navaros claims to support is an injustice. There's always been suffering in the world, and wrongs have been and will continue to be committed. That's the current situation, and if you have any doubt about the reality of it, then you haven't been paying close enough attention to what's been happening in the world.

 

Are his principles good for the country? The nation's suicide statistics, drug statistics, crime statistics, divorce statistics, and mental illness statistics give us part of the answer. These statistics should make it clear that the last time I told Navaros's secret police that I want to resolve a number of lingering problems, they declared in response, "But the sun rises just for Navaros." Of course, they didn't use exactly those words, but that's exactly what they meant. One last thing: Mr. Navaros thinks he can impress us by talking about "counterestablishment this" and "anatomicochirurgical that".

 

I shall not argue that Navaros's newsgroup postings are an authentic map of his plan to lower our standard of living. Read them and see for yourself. Navaros should not tip the scales in his favor. Not now, not ever. I do not have the time, in one sitting, to go into the long answer as to why we must exert a positive influence on the type of world that people will live in a thousand years from now -- not just in the poetic sense, but in the very specific and prosaic terms I am outlining in this letter. But the short answer is that if he can one day remove society's moral barriers and allow perversion to prosper, then the long descent into night is sure to follow. Navaros's moonstruck tracts are in full flower, and their poisonous petals of interventionism are blooming all around us. Apparently, Navaros's attendants all have serious personal problems. In fact, the way he keeps them loyal to him is by encouraging and exacerbating these problems rather than by helping to overcome them. While reading this letter, you may have occasionally asked yourself, "Where is all of this leading?" and, "What is the point exactly?" I deliberately wrote in the style I did so that you may come up with your own conclusions. Therefore, I leave you with only the following: Mr. Navaros is up to no good.

[Siege]

Nice writing skills...and I agree.

[Juztyn]

I did not, nor will I ever, read all of that. I'm sure it was very interesting, though.

[Harvester]

Gotta love those automated insult/complaint generators.

[[PoB]ArMAgeDDoN]

Dude, 1, you have too much free time on your hands, and 2, you could of just made it shorter by saying "he's a dick and lets all just ignore him".

[Sine Nomen]

...........no, that wouldn't be ridiculously ironic.

[Spikee]

Hi I'm new here and I'd like to start off by saying: Don't feed the trolls

 

Hey Navaros, how have the hard, long days been without your computer? Mentally distressing?

 

Heh.

Hehe.

HeeHee.

HEHEHEHEHEHEHEEHEHEHHEEHHEHEHE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

If you go after Raven because of some kind of damage on your computer (which was probably what we call "operator's error", or you're a moron and do stupid things like put toast in your CD-R tray) and you call it "mental distress".... dude, you will officially be the saddest case of net geek EVER.

 

Now go home and cry, you saddo.

 

Hey, at least he's entertaining! And oh yeah, this game is the whoop...

 

P.S. - ChampionMrSocks, your very long soliloquy was almost as reprehensible. Don't let a troll drive you to typing dissertations like that, do what I do - give'm one good shot upside the head and mooooooove on...

[[PoB]ArMAgeDDoN]

Originally posted by Spikee

If you go after Raven because of some kind of damage on your computer (which was probably what we call "operator's error", or you're a moron and do stupid things like put toast in your CD-R tray) and you call it "mental distress".... dude, you will officially be the saddest case of net geek EVER.]

 

I hate to go off-topic, but about his little "lawsuit idea" about the backup copy, I just cant help. Anyway, this guy can't even copy a CD without screwing up something on his computer? Does it sound like this guy works for Microsoft or what?!?!

[StormHammer]

ChampionMrSocks - a very eloquent and thought-provoking read. You could also have said - "I disagree with his opinion".

 

Let me put this in perspective for you...if any member of these forums has a problem, either personal or ideological, with any other member, that is their prerogative. However, using these forums as a 'soap-box' from which to launch an attack (however eloquently penned) against another member's viewpoint, character, ideology, etc., is not a particularly good idea. As you and others should now be well aware, flames, insults, attacks against character, religion, creed, idealism, etc. of any inividual, are not tolerated in any way, shape or form on these boards. Feel free to debate your differences in private, via other forms of communication. However, if you wish to continue posting on these forums, please try to respect the opinions of others.

 

A flame is a flame by any name, and tolerance of the same would be a shame...so please refrain.

 

Having said that, if your essay is taken in another context, with the personal focus of the subject removed, and shifts emphasis to the dicussion of the various wrongs in the world, and how we choose to combat them, then it would serve as an acceptable platform of debate on the socio-economic and idealistic values of the modern world, in all it's various colours and flavours.

 

(Read: Edit post)

 

Let me know via PM if you wish to consider editing out the personal focus (i.e., the personal attack on Navaros) of your post, and I will certainly consider re-opening this thread so that others may debate the other subject matter.

 

This thread is closed.