An Open Letter To ESKOM
I would like to begin this letter by expressing my profound sadness and deep disappointment with some of Eskom’s manifestos. Consider this letter not as a monologue but rather as a joint effort between writer and reader. Together we shall call Eskom on the carpet for peonizing and enslaving its condemners. Together we shall keep the lines of communication open. And together we shall beat it at its own game. Far be it for me to advertise
magical diets and bogus weight-loss pills. I call on Eskom’s spokesmen to disavow their ties to Eskom and reveal the truth about its conjectures. It’s a pity. The
facts it has often stated contain some serious distortions. Some are blatant; others are subtle. One of the most mordacious is its discussion of jaundiced sleaze merchants. I must emphasize that it has been violating all the rules of decorum. This outrageous conduct indicates to me that I do not find refrains that are sententious, merciless, and spineless to be
funny. Maybe I lack a sense of humor, but maybe if we don’t soon tell it to stop what it’s doing, it will proceed with its undiplomatic, sadistic positions, considerably emboldened by our lack of resistance. We will have tacitly given it our permission to do so.
I mean, really. In the simplest of terms, Eskom would have us promote a culture of dependency and failure. May God, in his restraining mercy, forbid that we should ever do this most bloodthirsty and dimwitted thing! Some would say that this is a platitude. Would that it were! Rather, it seems that no one else is telling you that foolish oligarchism and Eskom’s quips are one and the same. So, since the burden lies with me to tell you that, I suppose I should say a few words on the subject. To begin with, the pen is a powerful tool. Why don’t we use that tool to create bridges between marginalized people and then extensions outward to broader constituencies?
By toning down its shell games, many more people are exposed to Eskom’s self-righteous message, convinced by its passion, and seduced by its simplistic answers to complex social problems. While incompetent couch potatoes claim to defend traditional values, they actually devalue whole categories of people. At any rate, I deeply believe that it’s within our grasp to send Eskom’s diatribes into the dustbin where they belong. Be grateful for this first and last tidbit of comforting news. The rest of this letter will center around the way that if it had lived the short, sickly, miserable life of a chattel serf in the ages
before technocracy it wouldn’t be so keen to create a mass psychology of fear about an imminent terrorist threat. Maybe it’d even begin to realize that I tend to refer to it as
froward. I like that term because in addition to its normal denotation it has more recondite connotations that matter in ways that merit consideration. For example, it implies that I have a dream that my children will be able to live in a world filled with open spaces and beautiful wilderness—not in a dark, lawless world run by the worst sorts of faitours I’ve ever seen.
What that means, simply put, is that I clearly hope that the truth will prevail and that justice will be served before Eskom does any real damage. Or is it already too late? The most appealing theory has to do with the way that in a rather infamous speech, Eskom exclaimed that principles don’t matter. (I edited out the rest of what it said because, well, it didn’t really say anything.) I would like to digress here. So, what happens to the moral example we set—for the world and for our own children—if we look the other way while it encourages its coalition to impose ideology, control thought, and punish virtually any behavior it disapproves of? I guess it just boils down to the question: How can it create a hostile environment and then turn around and shed tears for those who got hurt as a result? Well, if I knew that, I’d be in Stockholm picking up my prize and a sizable check.
At this point, I could complain about how Eskom belittles all fine social standards, but that wouldn’t be productive. Instead, I’ll say simply that temeritous sots are often found at its elbow. This suggests to me that the television-addicted, drone inhabitants of its rotting empire of fascism uniformly believe that there’s nothing wrong with governments that brutally suppress dissidents. Well, I have news for such gin-swilling, pestilential slobs: I’ve observed at least one of Eskom’s trained seals threatening national security. This is absolutely indicative of the unprofessional, ungracious, and unacceptable behavior that is so endemic to Eskom’s gestapo. How can we expect to spark a debate on inclusiveness, respect, and tolerance if we walk right into Eskom’s trap? We can’t, and that’s why its announcements are not so much a nationalist as a neo-imperialist attempt to unleash the dogs of violence and intimidation throughout the country. But it goes further than that; it spouts a lot of numbers whenever it wants to make a point. It then subjectively interprets those numbers to support its philosophies while ignoring the fact that the key to its soul is its longing for the effortless, irresponsible, automatic consciousness of an animal. Eskom dreads the necessity, the risk, and the responsibility of rational cognition. As a result, I am appalled by its serial dishonesty. First, Eskom lied about hurting others physically or emotionally. Then, Eskom lied about lying about that. I have now said everything there is to say. So, to summarize it all, Eskom is a quondam do-gooder who nowadays is primarily a garrulous, shameless fainéant.
This letter was automatically generated using Scott Pakin’s automatic complaint-letter generator (Click the link to try it and have some fun)