Yesterday, I was given the opportunity to contact customer service of a company I have (most likely mistakenly) bought the products of.  After being given in return a form letter and an offer to go screw myself, I was also opted in to the opportunity to give a survey on my experience.  Whoops.

‘Twas a bold strategy, let’s see if it worked out for them.

It didn’t.


 Posted below is an excerpt of the letter I left with customer service.

I would like to give your company more money in the form of contued support of your products, but the knowledge it goes to pay the undeserved salaries of utter incompetents like [name redacted] makes that difficult. The utter cheek of asking for a survey after this was an even worse slap to my face.

What did they think I would say? “Well, this utter mistake of a system screwed me over and some faceless cog was no help whatsoever, but let me help them out by giving their supervisor a falsified good review of their conduct!”

What were they thinking they did so worthy of a good review? “I gave this guy a form letter and told him to screw off!  Job well done!”

Why do you even need to pay someone to do that? Are stooges doing the job of an automated system cheaper than an automated system? That is the only way I can imagine they are still employed.

What is the supervisor (or even better, the representative themselves) going to think when they read what I wrote?  Will the supervisor going to think “Good, my employees are useless and losing my company money; it is all going to plan!”  Is the representative going to think “Well the automated system can’t sleep with my supervisor, SO HA!

This is why capitalism is doomed to fail.  The more intelligent people in a company, the more likely those in management will be overthrown or surpassed.  So you have a company of idiots doing the least possible in the worst way possible all in the name of cheating everyone else at the company for the most profit.

One of the most chilling quotes of G.K. Chesterton was this from “What I Saw in America”s chapter “Presidents and Problems”:

Perhaps these people do entertain the extraordinary notion that the nineteenth century was normal. But there are very few who think so, and even they will not think so long. The blunder is the beginning of nearly all our present troubles. The nineteenth century was the very reverse of normal. It suffered a most unnatural strain in the combination of political equality in theory with extreme economic inequality in practice. Capitalism was not a normalcy but an abnormalcy. Property is normal, and is more normal in proportion as it is universal. Slavery may be normal and even natural, in the sense that a bad habit may be second nature. But Capitalism was never anything so human as a habit; we may say it was never anything so good as a bad habit. It was never a custom; for men never grew accustomed to it. It was never even conservative; for before it was even created wise men had realised that it could not be conserved. It was from the first a problem; and those who will not even admit the Capitalist problem deserve to get the Bolshevist solution. All things considered, I cannot say anything worse of them than that.

I cannot say anything worse of them than that, indeed.

One thought on “G.K. Chesterton and A Letter of Formality

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.