Defamation on Solo


Recommended Posts

Carol,

Fred Luntz (a polling and covert wordsmith guru who frequently appears on Fox) recently made a very interesting observation. He said if the conservatives want to distance themselves from the repercussions of the class warfare discourse of the progressives, they have to stop using the word "class" when they frame their collectives. For instance, if they want to address the middle income demographic, they should not say "middle class," but instead, "hard working Americans." Granted, this is not as precise, but it implicitly flatters the people with a designation that has good moral conduct embedded into it, and it steps outside the class struggle frame.

I find the language this young man uses is loaded with the kind of covert subconscious stickiness Luntz pointed to. It's one collective after another in his discourse--all with strongly worded emotional anchors. This dude is a pure social metaphysician in the original sense of that term, even though it is a very limited concept. He is a collectivist to the core of his soul. And he constantly calls on "Objectivists" as if this were a class of people like a tribe. There are no individuals in his world on a primary level. (I base this on what little I have read from him.) There are Objectivists, blacks, Muslims, Hispanics, filth, betrayers, and so on. His outbursts show clearly that he wants compliance from all his imaginary tribe members. He comes off as having the soul of a bully.

Oddly enough, I don't find his racism as offensive as his wallowing in negative emotions. Lots of people are going to bash his racist rants, but not many over in those murky waters will object to his focus on spite as a constant subtext.

Just as laughter is contagious, so is hatred. This is physical. It comes from the way mirror neurons work. And it is common knowledge that when you cultivate excessive emotional negativity, you literally kill yourself over time. Ulcers, cancer, strokes, heart attacks, the list goes on and on.

The problem is that, since hatred is contagious, you kill those who go along with you, too.

If someone were to characterize this dude as "toxic," they would not be using a metaphor. His behavior is literally and physically toxic to those who spend lots of time around him.

There's a matter of degree, too. Barbara Branden used to give us a constant reminder. if you use your harshest terms for the people you disagree with, what is left to designate the real bad guys like Hitler? You end up trivializing the extent of their evil by leveling it to people who are nowhere near the monsters they were.

This is one of the reasons you rarely see me use words anymore like "disgusting," "contemptible," "subhuman," "evil," "filth," and so on. I do use them, but when I do, they tend to have impact. The reason is I choose my targets based on relevance, and I don't dilute them with kindergarten antics or overuse.

I'm on a Brazilian saying kick, so here is another. It refers to the true extent of the effectiveness SLOP has in the Objectivist subcommunity (and elsewhere) due to the constant yelling and nasty emotional environment this dude helps cultivate. (And he's not the only one.)

When one donkey brays, the one beside him doesn't budge, but simply lowers its ear to tune out the noise.

Michael

Michael,

Your analysis strikes me as spot on. I come to my reactions to him from a different ccontext and part of the spectrum, of course... but my reactions were the same as yours. You say this young man is a collectivist, I say he experiences the world as "me" or "not-me", and he makes both of us sick. He is terrified of "not-me" and needs help with that. Lindsay Perigo is not giving him any help.

Has he not even read that Rand said racism was the worst form of collectivism?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Today Dog has defamed not just Solo with its lowest point, but the Objectivist world in general imo, withhis fascist ravings.

You oughta provide a link in a case like this. Think of it this way, for me to go looking for it means at least 2 page views for the SLOP trough, if you give the link they only get one.

http://www.solopassion.com/node/9494

"Look at their faces. There is no humanity in those faces. This type of barbarism is COMMON for blacks and Hispanics. It is rare for whites."

"Savage black violence is real and I for one wish that some Objectivist with balls would take notice of it. But what we get are fucking cowards and quislings like that horse-faced Hsieh or that South African lemming Leonid."

He's got another new one on Islam:

http://www.solopassion.com/node/9493

"IMO, Islam should be banned and Muslims should be deported. When will the Objectivist movement wisen up to this reality?"

Time for Jabba to come over and cheer him up, methinks:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_QoDpd6sDQ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today Dog has defamed not just Solo with its lowest point, but the Objectivist world in general imo, withhis fascist ravings.

You oughta provide a link in a case like this. Think of it this way, for me to go looking for it means at least 2 page views for the SLOP trough, if you give the link they only get one.

http://www.solopassion.com/node/9494

"Look at their faces. There is no humanity in those faces. This type of barbarism is COMMON for blacks and Hispanics. It is rare for whites."

"Savage black violence is real and I for one wish that some Objectivist with balls would take notice of it. But what we get are fucking cowards and quislings like that horse-faced Hsieh or that South African lemming Leonid."

He's got another new one on Islam:

http://www.solopassion.com/node/9493

"IMO, Islam should be banned and Muslims should be deported. When will the Objectivist movement wisen up to this reality?"

Time for Jabba to come over and cheer him up, methinks:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_QoDpd6sDQ

9D, I apologize. But in this case, I just would not step foot in that site after looking, let alone invite anyone else to visit it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tag this onto an old thread because I could not find the title I remembered. New Low at Solo, which is inadequate anyway.

Today Dog has defamed not just Solo with its lowest point, but the Objectivist world in general imo, withhis fascist ravings.

J. Maurone made an appropriate response. We'll see who goes first over there, him or Dog.

WOW, that was fast, my question is answered, Maurone has said he will be leaving there, and he mentioned "toxicity."

I do not know anything about him but he appears sensible,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carol,

Maurone's got a heart.

He did some stupid things for some stupid reasons and allowed himself to be swayed by some stupid people on a stupid mission, but he's got a heart.

Just to be clear, here is what I mean by stupid with a great deal of precision: Human stupidity.

Maurone's not in a good place right now, but I have hopes he will eventually get to a good one. I think he's starting to see that a mind without a heart equals a thug--at the very best. The heartless mind may not look like a thug in the beginning, but he or she or the crowd somehow always ends up there.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Is it necessary to be emotionally outraged over every murder that is committed in the United States?"

Good question, Jason Quintana!

I got enraged about a US murder once, and argued it here on OL. I survived as did my opponents, to fight another day.

The answer on Solo seems to be, "Only if the murderer is black, and the victim white". The survivors of this will be, guess what colour.

Solo is no longer a forum or O-site, it is a hate blog in the orbit of Geller, maybe LP can lick up some of her scraps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer on Solo seems to be, "Only if the murderer is black, and the victim white". The survivors of this will be, guess what colour.

Carol,

I don't think that's where they are at.

Sure, Perigo and his minions promote killing motivated by hatred all the time. And if you disagree, they call you an apologist for evil and play the victim game all bigots play. Which means, the hater will show you a victim, true or otherwise, then threaten to despise you and call you vulgar names if you do not become a hater of the collective he or she hates. It's as if the victim on one side blanks out any victim on the other.

It's a perception thing, not reality (i.e., the victims of hatred in reality are on all sides).

it's a mind game.

The idea of hating the individual who perpetrated an atrocity, but not hating the collective such an individual belongs to, does not enter the mentality of this kind of bigot--not on a fundamental level.

Oddly enough, this is the reason I don't think the SLOPPERS (not all, just the ones who adhere to this mentality) want to wipe out blacks just so whites can survive. Or Muslims, or any other group.

Believe it or not, it's more collectivist than that.

In their world, the individual literally does not exist on a fundamental identification level, nor as a fundamental value. It's not that the idea enters their awareness and gets rejected. it's more like unicorns to them. Yeah, they can imagine a unicorn--or an individual as an end in himself or herself--as make-believe, but they know--with 100% certainty--such a thing doesn't exist.

There is only class against class, or collective against collective. Philosophy is a rulebook for a tribe, nothing more, and the individual is merely a replaceable cog in that machine. So I don't believe the value is extermination (although it certainly can be a praised as an unintended result in that environment).

The value is more like tribal domination. Our tribe is better than your tribe. Take that, you bastards! We win!

The reason they don't want to kill all the blacks is because individual blacks mean nothing metaphysically to them. Their target is the black tribe--the only true human existent their pea-brains can grok. Break the back of the offensive tribe and let the survivors beg for mercy. But don't worry. You can forget about those. They're bugs. They're nothing. Ditto for Muslims. Ditto for the individuals in all the collectives they hate.

That's more the attitude I see.

And that's my disagreement. But you are correct that it is a hate site.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take your very good point. Actually, I never thought Perigo was a racist. He is a hatist. I think he hates people who don't like Mario Lanza, more than loves Lanza, for example

He's like the inversion of the gospel song, "If you don't love your neighbour then you don't love God."

"If you don't hate the Brandens

If you don't hate the music

If you don't hate the Muslims

then you don't love Ayn."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he's starting to see that a mind without a heart equals a thug--at the very best. The heartless mind may not look like a thug in the beginning, but he or she or the crowd somehow always ends up there.

Michael

How exactly does a mind without a heart equal a thug. What do you mean by thug?

The reason they don't want to kill all the blacks is because individual blacks mean nothing metaphysically to them. Their target is the black tribe--the only true human existent their pea-brains can grok. Break the back of the offensive tribe and let the survivors beg for mercy. But don't worry. You can forget about those. They're bugs. They're nothing. Ditto for Muslims. Ditto for the individuals in all the collectives they hate.

Who is "they"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kyle,

They? i said it clearly. SLOPPERS who adhere to a bigoted mentality. Please reread my post if you are in doubt.

As to the context (the thug part), this is an old story. A very ugly old story.

My suggestion is to learn it before judging things.

A bad habit in our subculture is to judge things intensely on superficial contact before knowing what they are--usually by following some opinion of Rand's or imagining what that opinion was. But not always. Sometimes it's just a bad habit or laziness.

I call this flawed epistemology--placing the normative before the cognitive by choice and because it's a butt-load easier. Pointing fingers and opining is fun, but learning stuff makes your brain hurt.

There's lots of material all over telling this sorry tale, so I am not going to rewrite it.

But, of course, you are free to do as you choose.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bad habit in our subculture is to judge things intensely on superficial contact before knowing what they are--usually by following some opinion of Rand's or imagining what that opinion was. But not always. Sometimes it's just a bad habit or laziness.

You could have just said this instead of the section I quoted in my post 36. The quote in my post 36 can lead to a lot of incorrect inferences whereas the quote above this sentence is much clearer.

I can see now that you were speaking of prejudice; I didn't know what you meant in the other quote.

As to the "SLOPPERS who adhere to a bigoted mentality", well, I'll leave that dog to lay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could have just said this instead of...

Kyle,

I'm confused.

You asked a question. Two questions, in fact. I answered.

Now you want to tell me how to answer you when you ask questions?

Hmmmmm...

I tend to respond poorly when people tell me what to do in a bossy tone.

Whatever...

You're young, so I'll discount it to excess of zeal for now.

btw - I have thoughts on your puppy story (I didn't forget), but I am finishing up some reading first--stuff that is proving to be relevant to what I want to say.

I have a suggestion. Go easy on the inter-forum feuds, have a little patience, and good things will come. You seem to have talent and I don't believe you will gain anything by jumping into the nastiness. I only see a waste of precious time that never returns without any kind of payoff in exchange. But I don't know you. I may be wrong and you may actually like that crap. Time will tell. Like I said, you decide. It's your life, your values and your choice.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bossiness?

I wasn't telling you how to answer. I recommended that you say this:

A bad habit in our subculture is to judge things intensely on superficial contact before knowing what they are--usually by following some opinion of Rand's or imagining what that opinion was. But not always. Sometimes it's just a bad habit or laziness.

Instead of this:

I think he's starting to see that a mind without a heart equals a thug--at the very best. The heartless mind may not look like a thug in the beginning, but he or she or the crowd somehow always ends up there.

In your post 31. Because the former is clearer.

Also, feuding? Where were the feuds. Are you counting our little misunderstanding as a feud?

Additionally, I thought you had forgotten about the parable. I'm about ready to release another story, but I am waiting for your comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kyle,

Sorry. I misunderstood you.

Your comparison of my thoughts is interesting. I didn't think to align them that way. Kinda cool, actually...

But they do mean different things.

By heart, I meant specifically feeling kindness toward weak people and even toward the weaker side of human nature, like cutting friends some slack when they mess up. (Maurone, if he reads this, knows exactly what I mean.) There are limits and contexts, of course, but just as presuming innocence until proven guilty is a default attitude for fairness, I believe in kindness as a default for enjoying good human relationships.

It's not very Objectivist, in fact, some frown on it in our subculture, but I find compassion to be a value. Neuroscience and psychology are already showing evidence that it is a healthy habit to cultivate.

In other words, it's very selfish to do that. And you tend to live longer.

Rand's point in her anti-altruism campaign is a good one, though. Don't let manipulators pollute your ethics with their sweet poison version of it.

btw - I'll get to your puppy parable in a day or two at the max.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Benevolence is not very Objectivist? I'm going to have a hard time believing that.

Those Objectivists who look down on kindness are likely still associating kindness with altruism. The two should be firmly divorced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Benevolence is not very Objectivist? I'm going to have a hard time believing that.

Those Objectivists who look down on kindness are likely still associating kindness with altruism. The two should be firmly divorced.

NOW you're talkin'!

Altruism has played with people's heads for so long it's screwed up compassion

and kindness. It made a doctrine out of our better instincts.

Objectivists should and can (and often do) reclaim them as part of the selfish pleasure of living.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Benevolence is not very Objectivist? I'm going to have a hard time believing that.

Those Objectivists who look down on kindness are likely still associating kindness with altruism. The two should be firmly divorced.

NOW you're talkin'!

Altruism has played with people's heads for so long it's screwed up compassion

and kindness. It made a doctrine out of our better instincts.

Objectivists should and can (and often do) reclaim them as part of the selfish pleasure of living.

Amen!

R. Hillel used to say :

If I am not for myself, then who is for me

And if I am only for myself what am I?

And if not now, then when

All of which has to do with what I should be doing.

You can't get much more egotistical than that.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And its Principal is Mad King Ludwig of Bavaria, except with far inferior musical taste

Ludwig II of Bavaria is called "Mad King" in English? That hits the nail on the head of course!

Mad King Ludwig used to squander the money of his Bavarian subjects to build his 'fairy tale castles' Neuschwanstein, Linderhof and Herrenchiemsee. Ironically, these castles today have become a veritable bonanza for the Bavaria state because they attract visitors from all over the world. :smile:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: this Doug fellow, who seems to enjoy stomping and thrashing around over on SOLO. I looked at his profile and it says that he has been an Objectivist for "about 6 years."

Pretty much explains everything. Most people have underwear older than that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And its Principal is Mad King Ludwig of Bavaria, except with far inferior musical taste

Ludwig II of Bavaria is called "Mad King" in English? That hits the nail on the head of course!

Mad King Ludwig used to squander the money of his Bavarian subjects to build his 'fairy tale castles' Neuschwanstein, Linderhof and Herrenchiemsee. Ironically, these castles today have become a veritable bonanza for the Bavaria state because they attract visitors from all over the world. :smile:

If Solo and OL are preserved for the edification of future Net generations, the Swamp will still attract a lot more visitors than the Trough, except for thirsty dogs.It will have water slides and a Fountain of Reason featuring a statue of King Michael the Patient and his beauteous consort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: this Doug fellow, who seems to enjoy stomping and thrashing around over on SOLO. I looked at his profile and it says that he has been an Objectivist for "about 6 years."

Pretty much explains everything. Most people have underwear older than that...

I don't understand the comment. Are you suggesting that Doug's behavior and opinions result from Early-O'ist Syndrome, to coin a term? Or the opposite, that longer acquaintance with Objectivism could provide an antidote? Or?

IIRC, Doug has talked in earlier threads about his being involved, prior to his learning about Objectivism, with groups and venues where his views are popular.

I hadn't looked at SOLO in months, not since a bit after Darren Wrede was ejected. Darren did manage to provoke a lot of debate I found interesting about evolution. There's a fairly new thread (begun Nov. 27, 2012) which might also be of interest on evolution issues, started by Richard Goode, "Rand vs. Dawkins," http://www.solopassion.com/node/9473

I have the Dawkins book The Greatest Show on Earth amongst my Dawkins collection but haven't done more than glance through that one. I sure don't like Dawkins' approach in the first chapter, as quoted by Richard Goode, and agree that it uses intimidatory tactics.

Ellen

PS: For some reason, the date and time information isn't showing on my posts with the new software. It didn't on one I posted yesterday and, judging from the preview screen, isn't showing on this one. I can't figure out why. The information shows on the "reply" screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: this Doug fellow, who seems to enjoy stomping and thrashing around over on SOLO. I looked at his profile and it says that he has been an Objectivist for "about 6 years."

Pretty much explains everything. Most people have underwear older than that...

I don't understand the comment. Are you suggesting that Doug's behavior and opinions result from Early-O'ist Syndrome, to coin a term? Or the opposite, that longer acquaintance with Objectivism could provide an antidote? Or?

IIRC, Doug has talked in earlier threads about his being involved, prior to his learning about Objectivism, with groups and venues where his views are popular.

I hadn't looked at SOLO in months, not since a bit after Darren Wrede was ejected. Darren did manage to provoke a lot of debate I found interesting about evolution. There's a fairly new thread (begun Nov. 27, 2012) which might also be of interest on evolution issues, started by Richard Goode, "Rand vs. Dawkins," http://www.solopassion.com/node/9473

I have the Dawkins book The Greatest Show on Earth amongst my Dawkins collection but haven't done more than glance through that one. I sure don't like Dawkins' approach in the first chapter, as quoted by Richard Goode, and agree that it uses intimidatory tactics.

Ellen

PS: For some reason, the date and time information isn't showing on my posts with the new software. It didn't on one I posted yesterday and, judging from the preview screen, isn't showing on this one. I can't figure out why. The information shows on the "reply" screen.

Early O'ist Syndrome.

By way of analogy, it takes roughly five years to become a black belt in karate in most traditional systems. That assumes about 5 hours of training per week, on average, and another hour or two of self-study. A black belt, contrary to conventional wisdom, merely signifies mastery of the fundamentals, or basics. Mastery of the subtleties takes many more years.

Objectivism is far more demanding than most forms of karate. And, as most martial artists have learned at one point or another, the most dangerous person in the dojo is the person who thinks he is a black belt and is not.

Doug yells a lot but he ain't no black belt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now