The OL "tribe" and the Tribal Mindset

[jeffrey smith]

I think that what Adonis needs to do is to take a more romantic approach to dealing with Pigero. Maybe take something like Mario Lanza's "I'll Walk With God," rename it "I'll Walk With Allah," and rewrite the lyrics to express Adonis' religious beliefs. Or take Schubert's "Ave Maria," rename it "There is Only One God, and Mohammad is His Prophet," rewrite the lyrics so that it's a song about grand Islamic heroism, and soon Pigero will be "value-swooning," weeping and moaning in ecstasy, and eager to be as tolerant as he is of Christian artistic content.

J

More precisely, he'd be deploring the fact that Objectivism has not produced something similarly sublime.

(Adonis--just to be clear, the mockery here is directed solely against Pigero, not your or Islam!]

Jeffrey S.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I made a comment on another thread I want to post here for easy access later. This isn't a taunt. It's literally a considered evaluation. Obviously, I am talking about Objectivist Liar and hater Lindsay Perigo and his minions.

Ya think it's tough luv?

Nah... Spite is spite...

Be glad those dudes were not born and raised in an Islamist community. There would be more suicide bombers in the world.

If you have ever wondered why there is some kind of schism between this site and that, I wonder if you still wonder.

Michael

[Jonathan]

Are there any Islamic sects that strongly advocate the stoning or beheading of people who create or listen to rock music? If so, that might be a way of warming Pigero up to Muslims.

J

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Jonathan,

LOL...

I have to look into it, but a few years ago I read reports of kids in Egypt listening to heavy metal bands on the Internet at home being dragged out of their homes and imprisoned. (Worship of Satan was the reason.) I didn't pursue it, so I don't know what happened to them once they were in the clunker. And, I also don't know for a fact whether this has been repeated in other Islamic countries, but I have little doubt it has, especially where there are religious police.

Maybe that's a start?

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I'll be dayammed!

Even Rowlands is now bashing Objectivist Liar and Hater Lindsay Perigo. See here:

... I think that "feelings are the feeler's responsibility" is just a way for assholes to blame their victims. We had plenty of that back when Perigo was here. It's never the fault of the person who's being rude, disgusting, or vicious. We should view him as a hero, giving us the opportunity to "grow" and "develop a thick skin". We should celebrate the foul-mouthed person who likes to tear down instead of building up. And anyone who says otherwise is a pansy!

Give me a break.

Good.

It's good to see this garbage noted and commented on for the garbage that it is, even by Rowlands.

I have many difference with Rowlands. A few are fundamental. But I do hope he manages to achieve his positive goals and builds stuff of value.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

You know you're getting to the tribalists when they start posting full articles about you. Check this one out:

Carny Huckster Incarnate: Michael Stuart Kelly

January 11, 2010

The "Objectivish" blog of Joe Maurone

If anybody is interested, this dude is one of the vicious people who, back in 2006, ganged up on Chris Sciabarra and spearheaded, together with Lindsay Perigo and Dianah Hsieh, an infantile smear campaign against Chris on SLOP that went on for weeks.

That was one of the most shameful episodes on all online Objectivist forums. These people think attacking others is the way to spread Objectivism, protect Ayn Rand's honor, yada yada yada. People call it "attacking others," but I call the way they do it bigotry and scapegoating.

I and others wrote about it here, but there are several other good threads on OL (and elsewhere) about this: The Nature of Private Written Correspondence – The Sciabarra Smear.

Here is one of my last online communications with that shameful dude. The "he" in my quote is Chris Sciabarra and I am addressing Maurone directly.

I have written at length what I thought of your behavior and that of the others elsewhere, and I disagree with your charge that he betrayed anybody. For the record, you owe Chris Sciabarra an apology. Shame on you.

I am delighted this jerk speaks bad about me. I would hate it if people like him spoke good things about me.

There is a fundamental issue at stake here and one I believe addresses the core of Objectivism: independent rational thinking versus personality cult tribalism.

I stand for independent rational thinking. I believe every single one of you reading this has a precious ability to think for yourself. It sickens me to see these bullies in our subculture try, by their lynch-mobs, to get good people to not think for themselves.

Do not be fooled by their aping Ayn Rand's jargon. They want you to toe their party line as top value--not think for yourself. Look at what they say, but also look at what they do.

And I am sick and tired of petty little nobodies like those folks prancing around pretending that Ayn Rand needs their defense. They shame her by their acts.

I can't do anything if people want to think that what they do is Objectivism and advancing Rand's ideas, but I can go on record saying that it is pure scapegoating tribalist bigoted garbage that you can find in any personality cult. People can then consider all this decide by their own independent thinking, but at least in the mix, they get my view of those haters and liars.

Michael

[Ruth]

FYI Lindsay Perigo has been under attack from quite a few religious sites here in NZ recently.

Sites include the Odious Flannigan's, NZ Conservative Wingnuts, and a National Front type site which I will not link to - Crusader Rabbit.

Mr Perigo has written some great stuff recently regarding the evils and anti-freedom nature of Christianity, so credit where credit is due.

[9thdoctor]

Mr Perigo has written some great stuff recently regarding the evils and anti-freedom nature of Christianity, so credit where credit is due.

Where’s his great stuff? Who is going to be convinced to change their views by one of these Jabba rants?

“The Flannagans should pause to consider that James has forgotten more about The Religion of Fagot-Lighting than they will ever know.”

Jabba

The opposition has Valliant all figured out:

“I've learned that the best lies are those inserted into mostly true statements.”

Lucia Maria

This is just one wolf pack against the other, it’ll get attention, it may even be entertaining, but that’s as far as it goes. From what I've seen the other side is winning all the points for civilized discourse.

Meanwhile, Chris Cathcart has reappeared, and while I have to say he’s gone to the dogs (5-10+ years ago he used to write really good stuff), he’s doing a turn as guest chef for a smorgasbord of put downs and all around nastiness.

Here’s Cathcart on Jabba:

Linzy-Poo-Zizzles

an idiot

A cognitive mess

drama queen

Poor Linzy-Poo

self-ass-kicking

emotionalist

you've had a couple [alcoholic drinks]

tipsy

all you hyenas [including Jabba]

[Robert Campbell]

FYI Lindsay Perigo has been under attack from quite a few religious sites here in NZ recently.

Sites include the Odious Flannigan's...

Ruth,

Didn't the Flannagans help Mr. Perigo with his efforts to get Jim Peron booted out of New Zealand?

Eventually everyone in the Perigonian orbit turns against everyone else.

Robert Campbell

PS added 2/21/10. It appears that the Flannagans feel no debt of gratitude to Jim Valliant, in any case.

[Robert Campbell]

Here's Cathcart on Jabba:

Linzy-Poo-Zizzles

an idiot

A cognitive mess

drama queen

Poor Linzy-Poo

self-ass-kicking

emotionalist

you've had a couple [alcoholic drinks]

tipsy

all you hyenas [including Jabba]

ND,

All of a sudden, Mr. Cathcart is threatening to surpass Mr. Perigo in the verbal abuse department.

They deserve each other.

The epithets are flying so thick and fast over there that Ms. Stuttle can barely get 1000 words in edgewise.

Robert Campbell

[Brant Gaede]

I hadn't read a word of it until this morning. Amazing. If I had only brought some marshmallows ...

--Brant

[Neil Parille]

A very minor point, but I don't ever recall Cathcart being a full-stop supporter of PARC. In fact I remember him saying that he couldn't point to anything explicitly dishonest in Barbara's biography.

-Neil

[Robert Campbell]

Neil,

I don't recall Mr. Cathcart ever coming right out and endorsing Mr. Valliant's book.

He gives every appearance of hating Nathaniel Branden much more fervently than he hates Barbara.

But a guy who prostrates himself in front of Leonard Peikoff while defending "welfare rights" is going to be hard to figure out.

Robert Campbell

[9thdoctor]

Meanwhile a new sex tape is making the rounds, starring Jabba and James. Love the soundtrack.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEva0pT9ndg

[9thdoctor]

I have doubts, qualms, whatever you call it, about sharing this latest from SLOP, it’s like repeating an insult and thus amplifying it. But it’s so ridiculous and should be documented, before the perpetrator thinks better of it. This is by that non-arthropod invertebrate author of PARC, it’s on SLOP’s thread, started by Ed Hudgins, about the 20th anniversary of TAS.

“TAS implicitly attacks RAND herself, Linz, not just the early ARI, every bit as much as their climbing into bed with the Brandens does. They would have dined on some feathery cock in order to get Rothbard himself to speak at a summer conference, I have no doubt.”

http://www.solopassion.com/node/7405

Here’s the equivalent thread on OL.

http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=8306&pid=91621&st=0entry91621

Of course, he maybe meant to evoke the image of incompetently prepared Coq au Vin. What do you think?

[Robert Campbell]

ND,

Who knows what Jim Valliant meant?

But all of the possible interpretations are disgusting.

Besides, I actually rather doubt that the leadership of IOS, as it was then called, would have been interested in inviting Murray Rothbard to speak at one of its gatherings.

The entire thread, which mostly consists of Valliant and Perigo quarreling, is for the morbidly fascinated only.

Robert Campbell

[Selene]

I have doubts, qualms, whatever you call it, about sharing this latest from SLOP, it's like repeating an insult and thus amplifying it. But it's so ridiculous and should be documented, before the perpetrator thinks better of it. This is by that non-arthropod invertebrate author of PARC, it's on SLOP's thread, started by Ed Hudgins, about the 20th anniversary of TAS.

"TAS implicitly attacks RAND herself, Linz, not just the early ARI, every bit as much as their climbing into bed with the Brandens does. They would have dined on some feathery cock in order to get Rothbard himself to speak at a summer conference, I have no doubt."

http://www.solopassion.com/node/7405

Here's the equivalent thread on OL.

http://www.objectivi...t=0entry91621

Of course, he maybe meant to evoke the image of incompetently prepared Coq au Vin. What do you think?

Maybe they do not take the feathers off the chicken for the Coq au Vin?

[Brant Gaede]

ND,

Who knows what Jim Valliant meant?

But all of the possible interpretations are disgusting.

Besides, I actually rather doubt that the leadership of IOS, as it was then called, would have been interested in inviting Murray Rothbard to speak at one of its gatherings.

The entire thread, which mostly consists of Valliant and Perigo quarreling, is for the morbidly fascinated only.

Robert Campbell

Another Perigo death wrastle. Too stupid for more words.

--Brant

[Dragonfly]

I find that thread rather funny. Despite some obligatory mutual ass kissing, Perigo is now slowly realizing that Valliant is a full-blown randroid of the worst kind, that kind of creature that he always has claimed to detest. So the question is, will this lead to a new split, or will they try to keep up the appearance of a good marriage?

[9thdoctor]

Besides, I actually rather doubt that the leadership of IOS, as it was then called, would have been interested in inviting Murray Rothbard to speak at one of its gatherings.

Do we have on our hands a textbook arbitrary assertion? Nope, I can cognitively process it. JV claims to have been acquainted (at the least) with Rothbard, but neither have any credibility.

The entire thread, which mostly consists of Valliant and Perigo quarreling, is for the morbidly fascinated only.

I'm with Dragonfly in finding it entertaining, kind of like how Malcolm McDowell's rendition of Singing in the Rain was amusing in A Clockwork Orange.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I have been really, really, really, really busy these last few days and I just signed on to look things over quickly.

And I saw this.

LOL...

What a bunch of losers over on that SLOP thread (the principals, not everyone).

Notice that while they bicker about which of them should save the world, and which of the sleazy things they do and promote are not really sleazy, the people they bash all make their living (and good livings, too) through intellectual pursuits.

Dayaamm!

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I can't resist.

After Vallinant called Nathaniel Branden a rapist in print, it's kind of funny watching him get pissed at Perigo for calling ARI's rewriting crap Stalinist.

This is playing double-standards poker deuces wild with two jokers in the pack.

(Guess who the jokers are?)

Michael

[psychoanaleesis]

First off, WTF is this Perigo babbling about? *I take full responsibility for the snide remarks. I just want to defense vomit ideas garbage forced into my mind growing up in a cult-mentality country. Bleeecchhh!

1) Does being an Objectivist mean the same as being a member of some religious org-y? A: I think not.

2) Does this mean being an objectivist (choosing to be - to be more exact) have to agree with all of Rand's ideas? Objectivists are Individualists with a capital I for the Ego. So no. I don't have to agree or take her word for it. We just got the same or similar conclusions from the facts presented. I'd really like for him to see a shrink but then again, his delusions are so deeply ingrained to his soul (mind) that no amount of anti-psychotic medication can snap him out of it.

3) Does being an objectivist require you to follow a person? Yes. Yourself. That is, your judgment, reason, standards,values, choices and it does require one to follow one thing more: Facts in order to effectively utilize logic.

4) Does being an objectivist require you to think like a group? No, I think individually for my own sake but may join a group with a common agenda when called for i.e. selfish-interest.

5) Does or did ever objectivism or being a man of reason require me to serve others for the sake of others? Never.

6) Does it ask me to shun my belief in God? No. Nonetheless, I don't believe in a being that is unquestionable or that somehow he mystically controls or "guides" me whichever way. I think God loves me so much to let me be and not send me to hell for standing on my own decisions (where I'll gladly throw myself into should I be incapable of making another one!), leaving everything up to myself and reasoning and facts. Besides, if God is a supernatural entity, then there is no way for my natural senses to, well, sense God.

About his post at http://www.solopassion.com/node/5662, I'll attempt to analyze this bullshit in the lens of semantics and let's see who's the cult.

"There's no mystery whatsoever about this. Take this in: (referring to Ave Maria video)"

- He's asking the reader to just "Take that in"? That's like shoving down a piece of steak down someone's throat. Juicy, maybe, but you'll choke and definitely won't enjoy that.

"...the beauty of Schubert's Ave Maria—glorious music set to evil lyrics—remains irresistible to anyone with a soul. Until it can answer this, Objectivism will languish."

-Precisely because of the music it remained irresistible. They bent the uplifting melody and set it with lyrics that asks a person to bow down, kiss the ground, lick the dust - just like in the Dark Ages when you see the Liege Lord heading your way.

"Until we have not just a bunch of Halley concertos, but an understanding of their objective necessity and superiority, we will get nowhere."

-Nope, objectivism never asked you to "get nowhere" nor understand it. It's self-evident! The "superiority" is not applied to man, it's his surroundings he must conquer - excluding people.

-I think, that the Halley concerto only resides in my imagination. Beautiful movement of notes not to be rivaled and I mean every piece of music that I liked, retained and selectively integrated in my mind. My Halley's concerto is slightly different from everybody else in the sense that it is my personal music to the valor of man.

"Hate to sound like a cracked record..."

-Isn't this one of the methods cults use to brainwash their members? To keep them in line? Glaring contradiction. He doesn't hate it. He loves it. If he hates it, then he should shut up about it.

"As I've said so many times, it's time for Objectivists to take The Romantic Manifesto seriously. More than that—to affirm unabashedly the objective superiority of Romantic music."

-I've yet to find and read the Romantic Manifesto here, but with other of Rand's books, I take seriously but not literary. It's great if I can discuss about it in front of an audience that is, my dollar (two cents are insufficient) on it.

-Romantic music is the ideal music but objectivism require one to "like" it. And don't put words in another person's mind. Music is not similar to a song. To prevent my kind of unholy songs from entering my consciousness, I try to take apart the lyrics and the music. Listen to the lyrics first for it's idea or sense of life then the music's sense of life and weigh both consciously. But sometimes, it just captivates me so fully. Besides, I like the church hymns I'm hearing... sadly, not most of its lyrics - Pitiful (an emotion which I abhor!).

Wooohh! That felt sooo good! Now, to find a paper in this damned country that wants to publish it.

Edited February 26, 2010 by David Lee

[Brant Gaede]

David, you overdosed on SOLOP. Start with small bites and build up your resistence otherwise you'll have to go to the emergency room.

--Brant

[9thdoctor]

First off, WTF is this Perigo babbling about?

Did you just complete a SLOP immersion course? How long did it take you to draw these conclusions about Perigo (who, BTW, I customarily refer to as Jabba)? My preliminary conclusion is that your gag reflex is working up to spec.

From your point 6 should I infer that you’re an agnostic or a deist?