Mike Renzulli

With Apologies to Diana Mertz-Hsieh

Recommended Posts

Back in April of 2008 a controversy arose that I raised on these pages and on some Objectivist blogs about a basic Objectivist course Diana Mertz-Hsieh taught while she was with IOS/TAS and my group's advertising their usage at one of my salon's meetings.

The controversy was based as to whether or not she held the copyright to the lectures and, hence, veto power over their usage which would have entailed a potential public usage in violation of copyright statutes. I have since found out via second hand knowledge articulated by David Kelley himself that the copyrights for the lectures done by TAS defaulted to their authors/speakers.

As a result, Mrs Hsieh was correct in her assertion that I needed to seek her permission in order to use them after all. In addition to this I made comments speculating on her state of mental health in which I must confess to feeling inordinate amounts of anger at the time.

I opted to avoid a confrontation (either legal or moral) to not use the lectures at the meeting in question after all. I apologize to Diana not only for my incorrect judgement in assuming I could use them and for the statements that came from me afterward.

I have communicated my apologies to her in an email in which she seems to have forgiven me and I post this apology as I meant no initial harm with my actions but had gotten angry afterwards none the less. The reality is that Mrs Hsieh was right, I was wrong. I hope she can understand my actions for what happened at the time and I take responsibility for and completely retract the (albeit irrational) statements I made during and after that period.

Subsequently, this post is also to announce that as of October 5th my Objectivist club will associate with/support the Ayn Rand Institute. It has been great posting and interacting with you all on these boards. However, my time spent on OL maybe lessened not only because of my changing camps but also because I expect that I might have more activities down the line to tend to in my personal life.

Thank you all for your time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh?

So if you apologize pubicly to Hsieh, you get to affiliate your club with ARI, so long as you cease or diminish your posting on OL?

I assume this is a joke. I certainly hope it is.

Ghs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume this is a joke. I certainly hope it is.

As conversions go, this one's pretty polite. Assuming this is the last we hear of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I assume this is a joke. I certainly hope it is.
As conversions go, this one's pretty polite. Assuming this is the last we hear of it.

I thought maybe Mike wrote a satire of something Hsieh had written earlier. After all, he is still using the tag: "Relishing in the fact that I have debunked Leonard Peikoff."

Ghs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I assume this is a joke. I certainly hope it is.
As conversions go, this one's pretty polite. Assuming this is the last we hear of it.

I thought maybe Mike wrote a satire of something Hsieh had written earlier. After all, he is still using the tag: "Relishing in the fact that I have debunked Leonard Peikoff."

Ghs

This is so spooky. I saw Mike just three months ago at the Free Minds/TAS Summer Seminar in Anaheim, California, and he was quite cordial, friendly even. He did have somewhat of a haunted, hyper-alert demeanor a good bit of the time, as though he were...I don't know...expecting someone to come up and accost him about something. Probably anticipation, wanting to give TAS "one more chance," but already feeling like he had one foot out the door.

I know, this is very speculative, very psychologizy. Just trying to make sense as to why he would jump ship like this. Perhaps ARI is pursuing a "fair and balanced" strategy of conversion: one rather nicer one for every nastier one. :-/

"The slithery dee crawled out of the sea. He caught all the others, but he won't catch me. You won't catch me, you stupid old slithery dee. You caught all the others, but you won't...<grolp>"

REB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However, my time spent on OL maybe lessened not only because of my changing camps but also because I expect that I might have more activities down the line to tend to in my personal life.

Has ARI softened their stance regarding posting on boards that don't repudiate the Brandens? Is this an example of individualism? Are "camps" an example of individualism?

Shayne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back in April of 2008 a controversy arose that I raised on these pages and on some Objectivist blogs about a basic Objectivist course Diana Mertz-Hsieh taught while she was with IOS/TAS and my group's advertising their usage at one of my salon's meetings.

The controversy was based as to whether or not she held the copyright to the lectures and, hence, veto power over their usage which would have entailed a potential public usage in violation of copyright statutes. I have since found out via second hand knowledge articulated by David Kelley himself that the copyrights for the lectures done by TAS defaulted to their authors/speakers.

As a result, Mrs Hsieh was correct in her assertion that I needed to seek her permission in order to use them after all. In addition to this I made comments speculating on her state of mental health in which I must confess to feeling inordinate amounts of anger at the time.

I opted to avoid a confrontation (either legal or moral) to not use the lectures at the meeting in question after all. I apologize to Diana not only for my incorrect judgement in assuming I could use them and for the statements that came from me afterward.

I have communicated my apologies to her in an email in which she seems to have forgiven me and I post this apology as I meant no initial harm with my actions but had gotten angry afterwards none the less. The reality is that Mrs Hsieh was right, I was wrong. I hope she can understand my actions for what happened at the time and I take responsibility for the (albeit irrational) statements I made during and after that period.

Subsequently, this post is also to announce that as of October 5th my Objectivist club will associate with/support the Ayn Rand Institute. It has been great posting and interacting with you all on these boards. However, my time spent on OL maybe lessened not only because of my changing camps but also because I expect that I might have more activities down the line to tend to in my personal life.

Thank you all for your time.

Congratulations! I'm sure you'll fit right in at ARI. The U.S. government will continue bombing the shit out of a bunch of foreign countries, dropping bombs on them, firing hellfire missiles at them from drones, occupying them, and killing lots of innocent civilians, including American citizens who have been put on secret assassination lists. And ARI will continue performing its valuable function of providing moral justifications for all of this, strictly in the name of objectivism, of course. Undoubtedly, you will turn out to be a valuable ally to ARI in assisting it with this mission.

Martin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back when I ran a campus club ARI provided lots of free literature to hand out, free videotapes to play at meetings (by mail), and they coordinated appearances by speakers. This was in the early nineties, my guess is that they still do these things, and I don’t believe TAS does them at all. They never asked me about my opinion of the Kelley split, and for most of the time I was involved with them I either didn’t know about it or hadn’t yet formed an opinion (the internet wasn’t what it is today). I was a registered Libertarian, and they never asked about that either. I expect they’re more careful now.

I don’t know if Mike has been pressured (or directed) to make this announcement, my guess is that he has, but I’m disinclined to offer a judgment. I can’t imagine submitting to that stultifying atmosphere for intellectual reasons, I’ll just say that and leave it there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Mike is following his heart and using his mind to the best of his ability.

Whether I agree or disagree, that is irrelevant. It's his mind and his life to dispose of as he chooses.

As far as I am concerned, he is a member in good standing on OL and can come and go as he pleases.

I wish him well whether he continues posting or not.

I think he is a good dude.

(I have no opinion about the apology to Hsieh. That's his business. It's weird to see something like that here on OL after all the attacks Hsieh has made against this site and members--with well-deserved blowback--but whatever. Knowing who you are and where you are at has never been a strong characteristic of Objectivists within this kind of context.)

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think Mike is following his heart and using his mind to the best of his ability.

Whether I agree or disagree, that is irrelevant. It's his mind and his life to dispose of as he chooses.

Michael, that's mean! I hate to see ~anyone~ "dispose" of his mind and life, even those who migrate over to the Peikovians. :-)

Seriously, I agree with all of your benedictive comments (including the deleted). You catch more flies with honey than vinegar...if you love a butterfly, let it go, etc.

Life's too short and too important for any of us to dwell on why someone is shifting allegiances, even when he's taking his entire discussion group along with him.

MR seems like a good guy, so I hope that I'm right, and I hope that he continues to be one as he settles into his new milieu.

REB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if you love a butterfly, let it go...

Roger,

What a nice thought!

You get to keep what you give away. (That's a phrase about having an abundance attitude by marketer Joe Schroeder.)

And... I start to reflect on the skilled butterfly collectors out there who can spread a butterfly on a beautiful frame at the drop of a hat...

:smile:

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Subsequently, this post is also to announce that as of October 5th my Objectivist club will associate with/support the Ayn Rand Institute.

MR seems like a good guy, so I hope that I'm right, and I hope that he continues to be one as he settles into his new milieu.

In Mike's profile, he lists his article "The Impossibility of 'Closed Objectivism'".

But doesn't the Ayn Rand Institute advocate precisely that: a Closed Objectivism?

MR has always come across to me as a very open-minded person, whose recent posts about Buddhism I found quite interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Enough already.

The South African Chapter of Private Objectivists* (SACPO) has been observing with dismay the various comings-and-goings, jockeying for position, intellectual conflict, and general contentious nature of Objectivism in the USA, and its bi-partisanship.

It therefore gives notice that:

it intends making a takeover bid of the Ayn Rand Insititute.

it intends dissolving such association.

For an undisclosed sum, (predominantly in gold bullion), certain conditions will be imposed:

After dissollution, all present members of ARI will undertake not to form any other Institution for a period of five (5) years.

All members may practise, contribute and appear publicly only in their private capacity.

All archival material by Ayn Rand (unedited) will become part of the public domain.

The question of 'intellectual heir' becomes null and void.

The question of 'open/closed', likewise.

The objectives:

After the putsch - er, friendly takeover - Objectivism will be liberated from over-ruling methods and structure.

The initiative will return to independent academics and scholars, furthermore, fostering a climate of individualism and independence among Objectivists themselves - virtues more observed in theory, than in action.

Our aim is for a spirit of benevolent camaraderie to pervade Objectivism, gradually dissipating dogmatism, thus becoming more inviting to newcomers.

We invite your support.

Sincerely,

AJG

*[Presently numbering three members - and expected to double within one year.]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tony, I simply must refer you to here: Secret Objectivist cult After you go through that (if you haven't already), lemme know if y'all interested in the ride of your life. You sound like good disciple material. :smile: Michael

Hmmm - dunno, Guru Michael.

Will get back to you after discussing this with MY disciples.

Guru Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...