The Nature of Private Correspondence - The Sciabarra Smear


Recommended Posts

Michael, you're right. What's more, I think that the same considerations apply to what we spend time on here on O-L. Even the greatly lessened negativity and stress level we have here from the doings of the Axis of Evil is still affecting the amount of positive focus I can muster and the productive work I can get done.

From this point on, I hereby wash my hands of the whole Judgmentalist mess on NF and SP. To anyone else who cannot manage to tear themselves away, you have my sympathy but not my help, neither on those boards nor by remote control here.

Now, onward and upward! I have two seminars to prepare for this summer!

REB

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 159
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It's like smoking, or any other addiction for that matter. I'm glad I had the presence of mind not to get sucked into this stuff in the first place. I do think the whole adversarial/bickering/gossiping world acts on the addictive sides of our personalities. It is easy to get caught in the vicious cycles of craving something that always leaves you less satisfied after you consume it than before. Let the drug dealers consume themselves.

As Branden says, "Doing more of what doesn't work doesn't work." Healthy existence requires we stop our merry-go-round and seek new behaviours that actually satisfy our hunger. If there are places we want to go with our ideas, we should take steps that really do get us there. We shouldn't keep our dreams on hold for the sake of an addiction, for the sake of enlightening someone who's goal is not to be enlightened. Who cares whether or not some noodle sees the light? I don't!

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

All true, Roger, Paul, MSK.

It certainly requires little more, it has shown what it has shown.

It was, however, worth throwing down over. Chris is worth throwing down over.

Nasty things don't fare well when exposed to sunlight. It would be unreasonable to expect public acknowledgment of such behaviors, but on the inside maybe it was felt and recognized.

The current aggregation will without doubt splinter and fragment, it will, and I suppose it needs to if any of them are to continue to grow, integrate. There will be those that remain inflexible, and that means pathology. I am sorry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see that our associate, Mr. Scherk, has graduated from moderation. Instead, Linz has cast his soul into the void, as far as SP goes. I suppose its not that odd that this follows what was a pretty danged malevolent post. See, WSS? See what happens when you put down the sword and pick up the olive branch?

There's a certain kind of pride a man can come away with, depending on what kind of bar he has been thrown out of. The hangtime he achieved was spectacular. Perigo seemed flustered; no vomit, only jerk.

rde

As the Atlasphere Turns

Link to post
Share on other sites
I see that our associate, Mr. Scherk, has graduated from moderation. Instead, Linz has cast his soul into the void, as far as SP goes. I suppose its not that odd that this follows what was a pretty danged malevolent post. See, WSS? See what happens when you put down the sword and pick up the olive branch?

It's very amusing, Rich. Lindsay did exactly what I had imagined he would do when it was time to push the red button -- it hardly mattered that I posted quotes from Lincoln on the subject of enemies . . . all but Lindsay can see that he has done me a great favour. Although he himself will not read the New Blog 46, he knows that I will have a wide readership . . .

There's a certain kind of pride a man can come away with, depending on what kind of bar he has been thrown out of. The hangtime he achieved was spectacular. Perigo seemed flustered; no vomit, only jerk.

Flustered is right! Like he had been in a car accident. Here's what he had to say in response to my post to Joe Maurone, ""By the better angels of our nature":

Sorry, but I just can't stand this jerk's type of smart-assing, & I won't subsidise it. He was duly warned. Sherk, as I said, yer an idiot, a waste of space. Go be a clever-dick in the house of someone who doesn't despise you. You're through here.

(From the SOLO thread "A Challenge to Ed Hudgins")

Link to post
Share on other sites

His kung fu was definitely not 100% on that one.

It was kind of precious...he sounded like a high school teacher in one of those brat pack movies-where they aren't used to putting together swear words. I always thought his swearing, his invective, was a strong point, but alas, no kung fu. "Clever-dick"? I guess the hyphenation is a bit innovative. "Jerk," well, that was just weak. All climaxed with a robust "yerouttahear."

Heh. The cadre going over there sure would make for an icky cocktail party.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 11 months later...

The inevitable happened and Hsieh is now feuding with Perigo.

The article linked to on Solo Passion in the lead article on this thread ("Dialectical Dishonesty") will still go to the article, but it will no longer be signed by Diana Hsieh. She took down her picture and renamed her account to "No One." (On Noodlefood, it is normal.)

Everything by Hsieh on Solo Passion is now given as being submitted by "No One."

I am mentioning this for readers who come across this thread and become confused when they click on the links.

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

The essence of tribalism

To start with, this notice is to advise that the "No One" pseudonym on Solo Passion has been reverted to "Diana Hsieh." So if any new reader is looking at the links, just be aware that these people are volatile. If this change is permanent, no one knows.

But there is something that needs to be mentioned. It is a temptation to think that since time has passed, the principles have changed for the better. Untrue. Time makes no difference whatsoever on the mentality of a person with corrupted thinking. Only correct rational thinking can change that. Here is a quote from a recent post by Perigo about this affair involving Chris that proves my point (and proves that the attacks continue):

Sadly, Chris had been hiding behind the veil of confidentiality to smear folk who had no idea what was going on until it was brought out into the open. The e-mails he sent to Joe Maurone about me, for instance. I couldn't believe my eyes when I first was shown them. And Chris had in effect been smearing the entirety of ARI with his "confidential" claims to Diana that sundry of its intellectuals were chomping at the bit to publish in JARS but were too terrified of possible reprisals to do so. With that sort of behaviour one forfeits confidentiality in my book.

(My emphasis.)

What this means is that if he decides you are against him, morality and principles go out the window. Make no mistake about this. This issue is tribal, not moral. It is "for me/against me" thinking. Morality is only a rationalization.

Can anyone imagine Ayn Rand doing this?

Heh.

If you send an email to a person like this man, be well advised that the standard he operates on is not reason or ethics, but instead staying in his good graces (or relying on his whim) if you do not want your words made in private to be published someday—without your permission—to attack you or somebody else.

This is contemptible.

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

MSK quoted Pigero:

Sadly, Chris had been hiding behind the veil of confidentiality to smear folk who had no idea what was going on until it was brought out into the open. The e-mails he sent to Joe Maurone about me, for instance. I couldn't believe my eyes when I first was shown them.

I think that dealing with adults who have the emotional development of children can be a complex thing, and I really don't see it as a "smear" for someone to talk privately about an Objectivist emotional toddler differently than they would talk about him in public, for the same reasons that I don't think it's a "smear" to talk about the behavior of an actual child differently in public than when with other adults in private. I think that if you've befriended either an Objectivist emotional toddler or an actual child, it would make sense that you'd try to speak to them (and about them publicly) in mostly positive terms, hoping to be something of role model to them on how emotionally stable adults behave, and when you privately discuss them with adult friends (or at least those who appear to be adults), I could see where you would want to warn your friends of some of the dangers they might face in dealing with an Objectivist emotional toddler or a child going through a naughty phase.

J

Edited by Jonathan
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jonathan,

Regarding your misspelling of Perigo: That is childlike and inappropriate if you want to be taken seriously.

Mr. Perigo is easily angered and has little control over what he says when angry and I disagree with much of what he says about the people he doesn't want get along with. But his views about life, philosophy, Ayn Rand, politics, living life to your highest potential, in general, I cannot find fault with. For many months on SoloHQ I was an avid reader of his writings and agreed and sanctioned much of it. There were many lively intelligent and adult discussions, much of it congenial. I'm still disappointed that it all came to an end with the breakup of SoloHQ. The finest moments of SoloHQ were very fine indeed. Linz was part of what made it work for awhile, for that I still have a measure of respect for him. Therefore, I find your misuse of his name contemptible.

Oops, should I have discussed that behind your back?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike,

I will never fault a person for standing up for productive efforts. I certainly agree that on the old SoloHQ there were some awfully fine moments (and I had the honor to be some of those). I also agree that this was in part due to the leadership, where Perigo was partially in control. And I fully admire you for your focus on productive effort and I align with your commitment to valuing that. (I'm serious.)

But for as much as I like you (which is a great deal), I do have to express a bit of amusement at you being bothered by a purposeful mocking misspelling of Perigo's name, enough so that you would express contempt for it here of all places.

I would say at least 20% of the entries on the list below came directly from posts by Perigo and a great deal of the others came from posts of those he encouraged and provided a platform for. Now this is only in relation to me as a person and to OL and OL members in general (of which Jonathan is one). This does not include the Brandens, Chris Sciabarra, Robert Bidinotto, TAS and TAS people, hell, even ARI and ARI people—or I have an even better idea.

Here is an exercise for you. Go to the online archives of The Free Radical and look at the authors for the back issues. Notice how many people contributed articles without pay to that publication over the years only to find themselves not only discarded shortly thereafter, but held up in public as evil by Perigo. It's simply one after the other. Years and years. Google their names and see how the man you respect so much has repaid those individuals who contributed (without pay) to his enterprise (where he does have control of the finances) in good faith. I mentioned money, but I doubt there is much anything to talk about.

If all this is Objectivism and respect-worthy for you, I will not argue it. We all have different tastes and standards. This, all this, is simply not good enough for me. I want more out of life.

But in order not to be tempted to look at this issue through the lens of a double-standard, I wonder if you have ever expressed your contempt to Perigo (on his site) or any of those he has sponsored for similar behavior at the time they posted the following gems of rationality. Any one at all will do.

Proposed MSK nicknames and sundry descriptions:

Brandens' poster-boy (my all-time for-real favorite, which I bear proudly)

Barbara Branden's chief low-level supporter (another favorite)

Brandens' pet toady

Slime

Slimy MSK

Toxic slug

Slippery

Incomparably odious

Odious MSK

Dysfunctional

New age

Anti-conceptual acid fountainhead

One hell of a disappointment

Limp-dick

Piece of shit

(Re "piece of shit"): I don't like your characterisation of MSK. It's insulting to shit.

Immoral scum who lie in practically every post

Pompous ass of the first order

Smug, truth-twisting fatness, the "saintly" Michael Stuart Kelly, giving his Buddhaliciously pompous approval

Sheer ruthlessness, shamelessness and a fanatical drive to love onesself so much that it overrides any desire to be honest or fair about your own corruption or misdeeds.

Michael "Saccharine" Kelly

Trojan Horse

Saintly fatness

"Loving chubby Buddha" image he so deceptively tries to cultivate

Cockroach

Crazed Cockroach Kelly

Cockroach Kelly's smug demeanour

Michael Stuart Kelly-Stuart-Stuart (Dizzy's most inept inspiration)

Michael Moore Stuart Kelly

Dishonest

Thoroughly dishonest MSK

Vicious man with an evil agenda

Laughable

Stupid ideas

Massive evasion

Evader (used in simple mode, without the "massive")

Pathological evader

Mentally ill

Fascist

Christian

Looter

Scout master of Objectivism

Perfectly reliable law of nature (I kinda like that one, too)

Stridently-anal

Snivelling self-indulgence

Enslavement mentality

Cane toad

Idiot

Uses altruism as his tool to create slaves

Sunk to the lowest depths of the worst defamations of Ayn Rand

(Said about me): "You are the real enemy of Objectivism"

Incapable of holding a coherent train of thought

Morally unfastidious

One of the most odious people I've ever encountered

I doubt he is a sincere man

So low a life-form

Greatest licker and sucker of all

Great Pretender himself

Talking ape

Male PMS

A bit like Hemingway as a boxer

Skunk

MSK skunk

Excrement

Shit

Complete dick

King of Objectivist evil

Megalomaniac

Scumbag

Too thoroughly and fundamentally disingenuous

Low-level creep

MuSKy

Lower than the lowest of the low

Disgusting reptile

Imbeciles like MSK

That awful entity

MSK's nauseating "sincerity"

Reminds me of a Christian television evangelist who fleeces his viewers

MSK-style character attacks (after all these names, this is now my favorite characterization :) )

For the Ojectivist Living site (in my homage, of course):

Cockroach Corner

Branden Community Church

Nasty folks (malicious motive)

Communist Living

Intellectual/cultural ghetto for the Brandens

Any port in a storm

Branden Temple

ObjectivistLying

The anti-Rand site for Brandroids, back-stabbers & buttlickers

Subjectivist Living

Bad vibe

The Shao-lin Temple of Barbara Branden

The Fearlessly Independent Thinker's Shrine to Barbara Branden

O-Lying Brandroids

O-Liars

O-Lying ghetto

Ollie den

Basically where all the dishonest people who've been run out of the Objectivist movement go to die

(Said about OL): "I'm willing to wrestle in mud, but not in shit"

OLLies

(Said about OL): "'Intellectual bankruptcy' may be too generous as applied to them"

Objectivist Livers

Objectivist Not Living

Objectivist Dying

Objectivist Undead

Smearing Rand-diminishers

People who don't love or hate

Jellyfishness and mounds of spineless goo

It may be ruined (said gleefully about the hack of the OL site in July 2006)

That place is full of them, operating in bad faith. (Said about alleged phonies on OL)

A hostile site that may be dying

Most of its activity was directed against SOLO & much of that against me personally. (Said by a self-flatterer)

These creatures are beyond contemplation in their awfulness

OL could go from Objectivist Living to Objectivist LaRouchies

Flaky ghetto

More should be coming as the paragons of high literary standards make their learned contributions.

I don't want to be at odds with you, but you should be aware that on OL, at least, this kind of thing does not happen in a vacuum.

Now if someday this guy writes something like Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical, The Psychology of Self-Esteem, The Evidence of the Senses, or, well... you know what I mean (maybe something equivalent quality-wise to this by Jonathan?), then I will also start talking about productive achievement and respect in different terms. For the present, I find a huge gap in capacity.

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael,

I said "I find your misuse of his name contemptible" I did not say I found Jonathan contemptible. As I find Lindsay's misuse of your name, and of you, to be contemptible. But I do not find the totality of the human being that is Lindsay Perigo to be contemptible.

Let it go. Unless it's all about getting even.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Let it go. Unless it's all about getting even.

Mike,

There is another possibility. It is not about getting even.

It is about making matters very uncomfortable if these petty little people wish to attack the men and women of achievement I love and admire. There has recently been several new attacks because SOLOP lost audience with the exodus of the ARI people. They need to dredge up some old smears like a Jerry Springer rerun and hope for a bite. I am not too good at sanction of the victim. Notice that when they stop over there, I am inactive about them.

In the Objectivist subculture, I have noticed that forgiveness is a cardinal virtue and widely practiced in judging those who constantly maliciously act like a fool. Objectivists don't say they forgive unconditionally. In fact, it is a no-no to say it. But, in acts, many do forgive unconditionally, more than any Christian I know.

I am considered a "soft" Objectivist and I do believe in forgiveness, but I don't practice that form of it—not in word and not in deed.

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites
In the Objectivist subculture, I have noticed that forgiveness is a cardinal virtue and widely practiced in judging those who constantly maliciously act like a fool. Objectivists don't say they forgive unconditionally. In fact, it is a no-no to say it. But, in acts, many do forgive unconditionally, more than any Christian I know.

You haven't seen the same vicious, backbiting, ostracize-at-the-drop-of-a-benefit-of-the-doubt sectarianism that I've been seeing for thirty years, then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve,

LOL...

You're right. I should qualify that.

Unconditional forgiveness in Objectivism is for a member of one's own tribe, especially a tribe leader, or with someone like Perigo after some dust settles. Never for a scapegoat, though, should a member become one.

Of course, the members of other tribes are some of the most dirty rotten scoundrels to ever plague the earth and deserve only to be exterminated.

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jonathan,

Regarding your misspelling of Perigo: That is childlike and inappropriate if you want to be taken seriously.

Mr. Perigo is easily angered and has little control over what he says when angry and I disagree with much of what he says about the people he doesn't want get along with. But his views about life, philosophy, Ayn Rand, politics, living life to your highest potential, in general, I cannot find fault with. For many months on SoloHQ I was an avid reader of his writings and agreed and sanctioned much of it. There were many lively intelligent and adult discussions, much of it congenial. I'm still disappointed that it all came to an end with the breakup of SoloHQ. The finest moments of SoloHQ were very fine indeed. Linz was part of what made it work for awhile, for that I still have a measure of respect for him. Therefore, I find your misuse of his name contemptible.

Oops, should I have discussed that behind your back?

Mike,

My use of the name "Pigero" is simply the act of mimicking Pigero's antics. It sounds like "Figaro," which I thought fit well with his love of opera and his pompous dream of one day improving the world's appreciation for great music by offering public air-conducting seminars (which might be a good thing: I don't know about you, but I don't think that the music of the world's greatest composers stands on its own; watching a maudlin ass wave a baton around is probably just what is needed to supplement it and make it truly high art). And, obviously, "Pig" is the first part of "Pigero," which even you seem to appreciate is applicable to him. He can be a real pig of a man who, as you say, is easily angered and has very little control over himself. Besides, "Pigero" is very mild compared to the names that he has repeatedly called good, intelligent, productive people year after year (including Objectivists who have accomplished significantly more than he has).

Like MSK, I don't remember you expressing contempt for Pigero, to Pigero, when he was abusing others with much worse language than "Pigero." Perhaps you've done so on several of the countless occasions when he was throwing his typical tantrums? If so, I'm not remembering it.

J

Edited by Jonathan
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jonathan,

I found your "misspelling" of Perigo as Pigero quite appropriate and clever.

There has recently been several new attacks because SOLOP lost audience with the exodus of the ARI people. They need to dredge up some old smears like a Jerry Springer rerun and hope for a bite.

Michael,

What can you expect from a pig, but a grunt? I stopped reading SOLOP; It's bad for my blood pressure. Just ignore the insignificant buffoon.

Mick

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neologisms and deliberate misspellings are tolerated, it seems, at SOLO Passion to "describe" people and viewpoints ... at Objectivist Living.

Neologisms and deliberate misspellings are tolerated, it seems, at Objectivist Living to "describe" people and viewpoints ... at SOLO Passion.

It's the same MADness all over, I guess. Mutually Assured Denigration. *sigh*

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve,

There is a small difference. Over there the jargon is promoted, it is glorified, it is taught with acronym lists and social pressure, it is presented as the way philosophy could and should be, it is a banner to save the world with, all while The Branden Bashing Book is held up as Holy Gospel and a litmus test and promoted more than Atlas Shrugged.

Over here we just horse around some. Take a look. The people on this site spend their time actually producing stuff and jest sporadically. (I guess the horsing around stings more than it normally would because the jests hit some pretty fundamental truths.)

But maybe we should just forgive and forget...

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve,

I think Gandhi said something similar. It is still very true.

I find the atmosphere on Objectivist Living mush better than on SOLO.

I wish that people would remember Roark's example. "I don't think about you, Mr. Toohey."

Edited by Chris Grieb
Link to post
Share on other sites
I wish that people would remember Roark's example. "I don't think about you, Mr. Toohey."

Chris, some evils need to be thought about and understood -- and fought -- especially when they represent trends that are damaging to the spread of ideas we care about.

And clearly Rand herself thought long and hard about the Ellsworth Tooheys of the world.

Barbara

Link to post
Share on other sites

> some evils need to be thought about and understood -- and fought -- especially when they represent trends that are damaging to the spread of ideas we care about. And clearly Rand herself thought long and hard about the Ellsworth Tooheys of the world.

Barbara, I strongly agree: the uncontested absurdity becomes tomorrow's conventional wisdom as the saying goes.

Philosophies and systems of ideas have their moments when people are open to them and there is a mental space beyond mere physical survival for reflection, enough leisure and prosperity to consider them. And no censorship, de facto or de jure. I think there is a very great danger of those who don't understand or apply Objectivism correctly acting as a barrier between the ideas and a wider public. Rand's metaphor of lynching and burning a straw man not knowing it conceals the living body of the ideal applies here. That's a reason why, on the one hand, I think it's important to speak up when the immature or rage-filled or rationalistic (Diana, Linz, etc.) are driving themselves and others over a cliff or into a blind alley.

But, on the other hand, I for one have probably wasted too much time answering them. It won't do much good with people who are "too far gone" into certain kinds of intellectual and emotional errors. You have to appeal over the heads of those who think in the non-Objectivist way they do. In some cases perhaps to the next generation. That's why my solution, the only one I can really see as fundamental enough to work, is more thorough and systematic education and training. Systematic courses, materials, programs. My Objectivist education and training idea. Like the old NBI (or the Peikoff courses), but ultimately spreading beyond Objectivists and into the culture. Three prongs:

1. You can't spread or integrate Objectivism or fully apply it to your life (and work) till you understand it in depth, including how it relates to the history of ideas more systematically than is presented just in Ayn Rand's anthologized essays.

2. You can't understand your own philosophy and how to apply it and discuss it in the context of wide-ranging real world issues unless you've simultaneously studied history, the humanities, the social sciences, psychology . . . whatever are the missing pieces of the classical liberal arts education you didn't entire get from your professors.

3. You can't succeed in the world, get your life in order, persuade people, organize movements or companies, lead, write in a literate and forceful way unless you have studied the skills and methods of communication, social skills, organization and business, etc., etc.

Link to post
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