About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Forward one pageLast Page


Post 20

Thursday, December 25, 2003 - 7:39amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Merry Christmas Morrow! I've chosen to ignore the insulting manner this holiday season, so took no humbrage at Tremblay's response.

I say again to everyone, and Tremblay in particular, Merry Christmas. My wish is for everyone to experience an abundance of peace and good will during the holiday season and into the new year!

Post 21

Thursday, December 25, 2003 - 1:29pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
=======================================

As they used to say in the old days, "Hear, all ye good people, hear what this brilliant and eloquent speaker has to say!"

Or as they say nowadays, "Hear, hear!"

Happy Boxing day y'all, and happy new year.

=======================================
=======================================

Post 22

Thursday, December 25, 2003 - 4:29pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"I am interested in this from the psychological aspect, as I am fascinated in how mistruths and myths evolve."

Fuck you.


"Well that doesn’t surprise me Francois. A pretty savvy guy, 2BitsWorth, posted a “Merry Christmas” message on another forum yesterday, and you answered him by saying, “What, you still come here ? Why are you so eager to propagate your unwanted nonsense ? No one cares.” "

Since when do I have to be polite to a statist ? He's an avowed statist posting repeatedly on a libertarian forum, spamming and arguing. He has no place there.

Post 23

Thursday, December 25, 2003 - 5:00pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Perhaps a review of the story and movie "Scrooge" would be in order, to gain an appreciation that life is bigger and more complex than a single life. Surely a newlywed would appreciate that aspect?

May the spirit of the season envelope you Tremblay with a revelation such as the mythical Scrooge experienced!

While they seem to be rebuffed, my sincerest wishes for prosperity and good fortune are offered, and the heartiest of congratulations on entering into matrimony.

Post 24

Thursday, December 25, 2003 - 5:39pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Scrooge is altruist propaganda. And stop playing victim. I'm not interested in your whining, and the only enlightenment needed is yours.

Post 25

Thursday, December 25, 2003 - 6:27pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Tsk, tsk, tsk. Altruistic propaganda? Perhaps. It indeed supports the beliefs of the author and other similar-thinking persons - in that context yes it would be a fictional propaganda - just like "Atlas Shrugged" or any number of movies listed in this thread.

Should we then conclude then that "if one is open and receptive to the propaganda contained therein then the subject matter is a worthy and acceptable piece of literature?" Conversely, should we also conclude that "if one is not open and receptive to the propaganda contained therein then the subject matter is useless and pointless?"

Altruism has its benefits to society - if one accepts the concept and need for a society. Of course if one subordinates the concept and needs of society to the self-serving actions of the individual, then altruism is merely the act of wasting resources at one's own expense.

Be that as it may, one should not forget that all "propaganda" is not false. Propaganda is information that supports a cause. In the case at hand it merely supports my original offering of good will to you, which still stands.

It is a terrible state of affairs that one has to argue to have their genuine best wishes accepted - why is that?

Post 26

Thursday, December 25, 2003 - 7:17pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
=======================================

> >> Morrow >>> I am interested in this from the psychological aspect, as I am fascinated in how mistruths and myths evolve.

>> Francois >> Fuck you.

Perhaps Monsieur Francois, you mean, “Baisez vous!” It has such a nicer, ‘je ne sais quoi’ ring to it, don’t you think? Oh, and I just love that nifty little French tactic of yours – in avoiding all those difficult questions. Tu m'emmerdes. C'est la vie! As the French say, “Une fois un troll toujours un troll.”


=======================================

>>> Morrow >>> Well that doesn’t surprise me Francois. A pretty savvy guy, 2BitsWorth, posted a “Merry Christmas” message on another forum yesterday, and you answered him by saying, “What, you still come here ? Why are you so eager to propagate your unwanted nonsense ? No one cares.”

>> Since when do I have to be polite to a statist ?

I would not describe 2Bits as a Statist. However, in your case I would be inclined to do so. While you preach Objectivism, I believe this is just a front for your real passion: Socialism. I’ll bet you haven’t said one bad word on any of your three sites (or this one) about the evils of the Socialist, Saddam Hussein. Yet you have delivered truckloads of anti-US propaganda. You attack the Bush led Coalition of nations that saved the Iraqi people from a Socialist tyrant (every bit as bad as the Socialist Hitler); yet say nothing bad about that tyrant. If Ayn Rand were alive today she would tell you that you are no Objectivist. For a true definition of yourself, look in the mirror. You will see a left winged, anti-American, Saddam supporting Socialist, whose hobby is to tell everyone he is an Objectivist. Honte sur vous, menteur! (Shame on you, liar!)

=======================================

>> He's an avowed statist posting repeatedly on a libertarian forum, spamming and arguing. He has no place there.


That’s the kind of idiotic thing an opponent of 2Bits’ says, on that same board. The troll in question, Provocateur, is similar to you. He has a sulphuric hated of the U.S., and, like you, his name is French (taken from Le provocateur d'agent – provocateur meaning agitator). Like you, he answers no questions, hurling abuse at his opponents instead, to cover his lack of answers. He often makes grammatical mistakes, and puts his address down as Sol III. Perhaps he means Quebec, Canada, eh? Eh Monsieur? Monsieur L’agent Provoceteur? Eh, Monsieur Sparke-plurg? Hmmm? Hors de avec lui, vous peu de wretch! Admettez que vous êtes un
espion! Un agent ennemi de capot interne! Un imbécile, un dimwit et un poisson enceinte! Admettez immédiatement!


=======================================


>> Francois >> Scrooge is altruist propaganda.


Not quite. Scrooge was the story of a mean hearted bastard. Ayn Rand often praised businessmen, and described them as the Atlas that held up the world. She wasn’t talking about mean hearted old tyrants like Scrooge. Cretinous pinchfists like him give capitalism a bad name, and provide fuel to Statists, just as you do.


=======================================


>And stop playing victim.


I this what you will say to your new wife after you beat her with the French Garlic Sausage that she forgot to buy enough of? And when she weeps, I suppose you roar, “Cessez de jouer la victime, vous fille stupide! Sortez maintenant, et mettez ce costume de dauphin dessus! Vous savez quoi faire!”
(Stop playing the victim, you stupid girl! Now get out, and put that dolphin costume on! You know what to do!)


=======================================


> I'm not interested in your whining, and the only enlightenment needed is yours.


Actually, Francois would be very interested in any kind of whining, if only people would provide that service for him, which they don’t. Oh, and especially if they dressed up in dolphin costumes. . .
See his instructive page on the subject – the one he proudly edited:
http://www.insolitology.com/guides/fuckdolphin.htm


=======================================
=======================================

Post 27

Thursday, December 25, 2003 - 7:32pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hey morons, here are two crosses and six nails. Go do the Jesus. No one cares.

Post 28

Thursday, December 25, 2003 - 8:25pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Francois: RE movie stuff.
I have two films in production, which I will link you to, and several films that are a bit too horrible to be shown in public, as they were filmed when I was young and stupid. I'd be happy to write some stuff up for your site, which I will check out in the next day or so. I'll send you some insights and you can use what you like.

Tea Party, a greelit, woefully underfunded film, (But progressing steadily) will be complete some time after the second coming.

The Simon Jester Papers is basically my way of saying "Fuck You" to Micheal Moore. In souless hollywood terms you might call it Bowling for Columine Meets This is Spinal Tap. (Mockumentary)

http://www.freewebs.com/aesthetictech/film.htm
Here is the synopsis-light page.

Happy Festivus !

Post 29

Thursday, December 25, 2003 - 8:36pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Thanks John Shaw. I've added your site to my links page. I'll also follow it closely.

Post 30

Friday, December 26, 2003 - 10:43amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
DAMN! That was just....well that was all just sad, was what that was!

1. "Altruism" is NOT a synonym for "goodwill toward men". it is a very specific doctrine, created by Auguste Comte, which states that you must put interests of OTHERS above SELF -- in all cases -- as a moral principle.
In this instance of "scrooge", Bob Cratchett and his family were not fulfilling Altruism, because they WANTED decent food, they WANTED warm heat in the winter, and they WANTED Tiny Tim to survive.

"If one accepts the value of a society", as Mr. Morrow and 2bits seem to want to define it, then anything goes, eh? The only value in "socity" is that individuals gain, and the only way that individuals gain is by FREE, NONCOERCIVE TRADE. I'm all for generocity, myself, IF the generocity is deserved, and if it is MY CHOSEN method of generocity.
Scrooge was a stench-riddgen pinchfisted gasbag, yes, but this does NOT indict capitalism, or indicate that "society" has any legitimate interests beyond protecting INDIVIDUALS' ability to trade with one another, and otherwise peacefully interact.
IF Francois does not want to accept your "sincere heartfelt holiday wishes", then why should that degenerate into the pissing-contest that it became? Because you guys both seem to want to pound him mercilessly, and make assertions with no attempt to back them up.
Read up on Altruism, friends. Read David Kelley's book "Unrugged individualism". Learn something, and stop prattling on about the "selfish interests of the Individual" as the root of all evil because (mark my words), you'll eventually be hearing those self-same bromides about "selfish individualism" piped through loudspeakers at a fascist rally in whatever country you're from, if things don't change.

If the sum total of all you can think to do this holiday season is praise somebody for giving fifty cents to some homeless street guy, then I pity you, AND I pity the homeless guy.
What about helping the guy get to the point where he doesn't NEED the damned handouts?
What about instilling some form of VALUES in the guy? What about -- oh, I dunno -- getting rid of government impediments to the guy trying to start a business? What about not sitting around on your asses bleating about how bad business and capitalism and "greed" are, and instead maybe CREATING a business to help the poor starving wretches?

You people make me sick. If you still don't get it, then we still can't help you.

"Charity" is nothing more than a temporary bandage over a problem which is BETTER SOLVED by individual initiative, and the sort of values you hate Objectivists for espousing:

1. Reason -- which enables people to look at their situation with some form of clarity -- to see where they are.

2. PURPOSE -- which allows people to live their lives in something other than a pathetic, half-consious daze, drifting from one day to the next, one party to the next....one paycheck to the next. Purpose -- where they want to go.

3. and Self-esteem -- the principled awareness that they DESERVE better, and that if they WORK for it, they can do better.

So instead of gang-banging Francois because you don't think he's "charitable" enough, go shove a yule-log up your asses and die.

THat's MY Christmas wish!

Post 31

Friday, December 26, 2003 - 12:49pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"go shove a yule-log up your asses and die"

Oh dear. That's even worse (^______^)

Post 32

Friday, December 26, 2003 - 1:00pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
What the hell DID you do to these guys, anyway?
I mean....what was up with you and 2BitLoser, or whatever his name is?

Post 33

Friday, December 26, 2003 - 2:28pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Henry - All I did was offer holiday greetings to the man - that's it - period.

I did not argue with Francois, except in an attempt to convince him that the greetings and congratulations on his recent marriage were genuine.

I did not attack him. Did not dispute, in fact, I agreed with his proposition that "Scrooge" could be defined as "altruistic propaganda" in the same context as any author writes in support of their beliefs. At its core it is a simple concept, why support something that you don't believe in?

The suggestion to review the movie "Scrooge" was a simple contextual reference to the other movies being cited in this thread, most of which are pure fiction, as is "Scrooge." To suggest that "Planet of the Apes" has some philosophically redeeming value, or significance, while "Scrooge" does not is to arbitrarily closing your mind. The acrimonious response to a well-wisher is more representative of the movie "Planet of the Apes" than any civil interaction in any of the movies cited in this thread. In that context then, "Scrooge" could be used as a barometer to balance the uncivil tones for which Francois is infamous.

Now to your diatribe. You state "In this instance of "scrooge", Bob Cratchett and his family were not fulfilling Altruism, because they WANTED decent food, they WANTED warm heat in the winter, and they WANTED Tiny Tim to survive." Your assertion is self-evident but I think that you missed the point. It was Scrooge and his behavior that is the point of the story, the Cratchett's did not have the means to be philanthropists as Scrooge did. In fact, the Cratchett's did not want charity, did not seek charity.

I have read some on objectivist theory, quite a bit actually. I do attempt to relate to that which avowed objectivists hold dear. The very fact that this extensive conversation is being held on a simple greeting is indicative that objectivists, at least in this conversation, do not do the same. While I accept the proposition that I should act in my own self-interests, you reject that the society has no value as it relates to the individual's self-interests. Or that seems to be the case in this conversation.

So who is being more open-minded here?

As Francois provided the reference, I give you a passage which seems to be pertinent in this situation:

"This does not entail that we should be destructive or expolitative. It is in our best interest to cooperate harmoniously with society at large, since we all depend on other people for our survival and happiness. No one produces his own food, lodging or tools anymore. Modernity, if nothing else, demands good will. Furthermore, friendship, love, intellectual discussion, are all values which can only be pursued with other people."

This can be found at:

http://www.whatisobjectivism.com/explained/page7.htm

While I am not an expert on the subject of objectisism I am pretty certain that the interaction in this forum does not meet the criteria offered by Francois as being "in his best interests."

And finally to the crux of the matter I offer you the following, also provided by Francois:

"...a proper ethics must start from reason, to arrive at a veridical idea of what our self-interest is. It is true that everyone acts in his perceived self-interest - we do things because we think they are beneficial for ourselves. Unfortunately, this is sometimes a delusion. We often do things that we think are beneficial, but are really destructive - such as shunning a source of well-being in the name of ideology..."

That about sums it up for now. And to think all this was generated by a simple "Merry Christmas." Do I dare wish anybody a Happy New Year?

Post 34

Friday, December 26, 2003 - 4:09pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
2bits: if you did not intend to attack Francois, you are not the problem. I took issue with the actions of Morrow, who seemed to be intentionally taking the debate to a subhuman level (pictures of Franc and his wife, et al.)
The other points will be addressed in a future post -- if I ever get around to it. The point is that no matter what the beef was between you and Franc, Mr. Morrow had NO business taking things to the level he did, and I will VOCIFEROUSLY denounce any such bullshit, when it comes across my screen.
So whatever problems you and Franc have, do NOT even attempt to defend Morrow's pathetic slur-campaign.
IF your holiday-wishes were sincere, then you should have just swallowed hard, and gone one about your day. If our friend Francois didn't want to accept them graciously, that is HIS business. NO reason to start a pissing contest on a different message-board.

It was bad form, and I stand by my original assessment.

Post 35

Friday, December 26, 2003 - 4:23pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Mr. 2bits:
The point which you BLITHELY glide past, in your efforts to cast Objectivism in a bad light it (and WE) do NOT deserve, is that Mr. Morrow attacked Francois in a most grotesque and insipid fashion -- looking up/posting his personal info, blathering about Allison, etc.

You are obviously not an Objectivist. That is fine. I MYSELF am the person most likely on this board to advocate dialog with libertarians etc. But to assert that the interests of "society" trump those of the individual is a fundamentally EVIL notion.
The supposed interests of "society" have been at the base of EVERY grotesque affront to human decency, from the "Inquisition" to the recent passage of the so-called "patriot" act here in the USA. "Society" is nothing more than a mass of individuals, and to the extent that ANY of those individuals are seen as expendable -- even the "rich fatcats" such as Scrooge -- then we are ALL in immenant danger of slavery.
If you cannot understand that, then we have no further basis for dialog. You will either continue to misrepresent Objectivism, and launch unprovoked attacks on somebody JUST for failure to accept your holiday wishes, or you will address the points I have raised.
The choice is yours, Mr. 2Bits.

I am probably the FIRST one here willing to dialog with everybody (including fundamentalist christians), but I will NOT tolerate unprovoked personal slurs against persons who do not deserve such treatment.
Either admit that Mr. Morrow was wrong in his approach, or (to put it bluntly) BLOW me.

Post 36

Friday, December 26, 2003 - 4:29pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Henry, listen. All I did was tell one of them (or both, I'm not sure) to go away from this board and Liberty Forum. Because he or they are not libertarian or Objectivist. Anything beyond that has me completely confused.

I can say, however, that Alison and I were both amused by the pathetic attempts at slander. There's no harm done. But I still think they should leave.

Post 37

Friday, December 26, 2003 - 5:38pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Mr Emrich I will began by unequivocably stating that I do not condone any "unprovoked slur campaign" - by me, for me or against me.

Now to address your other points:

"...your efforts to cast Objectivism in a bad light..."

I apologize if pointing out, IMO, what appeared to be inconsistencies in what I have read and how I was received. My wishes were sincere and, upon realizing that Mr. Tremblay had recently married, I added the additional good will. I am a strong proponent of the institution of marriage and view it as a wonderfully happy event.

"You are obviously not an Objectivist..."

That is correct. However, that does not mean nor indicate that I am not interested in learning of the subject. One learns by reading, asking questions, engaging in debate, comparing ideas, etc. I did not, and do not, reject objectivism out of hand - I don't know enough about the subject one way or the other. Most of what I do know has been gleaned from the sites of Mr. Tremblay, Mr. Kelly and ARI. Heck, I even went and bought "Atlas Shrugged" recently. Haven't read it yet, it's next on the agenda.

". . .But to assert that the interests of "society" trump those of the individual is a fundamentally EVIL notion. . ."

I don't recall making that assertion. I do recall making the assertion, in the context of this discussion, that good will within a society is a beneficial atmosphere. In my previous post I cited a reference or two from an objectivist site which seems to support the same thesis.

"...You will either continue to misrepresent Objectivism, and launch unprovoked attacks on somebody JUST for failure to accept your holiday wishes, or you will address the points I have raised..."

I've not misrepresented objectivism to the best of my knowledge. Nor have I launched any attacks, provoked or otherwise. I did address the rude response(s), a matter of dignity and personal pride. My reaction is not unlike your reaction, we both felt the need to address the subject.

"I am probably the FIRST one here willing to dialog with everybody (including fundamentalist christians), but I will NOT tolerate unprovoked personal slurs against persons who do not deserve such treatment.
Either admit that Mr. Morrow was wrong in his approach, or (to put it bluntly) BLOW me."

Your point on unprovoked personal slurs is well-taken. Unfortunately your first point about dialog is somewhat compromised by your last statement. In fact, it is somewhat similar to the "you're either with us, or against us" doctrine, an unacceptable form of dialog which allows no compromise, no mutual understanding.

As for Mr. and Mrs. Tremblay - I wish them the best. You are correct that it is entirely up to him/her/them to graciously accept or not. It is equally up to me to accept rudeness directly aimed at myself. He chose to be ungracious, I chose to address the rudeness.

Post 38

Friday, December 26, 2003 - 6:53pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
=======================================


I took this to another thread, called ‘Trolls and Spades – Take 2’.
http://www.solohq.com/Forum/messages/27/782.shtml?1072489904

It was a response to this thread, but also to the thread started by Joy Bushnell, called, ‘Trolls and Spades, a new look at an old problem’.

Hope you stick around 2BitsWorth – I might be banned soon, according to the owner. So what else is new?


=======================================
=======================================

Post 39

Friday, December 26, 2003 - 7:33pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
BTW folks, the original post that started all of this was posted on LibertyForums.com and was addressed to everyone who cared to read it. It consisted of the following simple post:

"Holiday greetings to all!
..
Let us put aside our differences and join together during the holiday season in the hope and prayer for peace and a prosperous New Year.
..
Merry Christmas to you and your families."

After an almost 6 month hiatus on the board, Mr. Tremblay reappears with the following reply:

"What, you still come here ? Why are you so eager to propagate your unwanted nonsense ? No one cares."

My reply was simply:

"Merry Christmas Tremblay. Merry, Merry Christmas."

And the final reply by Tremblay:

"Stop playing victim."

That's the whole original thread. You can verify if you wish by visiting the forum at:

http://www.libertyforums.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=001199

A slight bit different than portrayed here by Francois when he states "Henry, listen. All I did was tell one of them (or both, I'm not sure) to go away from this board and Liberty Forum. Because he or they are not libertarian or Objectivist. Anything beyond that has me completely confused."

His "what, you still come here" is completely misleading in that he was the one who hadn't been there in almost 6 months, I had been there all along. The last exchange on that board was June 12, 2003. I urge you to review the thread at:

http://www.libertyforums.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=000297

Two other exchanges should completely set the context, review them if you like at:

http://www.libertyforums.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=000255

http://www.libertyforums.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=000297

Good night. Oh what the hell, I'll take my chances . . . Happy New Year!

Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Forward one pageLast Page


User ID Password or create a free account.