RE: MD Neo-Nazi Racism and the MOQ go together like peanutbutter and broken glass. Sandwich anyone?

From: Paul Vogel (nitzke@hotmail.com)
Date: Mon Jun 21 2004 - 15:50:11 BST

  • Next message: Richard Loggins: "Re: MD COSMOTHEISM"

    Dear Platt, and to any "open-minded" MOQ'ers:

    "MD Neo-Nazi Racism and the MOQ go together like peanutbutter and broken
    glass. Sandwich anyone?"

    Such "Ad Hominem" personal attacks like the above slanderous bigoted
    nonsense are the usual mode of the "intellectually and morally bankrupt"
    social-marxist dogmatist.

    Here is the Whole Truth about "Cosmotheism" that David Buchanan
    and his own ilk of "Selfishly Subjective and Egotistical Egoists" just can't
    abide:

    An Interview with Dr. Pierce
    http://forums.originaldissent.com/showthread.php?t=12548

    Cosmotheism is a religion which positively asserts there is an internal
    purpose in life and in the cosmos, and there is an essential unity, or
    consciousness that binds all living beings, and all of the inorganic cosmos,
    as one.

    Our true human identity is: we are the cosmos, made self-aware and
    self-conscious by evolution.

    Our undeniable human purpose, is to know and to
    complete ourselves as conscious individuals, and also
    as a self-aware species, and thereby to co-evolve
    with the cosmos towards total and universal awareness,
    and towards the ever-higher perfection of consciousness
    and being.

    Required Reading For ALL Cosmotheists:

    Cosmotheism/Classical Pantheism:

    http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/panpsychism/#1

    http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/panpsychism/#5

    The intellectual level is the Highest Level for Pirsig's MOQ, Platt, but,
    the Highest Level for True Cosmotheists is DIVINE CONSCIOUSNESS!

    Best regards,

    Paul Vogel

    http://www.cosmotheism.net

    >From: "Platt Holden" <pholden@sc.rr.com> Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org To:
    >moq_discuss@moq.org, owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk Subject: RE: MD Ronald
    >Reagan Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 17:05:50 -0400
    >
    >Hi all,
    >
    >When a liberal's doctrine is challenged, he goes bonkers with a personal,
    >ad hominem, attack. Witness DMB's latest screed in which he calls me
    >variously "a knee-jerk ignoramus," "a right-wing ignoramus," and a "neo-
    >Nazi" in addition to being "foolish," "inane," "stupid," and "boring."
    >
    >Sad isn't it? But I take comfort in the knowledge that when one finds it
    >necessary to resort to name calling, Pirsig sets him straight:
    >
    >"To say that a comment is "stupid" is to imply that the person who makes it
    >is stupid. This is the "ad hominem" argument: meaning, "to the person."
    >Logically it is irrelevant. If Joe says the sun is shining and you argue
    >that Joe is insane, or Joe is a Nazi or Joe is stupid, what does this tell
    >us about the condition of the sun? That the ad hominem argument is
    >irrelevant is usually all the logic texts say about it, but the MOQ allows
    >one to go deeper and make what may be an original contribution. It says the
    >ad hominem argument is a form of evil. The MOQ divides the hominem, or
    >"individual" into four parts: inorganic, biological, and intellectual. Once
    >this analysis is made, the ad hominem argument can be defined more clearly:
    >It is an attempt destroy the intellectual patterns of an individual by
    >attacking his social status. In other words, a lower form of evolution is
    >being used to destroy a higher form. That is evil." (Lila's Child, note
    >140)
    >
    >Case closed.
    >
    >Best, Platt

    >From: David Buchanan <DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org>
    >Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
    >To: "'moq_discuss@moq.org'" <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    >Subject: MD Neo-Nazi Racism and the MOQ go together like peanutbutter and
    >broken glass. Sandwich anyone?
    >Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 15:26:40 -0600
    >
    >Wim, Mark and all non-fascist MOQers:
    >
    >Mark Steven Heyman wrote:
    >Right on que, Platt mentions "The Bell Curve" as scientific evidence
    >in support of the idea that one "race" of humans is inferior to
    >another. I was wrong when I said no scientific evidence exists to
    >support this statement; I should have said no CREDIBLE scientific
    >evidence.
    >
    >dmb says:
    >Racism isn't the only thing Holden and Volger have in common. They are also
    >both fond of quoting Pirsig's "germ" passages to justify their murderous
    >hatred. They both think everything left of center is Marxist. They both
    >think Pirsig is compatible with their fasicst views. Watching the various
    >threads unfold was both disturbing and amusing. I joked that Platt might
    >find some friends at Vogel's site. But thanks to Mark's efforts in exposing
    >the Pioneer fund's fascist heart and deceptively packaged psuedoscience,
    >now
    >I see that they already had friends in common...
    >
    >The same MSH wrote:
    >Platt is also impressed by an advertisement ...signed by 52 "experts",
    >If you look at the Pioneer Fund web site, you'll see that EVERY major
    >grantee, who happened to be alive at the time the ad was composed, is
    >listed among the "expert" signatories. Others of the signatories
    >have published papers in the fascist journal, Mankind, which is
    >maintained by Pioneer funds, or in other similar journals. ...A much more
    >useful list would be the one containing the thousands of names of
    >scientists
    >who didn't sign the advertisement.
    >
    >dmb says:
    >There are parallels in many of the sciences. Bogus science is used to muddy
    >the waters on issues like global warming and biological evolution, for
    >example. The right-wingers have hatched think tanks and media outlets that
    >are equally psuedo-intellectual. Conversatives tend to hate the eggheads
    >and
    >the elitists, as they like to call them, but they also want the
    >respectability and status that comes from scientific and intellectual
    >credibility. They sense that its a good thing that people should have, but
    >they don't really know waht it is. I mean, Rush Limbaugh doesn't even
    >deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence with Noam Chomsky. Ooops. This
    >is what Pirsig was talking about when he said social values can be
    >intellectually defended. But it is the social values that are being
    >defended
    >and the style or manner hardly matters - except when it serves to hide,
    >disguise and obscure the substance of the assertion, as is almost always
    >the
    >case with the pseudointellectual nonsense asserted by Platt and PV. These
    >guys clearly don't know their crackpots from a hole in the ground...
    >
    >S.J. Gould:
    >"'The Bell Curve' ..presents no compelling data to support its
    >anachronistic
    >social Darwinism, so I can only conclude that its success in winning
    >attention must reflect the depressing temper of our time -- a historical
    >moment of unprecedented ungenerosity, when a mood for slashing social
    >programs can be power-fully abetted by an argument that beneficiaries
    >cannot
    >be helped, owing to inborn cognitive limits expressed as low I.Q. scores."
    >
    >dmb continues:
    >"Unprecedented ungenerosity" is a very generous way to put it. And it has
    >become even worse since he wrote it. I believe Platt and Paul and their
    >sympathizers are quite sincere and simply do not understand that they are
    >on
    >the wrong side in a larger metaphysical battle, one depicted quite well in
    >Lila. Platt does not even see that his views are a kissin cousin of the
    >freak show called Cosmotheism. And VP thinks he is not a racist. He
    >re-defines the word in a racist way that allows him to escape the charge
    >and
    >hate the jews at the same time. I would hope that the irrationality, if not
    >absurdity, of such a move is obvious to all reasonable creatures. But more
    >importantly, I hope that these guys serve to demonstrate what social level
    >values look like as they are exhibited in particular individuals. The
    >titantic battle between social and intellectual values plays it self out in
    >ways large and small, in different cultures and contexts, but we can learn
    >to see it well enough to see it in the guy next to us and in ourselves.
    >
    >Pirsig in LILA:
    >"The gigantic power of socialism and fascism, which have overwhelmed this
    >century, is explained by a conflict of levels of evolution. This conflict
    >explains the driving force behind Hitler not as an insane search for power
    >but as an all-consuming glorification of social authority and hatred of
    >intellectualism."
    >
    >Ken Wilber in his INTEGRAL PSYCHOLOGY:
    >..........................................."Auschwitz is the result of the
    >many products of rationality being used in irrational ways. Auschwitz is
    >rationality hijacked by tribalism, by an ethnocentric mythology of blood
    >and
    >soil and race, rooted in the land, romantic in its dispositions, barbaric
    >in
    >its ethnic cleansing. You cannot seriously attempt genocide with a bow and
    >arrow; but you can attempt it with steel and coal, combustion engines and
    >gas chambers, machine guns and atomic bombs. These are not rational desires
    >by any definition of rational; these are ethnocentric tribalism
    >commandeering the tools of an advanced consciousness and using them
    >presicely for the lowest of the lowest motives. Auschwitz is the endgame,
    >not of reason, but of tribalim."
    >
    >dmb says:
    >Is uncritical patriotism so very different from the "glorification of
    >social
    >authority". Is racism so very different from an "ethnocentric mythology"?
    >I'm not saying that Platt is building gas chambers. The differences are
    >many. But the similarities revolve around the desire to assert social level
    >values and/or attack intellectual level values. This basic distinction is
    >what puts fascism and its cousins on the right on the wrong side of the
    >evolutionary struggle. So, when guys like Platt and Paul imagine that
    >Pirsig
    >supports their value system, they couldn't be more mistaken. They love a
    >book in which they are depicted as the enemy of intellect and evolution
    >itself.
    >
    >Similarly, one of the more important ideas in drama is that the bad guy is
    >a
    >hero in his own world. Bad guys who know they are bad guys, like Lex
    >Luther,
    >are for children, as are superheros. But in books and movies and plays for
    >us grown ups, the bad guy doesn't know he's a bad guy, cause that's how it
    >is in real life. Bad guys do not decide to be evil, its just that they are
    >so badly mistaken, so bloody wrong, that the consequeces of their limited
    >beliefs are just naturally so. This is true in drama because its true
    >psychologically. I'm sure Hitler thought himself a hero. So does Bush, who
    >honestly cannot recall making a mistake. It has to be psychological because
    >nobody's that stupid. No, it involves a kind of selective blindness that is
    >more complex than mere dullness of mind and surely is related to our own
    >personal cultural immmune system that attacks anything that seems alien.
    >And
    >so when a social level value system encounters intellectual level values,
    >they are seen as "germs". This explains bot Hitler's anti-intellectualism
    >and Platt's hatred Chomsky and Zinn in favor of Rush, the Bell Curvers and
    >the rest of his crypto-fascist mentors. This explains why PV views
    >legitimate science as a political enemy.
    >
    >There are a million examples in the world, but why waste two good ones who
    >are already known so well by all MOQers?
    >
    >Thanks,
    >dmb
    >
    >P.S. Wim, this post was awfully fun for me so you probably ought not read
    >it.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    >Mail Archives:
    >Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    >Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    >MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
    >
    >To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    >http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
    >

    _________________________________________________________________
    FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now!
    http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 21 2004 - 16:20:49 BST