Subj : Voigt's Rude Behavior
To   : CONSTANCE RAWLEY
From : Curtis Johnson
Date : Thu Nov 02 2000 04:34 am

 -=> Quoting CONSTANCE RAWLEY to CURTIS JOHNSON <=-

 CR> Joseph Voigt claimed that Henson's reference to hatemongering was 
 CR> "untrue." I rebutted Voigt citing evidence which is strewn about 
 CR> the Matzdobre and Holysmoke Echoes for all to see. 

	You didn't refute it, however.  Indeed, I received no 
response from you to my message to you on this.  Do you want me to
post it again?
   
 CR> With regard to your attempt to justify such behavior, allow me to 
 
	Ah, so you did indeed read it.  Why, then, did you not
respond?

 CR> make a suggestion. Read or re-read Kurt Vonnegut's "Mother Night." 
 CR> 
 CR> The story's about an expatriate playwright who pretends to be a Nazi 
 CR> collaborator in order to broadcast propaganda containing coded
 CR> messages  to Allied Forces. He eventually realizes that his
 CR> hate-filled, racist,  anti-religious rants served to inspire the
 CR> elitist Nazi mindset behind  the attrocities. Though Vonnegut's story
 CR> is fiction, it nonetheless  makes a relevant point: 
 CR> 
 CR> "You must be careful what you pretend to be, because in the end, 
 CR> you are what you pretend to be." 
 
	An interesting comment, but of doubtful relevance since you
are reading hate when there doesn't seem to be any there.  The concept
of flame echoes, which I've tried to explain to you, seems to have
escaped you entirely.  Perhaps if you had tried to reply to my message
you would have had to think about it, and then it might have sunk in.

	If you are really interested in talking about philosophy,
you might wish to discuss this comment instead of carrying on an
unprovoked vendetta against another participant over what he says
*in entirely different echoes than this one.*
	Like most such sayings, this one contains a nugget of truth
but is far from universally applicable.  Vonnegut, of course, is a
fiction writer.  To write credible villains, a fiction writer has
to pretend to be the villain to some extent, particularly if the
story is written from the villain's POV.  When Agatha Christie
wrote her famous novel in which the narrator was revealed to be the
murderer at the end, was she any more of a murderer for having
written that book?  Are actors that portray villains any likelier
to be villains in real life?  I do get the impression that it is
actors who portray heroes that are more likely to misbehave very
badly in real life.  There are many cranks out there who pretend to
be another Einstein, yet hardly achieve the contribution to science
of the dullest lab drudge.  And so on.
	And as so often with one-line wisdoms, there is an opposite
which is at least as true:  Nietsche's famous comment to the effect
that in fighting monsters, one should take care not to become like 
that monster.  (This is close to what psychologists call projection.)
IOW, if one is pretending hard *not* to be something, one often is
or becomes that something.  
				
 CR> Voigt's posts are peddling hate. That's what hatemongers do. 
	
	As I pointed out, he is standing up to a bully who claims
he will sue anyone who makes religious statements not up to his
standard, and who goes to great lengths to track down their 
addresses.  The most famous example was his $2500 reward to anyone
supplying the home address of someone who dared include his e-mail
address, "jesusonacid. . ." in his posts.  (He, of course, renenged
on the money.)  One of the recommended ways to stand up to bullies,
of course, is to do exactly what they are demanding that you not
do. I've told you, Joseph has told you, and Joseph has told the
bully, that this is precisely what he is doing.  I note that you 
have yet to give us any indication that such *deeds* on the part 
of that bully bother you at all, yet such are surely more dangerous
to Christianity!
 	In this case, standing up to such a bully would involve 
blasphemy.  Blasphemy is not necessarily hate.  Sometimes it's just
humor (Lucian does hilarious parody of the Graeco-Roman myths, for
example).  And Joseph's posts to that bully are so deliberately
over-the-top that they become funny, IMHO.  Of course, one need not
be of brittle faith or prudish cast to find them not funny, but
one should at least be able to recognize that they are not motivated
by hatred.

	And speaking of "peddling hate". . . in the very same packet
as this message, you inform us WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE WHATEVER that
Joseph is a "pervert."
	I think you'd better think long and hard on Nietzsche's saying.



--- Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 [NR]
 * Origin: America's favorite whine - it's your fault! (1:261/1000)

.