Mind-Memes

Dear Jesse,

Because your forum box is not set to "receive" I'm going to post this letter here.

Prok

Dear Jesse,

In the thread called "Catch This Bomb", you said you had edited out personal attacks. I don't see any editing marks, though. [Does anybody see them? I can't find any]. Then you closed the thread. I'm not sure why. I think there has been a convention that when the editing takes place, we can see the perlustration as follows: [edited for personal attacks by Jesse Linden]

I posted a comment after Seth placed in a positive (or at the very least, troublingly neutral) light the anarchists and terrorists Kropotkin and Bakunin. Pyotr Kropokin, a Russian anarchist active in the 1920s, was most famous for talking positively about terrorism as the "propaganda of the deed".

All sorts of chic hard-left French intellectuals were going around talking about the "propaganda of the deed" after 9/11 -- it was sickening.

In my reply to Seth, I said: "No, Seth, you're living under the burden of some terrible weight of mind memes generated by all those violent fucks like Bakunin and Kropotkin, the forefathers of modern-day terrorism. Shame on you!"

I wouldn't call this a personal attack, whatever the strong language employed -- strong language that is fitting when you find someone going soft on Russian terror. I'd call it a pointed reply that illustrates Seth, like many American college students (or adults stuck with college ideals they never further researched), perceives something "radical chic" and "cool" about a terrorist like Kropotkin or Bakunin, known for their kewl anarchy and less for their embrace of the methods of violence and the "end justifies the means" which became the Bolshevik credo. But every Russian knows they celebrated violence and were a forefarther of modern terrorism and an antecedent to events like Beslan and 9/11. It was no accident, comrade, that numerous streets in the former Soviet Union were named after Kropotkin and Bakunin.

Maybe you consider accusing someone of suffering from "mind memes" some kind of personal attack. I'd say it was just illustrating that they suffer from mind-memes, i.e. cliches that cause them to have bad ideologies, even those justifying terrorism.

Maybe you think "anything goes" and "there is no God" and we can't make a judgement about what is a "bad ideology"? Did you never meet a "bad ideology" you didn't like LOL? Well, I think there are limits. I think terrorism and violence are pretty much at those outer limits. I think it's ok to call those ideologies and ideologues what they are in a forum like this.

Prok

The personal attack was done by someone else, not you. And the post was deleted, not edited. I know because I saw it before it was deleted and the thread locked.

Again, not everything is about you.

I didn't think it was about me. I was merely trying to investigate it. But since I didn't see any signed perlustration-type italics, I couldn't see what it was. And I had to conclude that it wasn't me. But I couldn't tell. Whether a new Linden had a different MO. That is they just left it but closed it. That's all.

I flag it because I think it's a good example of the kind of sharp comment that I make that is not a personal attack, just a sharp comment. But it's the kind of thing that people think is a personal attack because they feel slighted. Well, I feel slighted when the celebrate Russian terrorists, too.

I know I said I wasn't going to tease you anymore, but I changed my mind.

"Perlustration" - used twice in one thread, probably the most frequent use of the word in this century. I hear you are a writer, you likely missed the class where they taught write so your readers can understand you unless you like being an obscure throwback spouting archaisms, in which case Joyce has you beaten by miles. Perhapƒ you could increaƒe the comprehenƒability by uƒing ancient or odd Łǽţţəřφǿяμσ as well.

"Mind-Meme" - So what sort of a meme is there that doesn't exist in a mind? Do you also misuse "paradigm"?

You can't get through to Jesse to complain about your misunderstanding of forum moderation so post an open letter which is likely not to not be read? Funny my PMs go through just fine. Perhaps you aren't well connected enough.

There's no need to "investigate," Prokofy. I made the personal attack in the "Catch this bomb!" thread. The attack was deleted by the Lindens, and they issued a personal warning to me. They were right in deleting the attack, and acted correctly in issuing the warning. I understood the possible consequences when I said what I said, and I believe the Lindens acted in an appropriate manner.

I don't apologize for the attack itself, however, because the essence of it was true. It was done in the manner of holding a fist up to the face of a schoolyard bully who threatens to chase after you all over the building, and telling him to back off.

On a slightly different matter, let me respond to your repost above, taken from the "Catch this bomb!" thread.

You don't know what you're talking about.

You don't know what a meme is, as your attempted "prokofyism", mind memes, misuses the concept. (You speak as though memes are a commonly accepted intellectual paradigm, which they are not.)

Further, you don't know anything about me. You speculate that I am a college student, or an adult stuck in a college-age intellectual rut. No, I'm afraid all you've demonstrated is that you read other people's posts selectively and self-centeredly, and create conclusions that best serve yourself.

You also speculate that I support terrorism, from the mere fact that I invited Ulrika to discuss historical anarchy from the point of view of what anarchists like Bakunin, Kropotkin, Thoreau, Tolstoy, and Thomas Jefferson wrote. While some anarchists celebrated violence, many did not. Condemning all anarchist thinking because of the views of a few is like condemning Martin Luther King's tactics because Stokely Carmichael advocated violence in the defense of black rights.

You don't know what anarchy is. You don't know what terrorism is. The reason why you don't know is not because you haven't done the reading, although frankly, I wonder if you have. The reason why you don't know is because, once again, you've read selectively and self-centeredly, with the intent of cramming everything into your own, self-serving world view. Thus you cite as evidence the fact that "streets in the former Soviet Union were named after Kropotkin and Bakunin," a proof that so obviously pathetic and embarrassing that I have to wonder whether you deliberately engage in intellectual suicide.

More to the real point of this thread; Prokofy, you have, on several occasions, stated your intention to follow me around these "schoolyard forums" and offer "corrections." (If you like, I can quote you.) This thread is proof of that intention. I didn't like it when others seemed to follow you across the forums to bully you, and I spoke out against it. I don't like it any more now that you seem bent on doing the same to me.

I'm telling you to stop it. You are a bright and engaging person when you allow yourself to be, and sometimes you say very interesting things. But I am not interested in being the object of your personal issues.

There's no need to "investigate," Prokofy. I made the personal attack in the "Catch this bomb!" thread. The attack was deleted by the Lindens, and they issued a personal warning to me. They were right in deleting the attack, and acted correctly in issuing the warning. I understood the possible consequences when I said what I said, and I believe the Lindens acted in an appropriate manner.

I don't apologize for the attack itself, however, because the essence of it was true. It was done in the manner of holding a fist up to the face of a schoolyard bully who threatens to chase after you all over the building, and telling him to back off.

On a slightly different matter, let me respond to your repost above, taken from the "Catch this bomb!" thread.

You don't know what you're talking about.

You don't know what a meme is, as your attempted "prokofyism", mind memes, misuses the concept. (You speak as though memes are a commonly accepted intellectual paradigm, which they are not.)

Further, you don't know anything about me. You speculate that I am a college student, or an adult stuck in a college-age intellectual rut. No, I'm afraid all you've demonstrated is that you read other people's posts selectively and self-centeredly, and create conclusions that best serve yourself.

You also speculate that I support terrorism, from the mere fact that I invited Ulrika to discuss historical anarchy from the point of view of what anarchists like Bakunin, Kropotkin, Thoreau, Tolstoy, and Thomas Jefferson wrote. While some anarchists celebrated violence, many did not. Condemning all anarchist thinking because of the views of a few is like condemning Martin Luther King's strategies because Stokely Carmichael advocated violence in the defense of black rights.

You don't know what anarchy is. You don't know what terrorism is. The reason why you don't know is not because you haven't done the reading, although frankly, I wonder if you have. The reason why you don't know is because, once again, you've read selectively and self-centeredly, with the intent of cramming everything into your own, self-serving world view. Thus you cite as evidence the fact that "streets in the former Soviet Union were named after Kropotkin and Bakunin," a proof that so obviously pathetic and embarrassing that I have to wonder whether you deliberately engage in intellectual suicide. Thus you use emotionally-laden and demagogic tactics, such as bringing up the rhetoric of the French left about 9/11 - an event that has little if nothing to do with the issue I was discussing, but is guaranteed to provoke an emotional response. Your tactics are nothing more than an attempt to hide the threadbare character of your point of view.

More to the real point of this thread; Prokofy, you have, on several occasions, stated your intention to follow me around these "schoolyard forums" and offer "corrections." (If you like, I can quote you.) This thread is proof of that intention. I didn't like it when others seemed to follow you across the forums to bully you, and I spoke out against it. I don't like it any more now that you seem bent on doing the same to me.

I'm telling you to stop it. You are a bright and engaging person when you allow yourself to be, and sometimes you say very interesting things. But I am not interested in being the object of your personal issues.

There's no need to "investigate," Prokofy. I made the personal attack in the "Catch this bomb!" thread. The attack was deleted by the Lindens, and they issued a personal warning to me. They were right in deleting the attack, and acted correctly in issuing the warning. I understood the possible consequences when I said what I said, and I believe the Lindens acted in an appropriate manner.

I don't apologize for the attack itself, however, because the essence of it was true. It was done in the manner of holding a fist up to the face of a schoolyard bully who threatens to chase after you all over the building, and telling him to back off.

On a slightly different matter, let me respond to your repost above, taken from the "Catch this bomb!" thread.

You don't know what you're talking about.

You don't know what a meme is, as your attempted "prokofyism", mind memes, misuses the concept. (You speak as though memes are a commonly accepted intellectual paradigm, which they are not.)

Further, you don't know anything about me. You speculate that I am a college student, or an adult stuck in a college-age intellectual rut. No, I'm afraid all you've demonstrated is that you read other people's posts selectively and self-centeredly, and create conclusions that best serve yourself.

You also speculate that I support terrorism, from the mere fact that I invited Ulrika to discuss historical anarchy from the point of view of what anarchists like Bakunin, Kropotkin, Thoreau, Tolstoy, and Thomas Jefferson wrote. While some anarchists celebrated violence, many did not. Condemning all anarchist thinking because of the views of a few is like condemning Martin Luther King's strategies because Stokely Carmichael advocated violence in the defense of black rights.

You don't know what anarchy is. You don't know what terrorism is. The reason why you don't know is not because you haven't done the reading, although frankly, I wonder if you have. The reason is because, once again, you've read selectively and self-centeredly, with the intent of cramming everything into your own, self-serving world view.

Thus you cite as evidence that "streets in the former Soviet Union were named after Kropotkin and Bakunin," a proof that so obviously pathetic and embarrassing that I have to wonder whether you deliberately engage in intellectual suicide. Thus you constantly use emotionally-laden and demagogic tactics in these forums - like your reference to the rhetoric of the French left about 9/11 - an event that has little to do with the issues under discussion but is guaranteed to provoke an emotional response. Your tactics are nothing more than an attempt to hide the threadbare character of your point of view.

More to the real point of this thread; Prokofy, you have, on several occasions, stated your intention to follow me around these "schoolyard forums" and offer "corrections." (If you like, I can quote you.) This thread is proof of that intention. I didn't like it when others seemed to follow you across the forums to bully you, and I spoke out against it. I don't like it any more now that you seem bent on doing the same to me.

I'm telling you to stop it. You are a bright and engaging person when you allow yourself to be, and sometimes you say very interesting things. But I am not interested in being the object of your personal issues.

Actually, I rather enjoyed that part of the thread. In the future, I highly suggest that Prokofy work in a word of the day in every one of his posts. That way, there will be at least one tiny little nugget worth reading even if the rest is dross. I suggest calling it "Prokofy Neva's Dubious Word of the Day" or somesuch.

Thanks for teaching me a new word, Prokofy.

Actually, he/she used "perlustration" less-than-accurately in both cases.

The modern use of the word means to scan, test, evaluate, etc. It's most often used in medical diagnosis or biblical studies.

The archaic use means to wander all through something, to survey or view from all perspectives.

Hence the "Dubious Word" part...

I'm really annoyed, that that thread was locked! That was by far one of the best conversations about anarchism that I've ever seen in SL. You folks were really talking to me. When I got home ready to get back in on it -- I saw it was locked.

Jesse, I disagree with your decision to lock the thread because someone is responding to what they see as a frustrating problem player. If you lock every thread because we're telling Prokofy that he is nuts, you'll bring the forum to its knees.

It's times like this that I clearly see we are governed by an oligarchy. Punishments are applied inconsistently. There is no avenue for complaints or appeals. There is no mechanism through which we can affect change. All citizens are children in the eyes of the oligarchy. Boo! Hiss!


There. I feel better now. Would someone want to start a new Anarchism thread? You could just cut and paste one of the previous posts and we could pick it up from there.

~Ulrika~

Touche!

I'm not nuts, Ulrika, I'm just challenging your thinking. And it wasn't the reason the thread was locked.

Seth, why don't you have the courage to make a personal insult to my face? I stand by my remark about those who are in college or stuck with college, because really it's only in college, or being stuck in college, that you drop all those names all the time.

In Russian, the word "perlustratsiya" has a very specific meaning. It means to cut out a word, say, in a letter from a labor camp, and replace it with either a black mark, or with actual cut out places. Newspapers would have the same thing done to them. So this word got to mean very specifically not only reading and censoring, but cutting out *and leaving a mark to show you censored*. That's a very handy meaning to have here in our forums where the Lindens not only peruse and censor but *leave a mark to show they censored*.

That's so it can have a deterrent effect. Now I realize we're all speaking English here, not Russian, but that's ok, because the English meaning does contain the sense of censoring letters too. And I could note that when the post-Communist Czechs did the "lustration" campaign to purge out old communists, Westerners began to use the word "lustration" too when discussing this very worrisome process that led to the persecution of innocents.

Seth you don't know me, and I don't know you. I'm not interested in comparing and contrasting RL credentials. The beauty of a space like SL is supposed to be that you come on and interact with people outside those constraints or stereotypes. So try to be less fussy and reactive all the time.



"Memes" as a term used by itself is a bloggerism. It's all over the Internet. Blogs are named after it. People talk about it. AND they talk about mind-memes, usually with a hint of laughter or cynicism.

If we're in a new world and pioneers and whatnot, can't we begin to invent new vocabulary? Everybody knows how little idealets get formed and stamped and replicated and cut and paste throughout the Internet. Like the way people get so conditioned to be "helpful" and pass on some knowledge about a virus to avoid, that they end up spreading a stupid pointless tip to delete something that *itself* becomes a virus. That's a mind-meme of the simple sort.



I've read them carefully, and I'm waiting for you to stop name dropping famous writers and philosophers, and to start taking their ideas and actually quoting from them, rather than referencing them in some kind of highfalutin way that obscures rather than enlightens.

You also speculate that I support terrorism, from the mere fact that I invited Ulrika to discuss historical anarchy from the point of view of what anarchists like Bakunin, Kropotkin, Thoreau, Tolstoy, and Thomas Jefferson wrote.

No, I didn't say you supported terrorism. Don't make that leap and get all shirty over nothing. I said you should be ashamed for talking about them glibly, for citing them among anarchists and figures like Tolstoy (who was a pacifist) or Jefferson (a democrat) and implying they are of equal value, thought the advocated and embraced violence. They are not. Nothing chic about them. They are the forefathers of terrorism.



This could be debated, given the anarchist's taste for "destroying the state". How will it get destroyed? Or at what point does not establishing it because a form of violence? The point is, you don't get a pass from me putting figures like Kropotkin into the line-up with Thoreau and Tolstoy, sheesh. It's a huge grab-bag, and you're only name-dropping anyway and figuring no one will challenge you but just be in awe of your erudition. Not!



Oh, I've done loads of reading. Seems like you could do with a little more.



Well, I'm figuring most people won't have read up on their Russian anarchists and one graphic way to make the point about the visceral reaction a lot of the intelligentsia has about these figures is to point out that the Soviets named streets after them. That's a fact. And it's emblematic of that society based on terror. That's not demagogy, but helping Americans to understand some of the realities of the Russian regime that they remain ignorant of.The French left indeed did discredit itself after 9/11 as you well know, with their "propaganda of the deed" crap. This was widely discussed. You don't get to throw around all these radical chic references and get a pass from me. Especially when your purpose in doing so is to give them a blessing to be the forefathers for shaping something like SL and the open-sourced grid. No way.



Oh, I absolutely tend to be right here where you are spouting your stuff. It really needs a challenge. I



Oh, stop it. You can't make people not debate you. I'm sorry, but this is an open forum. I don't get to be "disciplined" by you. Especially when it is you who have evidently made a personal attack on me and been disciplined, and not me.

Please stop with the name-dropping. Put an idea out and discuss it seriously and honestly.

Actually, you've both personally insulted each other.

No. You're a little strange. Seriously. Your egocentric conspiratorial take on SL along with your out-of-place anti-Soviet rants are just bizarre. Often they're nonsensical (don't make me dig up your sociopolitical Mad Libs post).

You also have no capacity to modify your behavior. Despite advice both kind and cruel, you still post these absurdly long replies that no one actually reads. I skimmed the first paragraph of this monster, started to scroll, rolled my eyes, and hit reply after I reached the bottom.

I don't know what to tell you. You don't understand. You won't change. It's like trying to reason with a skipping record.

What's sad is that yet again I'm posting this same information -- in a drama thread of your creation nonetheless! To ensure that I don't get stuck in one of your sadomasochistic alt-tag-team forum mind fucks, I'm going to make this my last post of this thread and put you on mute again for another couple of days.

~Ulrika~

Congratulations!

Prokofy, you have my response to your thread. And your response to my response was very predictable.

I won't engage you in this manner. Say something that comes out of your head and not out of your gall bladder, and I'll respond respectfully.


And yes, Ardith, you're right. Guess I can't help it.

Prokofy, you have my response to your thread. And your response to my response was very predictable.

I won't engage you in this manner. If you say something that comes out of your head and not out of your gall bladder, I'll respond respectfully. Otherwise, I'm going to try hard not to respond at all.

And yes, Ardith, you're right. We did.

That's a personal attack, Seth. That's what they mean.

Actually, that was a statement of fact. If he'd called you a dipshit, you might have a case. As it is, he was merely pointing out that your posts tend to be extremely bilious.

And actually, not even that really. He was simply stating what he would reply to, he didn't come right out and say that prokofy had ever posted something out of his gall bladder, just said that he wouldn't reply to it in the event that it happened.

But we're splitting hairs... and really, isn't that what brings us together as a community?

I feel the hairy love, Lianne. Thank you....

Aww, I feel the love, Lianne. Thanks....

And this thread isn’t locked yet due to personal attacks...how ambiguously inconsistent...go figure.

Shadow