ARTBASE (1)
PORTFOLIO (3)
BIO
Marc Garrett is co-director and co-founder, with artist Ruth Catlow of the Internet arts collectives and communities – Furtherfield.org, Furthernoise.org, Netbehaviour.org, also co-founder and co-curator/director of the gallery space formerly known as 'HTTP Gallery' now called the Furtherfield Gallery in London (Finsbury Park), UK. Co-curating various contemporary Media Arts exhibitions, projects nationally and internationally. Co-editor of 'Artists Re:Thinking Games' with Ruth Catlow and Corrado Morgana 2010. Hosted Furtherfield's critically acclaimed weekly broadcast on UK's Resonance FM Radio, a series of hour long live interviews with people working at the edge of contemporary practices in art, technology & social change. Currently doing an Art history Phd at the University of London, Birkbeck College.
Net artist, media artist, curator, writer, street artist, activist, educationalist and musician. Emerging in the late 80′s from the streets exploring creativity via agit-art tactics. Using unofficial, experimental platforms such as the streets, pirate radio such as the locally popular ‘Savage Yet Tender’ alternative broadcasting 1980′s group, net broadcasts, BBS systems, performance, intervention, events, pamphlets, warehouses and gallery spaces. In the early nineties, was co-sysop (systems operator) with Heath Bunting on Cybercafe BBS with Irational.org.
Our mission is to co-create extraordinary art that connects with contemporary audiences providing innovative, engaging and inclusive digital and physical spaces for appreciating and participating in practices in art, technology and social change. As well as finding alternative ways around already dominating hegemonies, thus claiming for ourselves and our peer networks a culturally aware and critical dialogue beyond traditional hierarchical behaviours. Influenced by situationist theory, fluxus, free and open source culture, and processes of self-education and peer learning, in an art, activist and community context.
Net artist, media artist, curator, writer, street artist, activist, educationalist and musician. Emerging in the late 80′s from the streets exploring creativity via agit-art tactics. Using unofficial, experimental platforms such as the streets, pirate radio such as the locally popular ‘Savage Yet Tender’ alternative broadcasting 1980′s group, net broadcasts, BBS systems, performance, intervention, events, pamphlets, warehouses and gallery spaces. In the early nineties, was co-sysop (systems operator) with Heath Bunting on Cybercafe BBS with Irational.org.
Our mission is to co-create extraordinary art that connects with contemporary audiences providing innovative, engaging and inclusive digital and physical spaces for appreciating and participating in practices in art, technology and social change. As well as finding alternative ways around already dominating hegemonies, thus claiming for ourselves and our peer networks a culturally aware and critical dialogue beyond traditional hierarchical behaviours. Influenced by situationist theory, fluxus, free and open source culture, and processes of self-education and peer learning, in an art, activist and community context.
yawn...
------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C2A923.743AB830
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Blankyawn...
This list has been hijacked by ugly anti- creative nihilists...
Many members hide behind their comps just watching, not wanting to get invo=
lved because their 'supposed' valid reputations might get tarnished - yet b=
y not acting against such an abomination, being complicit in not taking any=
action, except pressing the 'Block Sender' on their email clients; they co=
ntribute by ignoring the actual problem & sweeping it under the virtual car=
pet. This place has become a battle ground and I do not wish to be part of =
a place that silenty hopes that it will go away.
All those who are actually bothered by what has been happening, please use =
your voice for achange - for now is the time to change this dispicable prob=
lem.
I have been using my 'block sender' occassionally, in deleted mails I have =
noticed the horrible shouts/spams by 'Karei', which has been a constant and=
vicious, consecutive list of attacking anyone 'they' fancy to offend, with=
out any comeback. Rhizome's solution is for us all to block such activity -=
but I cannot ignore the stench underneath.
Action needs to be taken 'NOW'. I know that everyone else other than the ob=
vious killers of joy that is; are fed up with all this depressing non-stop =
hate parade, who wish to take part in mutual sharing of ideas on their own =
terms. Everyone I have spoken to agrees of whom frequents this list; but wh=
ere are they now, where have they been, to stand up against such ugliness?
I long for the imaginative beauty that NN used to splurge on here in compar=
ison with the non-stop anti-creative hate that we are all forced to consume=
. At least NN was a lateral thinker - 'Karei', is repetative and offers no =
work of their own, putting down anyone who wishes for more than 'emptiness'.
'Kill their void'
respect to all who are wishing the list to be a better place...
marc
------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C2A923.743AB830
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE id=ridTitle>Blank</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-125=
2"><BASE
href="file://C:Program FilesCommon FilesMicrosoft SharedStationery">
<STYLE>BODY {
MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; FONT=
-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica
}
P.msoNormal {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px; COLOR: #ffffcc; FONT-F=
AMILY: Helvetica, "Times New Roman"
}
LI.msoNormal {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px; COLOR: #ffffcc; FONT-F=
AMILY: Helvetica, "Times New Roman"
}
</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1126" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=ridBody bgColor=#ffffff
background=cid:001701c2a923$74384730$0100a8c0@FURTHERFIELD>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=6>yawn...<BR><BR><FONT size=2>This list has bee=
n
hijacked by ugly anti- creative nihilists...<BR><BR>Many members hide behin=
d
their comps just watching, not wanting to get involved because their 'suppo=
sed'
valid reputations might get tarnished - yet by not acting against such an=
abomination, being complicit in not taking any action, except pressing the=
'Block Sender' on their email clients; they contribute by ignoring the actu=
al
problem & sweeping it under the virtual carpet. This place has become a=
battle ground and I do not wish to be part of a place that silenty hopes th=
at it
will go away.<BR><BR>All those who are actually bothered by what has been=
happening, please use your voice for achange - for now is the time to chang=
e
this dispicable problem. <BR><BR>I have been using my 'block sender'
occassionally, in deleted mails I have noticed the horrible shouts/spams by=
'Karei', which has been a constant and vicious, consecutive list =
of
attacking anyone 'they' fancy to offend, without any comeback. Rhizome's
solution is for us all to block such activity - but I cannot ignore the ste=
nch
underneath. <BR><BR>Action needs to be taken 'NOW'. I know that everyone el=
se
other than the obvious killers of joy that is; are fed up with all this
depressing non-stop hate parade, who wish to take part in mutual sharing of=
ideas on their own terms. Everyone I have spoken to agrees
of whom frequents this list; but where are they now, where have t=
hey
been, to stand up against such ugliness?<BR><BR>I long for the imaginative=
beauty that NN used to splurge on here in comparison with the non-stop
anti-creative hate that we are all forced to consume. At least NN was a lat=
eral
thinker - 'Karei', is repetative and offers no work of their own,=
putting down anyone who wishes for more than 'emptiness'.<BR><BR>'Kill thei=
r
void'<BR><BR>respect to all who are wishing the list to be a better
place...</FONT></FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=6><FONT size=2></FONT></FONT></STRONG> </D=
IV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=6><FONT
size=2>marc <BR></FONT><BR></DIV></FONT></STRONG>
<P> </P></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C2A923.743AB830--
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Blankyawn...
This list has been hijacked by ugly anti- creative nihilists...
Many members hide behind their comps just watching, not wanting to get invo=
lved because their 'supposed' valid reputations might get tarnished - yet b=
y not acting against such an abomination, being complicit in not taking any=
action, except pressing the 'Block Sender' on their email clients; they co=
ntribute by ignoring the actual problem & sweeping it under the virtual car=
pet. This place has become a battle ground and I do not wish to be part of =
a place that silenty hopes that it will go away.
All those who are actually bothered by what has been happening, please use =
your voice for achange - for now is the time to change this dispicable prob=
lem.
I have been using my 'block sender' occassionally, in deleted mails I have =
noticed the horrible shouts/spams by 'Karei', which has been a constant and=
vicious, consecutive list of attacking anyone 'they' fancy to offend, with=
out any comeback. Rhizome's solution is for us all to block such activity -=
but I cannot ignore the stench underneath.
Action needs to be taken 'NOW'. I know that everyone else other than the ob=
vious killers of joy that is; are fed up with all this depressing non-stop =
hate parade, who wish to take part in mutual sharing of ideas on their own =
terms. Everyone I have spoken to agrees of whom frequents this list; but wh=
ere are they now, where have they been, to stand up against such ugliness?
I long for the imaginative beauty that NN used to splurge on here in compar=
ison with the non-stop anti-creative hate that we are all forced to consume=
. At least NN was a lateral thinker - 'Karei', is repetative and offers no =
work of their own, putting down anyone who wishes for more than 'emptiness'.
'Kill their void'
respect to all who are wishing the list to be a better place...
marc
------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C2A923.743AB830
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE id=ridTitle>Blank</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-125=
2"><BASE
href="file://C:Program FilesCommon FilesMicrosoft SharedStationery">
<STYLE>BODY {
MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; FONT=
-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica
}
P.msoNormal {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px; COLOR: #ffffcc; FONT-F=
AMILY: Helvetica, "Times New Roman"
}
LI.msoNormal {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px; COLOR: #ffffcc; FONT-F=
AMILY: Helvetica, "Times New Roman"
}
</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1126" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=ridBody bgColor=#ffffff
background=cid:001701c2a923$74384730$0100a8c0@FURTHERFIELD>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=6>yawn...<BR><BR><FONT size=2>This list has bee=
n
hijacked by ugly anti- creative nihilists...<BR><BR>Many members hide behin=
d
their comps just watching, not wanting to get involved because their 'suppo=
sed'
valid reputations might get tarnished - yet by not acting against such an=
abomination, being complicit in not taking any action, except pressing the=
'Block Sender' on their email clients; they contribute by ignoring the actu=
al
problem & sweeping it under the virtual carpet. This place has become a=
battle ground and I do not wish to be part of a place that silenty hopes th=
at it
will go away.<BR><BR>All those who are actually bothered by what has been=
happening, please use your voice for achange - for now is the time to chang=
e
this dispicable problem. <BR><BR>I have been using my 'block sender'
occassionally, in deleted mails I have noticed the horrible shouts/spams by=
'Karei', which has been a constant and vicious, consecutive list =
of
attacking anyone 'they' fancy to offend, without any comeback. Rhizome's
solution is for us all to block such activity - but I cannot ignore the ste=
nch
underneath. <BR><BR>Action needs to be taken 'NOW'. I know that everyone el=
se
other than the obvious killers of joy that is; are fed up with all this
depressing non-stop hate parade, who wish to take part in mutual sharing of=
ideas on their own terms. Everyone I have spoken to agrees
of whom frequents this list; but where are they now, where have t=
hey
been, to stand up against such ugliness?<BR><BR>I long for the imaginative=
beauty that NN used to splurge on here in comparison with the non-stop
anti-creative hate that we are all forced to consume. At least NN was a lat=
eral
thinker - 'Karei', is repetative and offers no work of their own,=
putting down anyone who wishes for more than 'emptiness'.<BR><BR>'Kill thei=
r
void'<BR><BR>respect to all who are wishing the list to be a better
place...</FONT></FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=6><FONT size=2></FONT></FONT></STRONG> </D=
IV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=6><FONT
size=2>marc <BR></FONT><BR></DIV></FONT></STRONG>
<P> </P></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C2A923.743AB830--
Re: Re: An editing job for the ages
There is OBJECTIVE TRUTH (even if you don't get
what it is) and it is ACCESSIBLE.
tiz true - but you are not worthy of it & do not know it & that is also
true...
marc
> On Sat, 21 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
> > Two people can engage in a dialog at which they just throw insults at
each
> > other
>
> Nobody has insulted you babycheeks. The reality of what you are is
> simply not our responsibility. If you don't like it, change it.
> Be creative.
>
> > an insist upon the "truth" of their position (such as you do),
>
> No dearest. We do not. Keeo your dictatorial impulses
> to yourself. The only one "insisting" on the "truth" of their
> position is YOU. You are attempting to DICTATE your
> wishful projection of what our behavior is as the TRUTH.
>
> We are not speaking of "our position".
> We do not have "opinions" We do not have "points of view".
> There is_ truth. It ain't all relative.
>
> And try and imagine, and chew, and swallow on this:
> There is OBJECTIVE TRUTH (even if you don't get
> what it is) and it is ACCESSIBLE.
>
>
> > or they can engage in a dialog
>
> No dearest. the nature of dialogue is destructive.
> Your inability to UNDERSTAND the above as a FACT is your own ILLITERACY.
>
> > in which they realize they have opposing positions,
>
> We do not have a "position".
> We are not speaking ftom a "point of view".
> What we say and what you drivel is NOT EQUAL.
> What's more, we are not even trying to force
> truth on you: we have indicated that you're unable
> to converse and we desire no contact with you.
>
> If you want to look at a dictatorial "right' ape
> look at yourself. The entireity of your "dialogue"
> has been attempts to FORCE YOUR OPINION that what WE
> DO is a RELATIVE OPINION.
>
> Guess what babycheeks. It is NOT.
>
> > are willing to discuss alternatives that might bring about mutually
acceptable
> > outcomes.
>
> There ain't nothing MUTUAL babycheeks.
> You are not WANTED. There is no compromise in
> which your delusions are somehow VALID.
>
>
> > In business parlance, this is called win-win negotiating.
>
> And in REALITY parlance it's called two sheep fucking each other
> in the arse. This is not busuness.
>
>
> >From my
> > observations of you, you either "win" or run away.
>
> No babycheeks. You are not cabapble of OBSERVING anything besides your
> own ego. We neither "win" nor "run away".
>
> Keep your wisful projections to yourself.
>
> And if you want to see one RUNNING AWAY, look at yourself.
>
> Every time you're demonstrate an infantile idiot
> you respind with infantile "creative" meaninglessness.
>
>
> Tell us again how the basic universal truth if buddhism are
> just like your christian aunt polly?
>
> But would you admit being wrong? No.
>
> That ain't the only example.
>
> You are NOT a shaman. You attempt to dress yourself as one
> in order to explit it. It's a FACT.
>
> You're self-destructive, ignorant and irresponsible.
>
> It's a FACT.
>
> This is NOt a compromisable situation.
>
> There is no "negotiation".
>
> As long as you stick your nose in our face you will be treated
> as WHAT YOU ARE.
>
> You were givena chance, very politely, to go away.
>
> > Worldview - the mental construct that people use to understand and
participate
> > in their environment, usually encompassing as much of the world of which
they
> > are aware.
>
> Meaningless drivel. The above is NONSENSE.
>
> > Any world view is incomplete as no person has a complete awareness
> > of the world.
>
> Absolute DRIVEL. You do not have any knowledge of awareness.
>
> > Thus, recognizing and accepting/participating with other world
> > views creates a more complete construct...this is GOOD.
>
> There is NO THUS. You peddled a delusion as a fact and "thus"..
>
> > Forcing everybody to accept your personal worldview is BAD
>
> We are not FORCINg anyone to accept anything baycheeks. YOU ARE.
> It is YOUR PERSONAL WORLDVIEW that WORLDVIEWS EXIST. Bleat.
> They don't.
>
> We are NOT presenting a personal worldview. Wea re IMPERSONAL.
> Nor are we FORCING IT ON ANYONE.
>
> Funny how what we do will either be relegated to YOUR game (it's an
> opinion) (that is it falls) or it will be false (it falls).
> We suppose that's win-win. Heads I win, tails you lose.
> Dictatorial brain obsessed ape.
>
> > - it creates a less complete construct.
>
> No it doesn't. There are no constructs.
> Reality is nota CONSTRUCT. Blind idiot.
>
> > So we should all march and jump off a cliff?
>
> That is entirely up to you. You are already ALL marching towards a
> cliff. BLINDLY. And that'sa FACT.
>
>
>
> > The reason we get togethor in little groups
>
> Burble burble. There is no "reason". You're not capable of reason.
>
> > is help each other survive as long as possible.
>
> Yes that's exactly the "reason" to get together in little groups.
>
> A healthy singular individual in a healthy environment
> condition is capable of surviving on its own quite nicely.
>
> Animalistic survival instincts produce HERDS.
> Communities are based on other things.
> Communities are based on CONSCIOUSNESS.
>
> > Then rules develop to help the groups exist.
>
> No they don't, idiotic dictatorial ape.
>
> There are only one "set of rules" : those of Reality.
> And hence you have MALE YANG LEADERS who can perceive
> Reality and create LAWS which REFLECT Reality.
>
> And a properly functioning community is one
> in which you have proper leaders.
>
> And if you want to see why humanity is in a shithole
> it is because all proper MALE (energetic config, not gender)
> are *leaving*--that is why you have breakdown of religious
> lines, monarchies etc. Instead you have increased
> MECHANICAL DICTATORIAL BRAIN DRIVEN FORCE, which expresses
> itself in technology.
>
> That is why you have schizophrenia, and alzheimer's and AIDS
> and all sorts of idiocy, among which the push to keep
> each human UNINITED and FFRAGMENTED (yin imbalanced).
> How's that candy bar by the way? Your "optimistic"
> "yin" is ignorant junkie shite. All is fine "bleat".
> Allow us to be crass and tell you one thing: mommy nature
> does not luv you. She raises you like animalz.
> And she slaughters you when she wants your skin. Bleeeat.
>
> And no "little groups" are gonna help you "survive"
> if she wants you dead. Humans of course are damn nice
> that way that they can 'avoid" the trap mommy sets up for them
> by developing CONSCIOUSNESS. That is the ONLY WAY.
> CONSCIOUSNESS entails developing AWARENESS of the OBJECTIVE
> LAWS AND TRUTHS of the UNIVERSE. And that is WHY you have
> those *awful, awful* yang males who set up religions.
> That is WHY communities were founded. TO FOSTER CONSCIOUSNESS.
>
> Your actions foster bleating blathering idiocy.
>
> They DENY the human ACCESS to OBJECTIVE REALITY.
>
> This amounts to MURDER.
>
> There is no THREE opinions, not even TWO about it.
>
> Oh and by the way babycheeks, the original MALE YANG
> LEADERS were of the FEMALE GENDER.
>
>
>
> > So - an individual's (premature) death represents a failure of the
group.
>
> Babycheeks you know NOTHINg about death besides infantile fantasies,
> delusions, and drivel. You in fact CAUSE premature death with your
> behavior.
>
>
> > Waving around DEATH is confronting a group with the possibility of its
failure.
>
> Bleat, bleat. Good to know. Thanks for admitting to being
> a death obsessed freak. Funny how when WE_ introduced death you accused
> us of being "death obsessed". Your hypocrisy is neverending.
>
> Secondly. DEATH is "introduced" PROPERLY by those who know how to.
> You're simply USING death to INCITE FEAR (possibility of its failure).
> The CORRECT (and there is CORRECT) introduction of death does
> the OPPOSITE. It pushes humans to act self-responsibly, trim idiocies
> out of their lives and quit fearing failure.
>
> Because actual_ awareness_ of death causes the human to act WITHOUT
> MISTAKES (be always right) (and that doesn't mean right over others)
> (we are perfectly capable and have stared so of existing among
> an infinite number of self-autonomous, 1001% always.right, AUTHORITIES)
> (and that's in fact what awaits humans after death). And because
> out there (after earth) there is no time for mistakes.
> Surely it is no sin for humans to make mistakes in the materia,
> but the "idea" is to evolve to a state in which you act
> in AWARENESS AND ACCORDANCE with natural laws.
>
> YOU want to keep humans always on the level of "opinionating"
> "pointing of view' infantilism and obsessed with their brains.
> Give it up. Open your window. It's a a vast intelligent universe.
> Doesn't give a shit about your penis or your brain. Neither
> are going to be of any use to you, nor will your emotions.
>
> Art is a result of communities, of that process for
> striving for consciousness. It's not a biz. It's
> not about your brain or your emotions. Nobody cares.
>
>
>
>
> > The "liberal left" considers its
> > group to be much broader than the "conservative right",
>
> There ain't no lefta nd right here babycheeks.
> We arwe not political. We are not business.
>
> > and the DEATH of 'innocents'
>
> The only innocents babycheeks are ENERGETIC YANG MALES.
> All others are in breach of universal laws :>
> Nevertheless, you won't find us trying to murder anyone
> for "causing problems" even though they DO.
>
> The only one involved in death of innocents is Y O U.
>
> > on either side of conflict are seen as a failure of the "liberal
> > left" group, while the "conservative right" view it as necessary to
protect
> > the survival of members of its narrowly defined group.
>
> Ooo. That was SO MEANINGFUL.
>
> Too bad it's ignorant infantile meaningless burble.
>
>
what it is) and it is ACCESSIBLE.
tiz true - but you are not worthy of it & do not know it & that is also
true...
marc
> On Sat, 21 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
> > Two people can engage in a dialog at which they just throw insults at
each
> > other
>
> Nobody has insulted you babycheeks. The reality of what you are is
> simply not our responsibility. If you don't like it, change it.
> Be creative.
>
> > an insist upon the "truth" of their position (such as you do),
>
> No dearest. We do not. Keeo your dictatorial impulses
> to yourself. The only one "insisting" on the "truth" of their
> position is YOU. You are attempting to DICTATE your
> wishful projection of what our behavior is as the TRUTH.
>
> We are not speaking of "our position".
> We do not have "opinions" We do not have "points of view".
> There is_ truth. It ain't all relative.
>
> And try and imagine, and chew, and swallow on this:
> There is OBJECTIVE TRUTH (even if you don't get
> what it is) and it is ACCESSIBLE.
>
>
> > or they can engage in a dialog
>
> No dearest. the nature of dialogue is destructive.
> Your inability to UNDERSTAND the above as a FACT is your own ILLITERACY.
>
> > in which they realize they have opposing positions,
>
> We do not have a "position".
> We are not speaking ftom a "point of view".
> What we say and what you drivel is NOT EQUAL.
> What's more, we are not even trying to force
> truth on you: we have indicated that you're unable
> to converse and we desire no contact with you.
>
> If you want to look at a dictatorial "right' ape
> look at yourself. The entireity of your "dialogue"
> has been attempts to FORCE YOUR OPINION that what WE
> DO is a RELATIVE OPINION.
>
> Guess what babycheeks. It is NOT.
>
> > are willing to discuss alternatives that might bring about mutually
acceptable
> > outcomes.
>
> There ain't nothing MUTUAL babycheeks.
> You are not WANTED. There is no compromise in
> which your delusions are somehow VALID.
>
>
> > In business parlance, this is called win-win negotiating.
>
> And in REALITY parlance it's called two sheep fucking each other
> in the arse. This is not busuness.
>
>
> >From my
> > observations of you, you either "win" or run away.
>
> No babycheeks. You are not cabapble of OBSERVING anything besides your
> own ego. We neither "win" nor "run away".
>
> Keep your wisful projections to yourself.
>
> And if you want to see one RUNNING AWAY, look at yourself.
>
> Every time you're demonstrate an infantile idiot
> you respind with infantile "creative" meaninglessness.
>
>
> Tell us again how the basic universal truth if buddhism are
> just like your christian aunt polly?
>
> But would you admit being wrong? No.
>
> That ain't the only example.
>
> You are NOT a shaman. You attempt to dress yourself as one
> in order to explit it. It's a FACT.
>
> You're self-destructive, ignorant and irresponsible.
>
> It's a FACT.
>
> This is NOt a compromisable situation.
>
> There is no "negotiation".
>
> As long as you stick your nose in our face you will be treated
> as WHAT YOU ARE.
>
> You were givena chance, very politely, to go away.
>
> > Worldview - the mental construct that people use to understand and
participate
> > in their environment, usually encompassing as much of the world of which
they
> > are aware.
>
> Meaningless drivel. The above is NONSENSE.
>
> > Any world view is incomplete as no person has a complete awareness
> > of the world.
>
> Absolute DRIVEL. You do not have any knowledge of awareness.
>
> > Thus, recognizing and accepting/participating with other world
> > views creates a more complete construct...this is GOOD.
>
> There is NO THUS. You peddled a delusion as a fact and "thus"..
>
> > Forcing everybody to accept your personal worldview is BAD
>
> We are not FORCINg anyone to accept anything baycheeks. YOU ARE.
> It is YOUR PERSONAL WORLDVIEW that WORLDVIEWS EXIST. Bleat.
> They don't.
>
> We are NOT presenting a personal worldview. Wea re IMPERSONAL.
> Nor are we FORCING IT ON ANYONE.
>
> Funny how what we do will either be relegated to YOUR game (it's an
> opinion) (that is it falls) or it will be false (it falls).
> We suppose that's win-win. Heads I win, tails you lose.
> Dictatorial brain obsessed ape.
>
> > - it creates a less complete construct.
>
> No it doesn't. There are no constructs.
> Reality is nota CONSTRUCT. Blind idiot.
>
> > So we should all march and jump off a cliff?
>
> That is entirely up to you. You are already ALL marching towards a
> cliff. BLINDLY. And that'sa FACT.
>
>
>
> > The reason we get togethor in little groups
>
> Burble burble. There is no "reason". You're not capable of reason.
>
> > is help each other survive as long as possible.
>
> Yes that's exactly the "reason" to get together in little groups.
>
> A healthy singular individual in a healthy environment
> condition is capable of surviving on its own quite nicely.
>
> Animalistic survival instincts produce HERDS.
> Communities are based on other things.
> Communities are based on CONSCIOUSNESS.
>
> > Then rules develop to help the groups exist.
>
> No they don't, idiotic dictatorial ape.
>
> There are only one "set of rules" : those of Reality.
> And hence you have MALE YANG LEADERS who can perceive
> Reality and create LAWS which REFLECT Reality.
>
> And a properly functioning community is one
> in which you have proper leaders.
>
> And if you want to see why humanity is in a shithole
> it is because all proper MALE (energetic config, not gender)
> are *leaving*--that is why you have breakdown of religious
> lines, monarchies etc. Instead you have increased
> MECHANICAL DICTATORIAL BRAIN DRIVEN FORCE, which expresses
> itself in technology.
>
> That is why you have schizophrenia, and alzheimer's and AIDS
> and all sorts of idiocy, among which the push to keep
> each human UNINITED and FFRAGMENTED (yin imbalanced).
> How's that candy bar by the way? Your "optimistic"
> "yin" is ignorant junkie shite. All is fine "bleat".
> Allow us to be crass and tell you one thing: mommy nature
> does not luv you. She raises you like animalz.
> And she slaughters you when she wants your skin. Bleeeat.
>
> And no "little groups" are gonna help you "survive"
> if she wants you dead. Humans of course are damn nice
> that way that they can 'avoid" the trap mommy sets up for them
> by developing CONSCIOUSNESS. That is the ONLY WAY.
> CONSCIOUSNESS entails developing AWARENESS of the OBJECTIVE
> LAWS AND TRUTHS of the UNIVERSE. And that is WHY you have
> those *awful, awful* yang males who set up religions.
> That is WHY communities were founded. TO FOSTER CONSCIOUSNESS.
>
> Your actions foster bleating blathering idiocy.
>
> They DENY the human ACCESS to OBJECTIVE REALITY.
>
> This amounts to MURDER.
>
> There is no THREE opinions, not even TWO about it.
>
> Oh and by the way babycheeks, the original MALE YANG
> LEADERS were of the FEMALE GENDER.
>
>
>
> > So - an individual's (premature) death represents a failure of the
group.
>
> Babycheeks you know NOTHINg about death besides infantile fantasies,
> delusions, and drivel. You in fact CAUSE premature death with your
> behavior.
>
>
> > Waving around DEATH is confronting a group with the possibility of its
failure.
>
> Bleat, bleat. Good to know. Thanks for admitting to being
> a death obsessed freak. Funny how when WE_ introduced death you accused
> us of being "death obsessed". Your hypocrisy is neverending.
>
> Secondly. DEATH is "introduced" PROPERLY by those who know how to.
> You're simply USING death to INCITE FEAR (possibility of its failure).
> The CORRECT (and there is CORRECT) introduction of death does
> the OPPOSITE. It pushes humans to act self-responsibly, trim idiocies
> out of their lives and quit fearing failure.
>
> Because actual_ awareness_ of death causes the human to act WITHOUT
> MISTAKES (be always right) (and that doesn't mean right over others)
> (we are perfectly capable and have stared so of existing among
> an infinite number of self-autonomous, 1001% always.right, AUTHORITIES)
> (and that's in fact what awaits humans after death). And because
> out there (after earth) there is no time for mistakes.
> Surely it is no sin for humans to make mistakes in the materia,
> but the "idea" is to evolve to a state in which you act
> in AWARENESS AND ACCORDANCE with natural laws.
>
> YOU want to keep humans always on the level of "opinionating"
> "pointing of view' infantilism and obsessed with their brains.
> Give it up. Open your window. It's a a vast intelligent universe.
> Doesn't give a shit about your penis or your brain. Neither
> are going to be of any use to you, nor will your emotions.
>
> Art is a result of communities, of that process for
> striving for consciousness. It's not a biz. It's
> not about your brain or your emotions. Nobody cares.
>
>
>
>
> > The "liberal left" considers its
> > group to be much broader than the "conservative right",
>
> There ain't no lefta nd right here babycheeks.
> We arwe not political. We are not business.
>
> > and the DEATH of 'innocents'
>
> The only innocents babycheeks are ENERGETIC YANG MALES.
> All others are in breach of universal laws :>
> Nevertheless, you won't find us trying to murder anyone
> for "causing problems" even though they DO.
>
> The only one involved in death of innocents is Y O U.
>
> > on either side of conflict are seen as a failure of the "liberal
> > left" group, while the "conservative right" view it as necessary to
protect
> > the survival of members of its narrowly defined group.
>
> Ooo. That was SO MEANINGFUL.
>
> Too bad it's ignorant infantile meaningless burble.
>
>
Re: Re: An editing job for the ages
> Nobody has insulted you babycheeks. The reality of what you are is
> simply not our responsibility. If you don't like it, change it.
> Be creative.
You are always insulting people on this list - & you are talking nonsense;
as usual. Pretentious verbalizations for effect, but sharing no essense as
usual...
marc
> On Sat, 21 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
> > Two people can engage in a dialog at which they just throw insults at
each
> > other
>
> Nobody has insulted you babycheeks. The reality of what you are is
> simply not our responsibility. If you don't like it, change it.
> Be creative.
>
> > an insist upon the "truth" of their position (such as you do),
>
> No dearest. We do not. Keeo your dictatorial impulses
> to yourself. The only one "insisting" on the "truth" of their
> position is YOU. You are attempting to DICTATE your
> wishful projection of what our behavior is as the TRUTH.
>
> We are not speaking of "our position".
> We do not have "opinions" We do not have "points of view".
> There is_ truth. It ain't all relative.
>
> And try and imagine, and chew, and swallow on this:
> There is OBJECTIVE TRUTH (even if you don't get
> what it is) and it is ACCESSIBLE.
>
>
> > or they can engage in a dialog
>
> No dearest. the nature of dialogue is destructive.
> Your inability to UNDERSTAND the above as a FACT is your own ILLITERACY.
>
> > in which they realize they have opposing positions,
>
> We do not have a "position".
> We are not speaking ftom a "point of view".
> What we say and what you drivel is NOT EQUAL.
> What's more, we are not even trying to force
> truth on you: we have indicated that you're unable
> to converse and we desire no contact with you.
>
> If you want to look at a dictatorial "right' ape
> look at yourself. The entireity of your "dialogue"
> has been attempts to FORCE YOUR OPINION that what WE
> DO is a RELATIVE OPINION.
>
> Guess what babycheeks. It is NOT.
>
> > are willing to discuss alternatives that might bring about mutually
acceptable
> > outcomes.
>
> There ain't nothing MUTUAL babycheeks.
> You are not WANTED. There is no compromise in
> which your delusions are somehow VALID.
>
>
> > In business parlance, this is called win-win negotiating.
>
> And in REALITY parlance it's called two sheep fucking each other
> in the arse. This is not busuness.
>
>
> >From my
> > observations of you, you either "win" or run away.
>
> No babycheeks. You are not cabapble of OBSERVING anything besides your
> own ego. We neither "win" nor "run away".
>
> Keep your wisful projections to yourself.
>
> And if you want to see one RUNNING AWAY, look at yourself.
>
> Every time you're demonstrate an infantile idiot
> you respind with infantile "creative" meaninglessness.
>
>
> Tell us again how the basic universal truth if buddhism are
> just like your christian aunt polly?
>
> But would you admit being wrong? No.
>
> That ain't the only example.
>
> You are NOT a shaman. You attempt to dress yourself as one
> in order to explit it. It's a FACT.
>
> You're self-destructive, ignorant and irresponsible.
>
> It's a FACT.
>
> This is NOt a compromisable situation.
>
> There is no "negotiation".
>
> As long as you stick your nose in our face you will be treated
> as WHAT YOU ARE.
>
> You were givena chance, very politely, to go away.
>
> > Worldview - the mental construct that people use to understand and
participate
> > in their environment, usually encompassing as much of the world of which
they
> > are aware.
>
> Meaningless drivel. The above is NONSENSE.
>
> > Any world view is incomplete as no person has a complete awareness
> > of the world.
>
> Absolute DRIVEL. You do not have any knowledge of awareness.
>
> > Thus, recognizing and accepting/participating with other world
> > views creates a more complete construct...this is GOOD.
>
> There is NO THUS. You peddled a delusion as a fact and "thus"..
>
> > Forcing everybody to accept your personal worldview is BAD
>
> We are not FORCINg anyone to accept anything baycheeks. YOU ARE.
> It is YOUR PERSONAL WORLDVIEW that WORLDVIEWS EXIST. Bleat.
> They don't.
>
> We are NOT presenting a personal worldview. Wea re IMPERSONAL.
> Nor are we FORCING IT ON ANYONE.
>
> Funny how what we do will either be relegated to YOUR game (it's an
> opinion) (that is it falls) or it will be false (it falls).
> We suppose that's win-win. Heads I win, tails you lose.
> Dictatorial brain obsessed ape.
>
> > - it creates a less complete construct.
>
> No it doesn't. There are no constructs.
> Reality is nota CONSTRUCT. Blind idiot.
>
> > So we should all march and jump off a cliff?
>
> That is entirely up to you. You are already ALL marching towards a
> cliff. BLINDLY. And that'sa FACT.
>
>
>
> > The reason we get togethor in little groups
>
> Burble burble. There is no "reason". You're not capable of reason.
>
> > is help each other survive as long as possible.
>
> Yes that's exactly the "reason" to get together in little groups.
>
> A healthy singular individual in a healthy environment
> condition is capable of surviving on its own quite nicely.
>
> Animalistic survival instincts produce HERDS.
> Communities are based on other things.
> Communities are based on CONSCIOUSNESS.
>
> > Then rules develop to help the groups exist.
>
> No they don't, idiotic dictatorial ape.
>
> There are only one "set of rules" : those of Reality.
> And hence you have MALE YANG LEADERS who can perceive
> Reality and create LAWS which REFLECT Reality.
>
> And a properly functioning community is one
> in which you have proper leaders.
>
> And if you want to see why humanity is in a shithole
> it is because all proper MALE (energetic config, not gender)
> are *leaving*--that is why you have breakdown of religious
> lines, monarchies etc. Instead you have increased
> MECHANICAL DICTATORIAL BRAIN DRIVEN FORCE, which expresses
> itself in technology.
>
> That is why you have schizophrenia, and alzheimer's and AIDS
> and all sorts of idiocy, among which the push to keep
> each human UNINITED and FFRAGMENTED (yin imbalanced).
> How's that candy bar by the way? Your "optimistic"
> "yin" is ignorant junkie shite. All is fine "bleat".
> Allow us to be crass and tell you one thing: mommy nature
> does not luv you. She raises you like animalz.
> And she slaughters you when she wants your skin. Bleeeat.
>
> And no "little groups" are gonna help you "survive"
> if she wants you dead. Humans of course are damn nice
> that way that they can 'avoid" the trap mommy sets up for them
> by developing CONSCIOUSNESS. That is the ONLY WAY.
> CONSCIOUSNESS entails developing AWARENESS of the OBJECTIVE
> LAWS AND TRUTHS of the UNIVERSE. And that is WHY you have
> those *awful, awful* yang males who set up religions.
> That is WHY communities were founded. TO FOSTER CONSCIOUSNESS.
>
> Your actions foster bleating blathering idiocy.
>
> They DENY the human ACCESS to OBJECTIVE REALITY.
>
> This amounts to MURDER.
>
> There is no THREE opinions, not even TWO about it.
>
> Oh and by the way babycheeks, the original MALE YANG
> LEADERS were of the FEMALE GENDER.
>
>
>
> > So - an individual's (premature) death represents a failure of the
group.
>
> Babycheeks you know NOTHINg about death besides infantile fantasies,
> delusions, and drivel. You in fact CAUSE premature death with your
> behavior.
>
>
> > Waving around DEATH is confronting a group with the possibility of its
failure.
>
> Bleat, bleat. Good to know. Thanks for admitting to being
> a death obsessed freak. Funny how when WE_ introduced death you accused
> us of being "death obsessed". Your hypocrisy is neverending.
>
> Secondly. DEATH is "introduced" PROPERLY by those who know how to.
> You're simply USING death to INCITE FEAR (possibility of its failure).
> The CORRECT (and there is CORRECT) introduction of death does
> the OPPOSITE. It pushes humans to act self-responsibly, trim idiocies
> out of their lives and quit fearing failure.
>
> Because actual_ awareness_ of death causes the human to act WITHOUT
> MISTAKES (be always right) (and that doesn't mean right over others)
> (we are perfectly capable and have stared so of existing among
> an infinite number of self-autonomous, 1001% always.right, AUTHORITIES)
> (and that's in fact what awaits humans after death). And because
> out there (after earth) there is no time for mistakes.
> Surely it is no sin for humans to make mistakes in the materia,
> but the "idea" is to evolve to a state in which you act
> in AWARENESS AND ACCORDANCE with natural laws.
>
> YOU want to keep humans always on the level of "opinionating"
> "pointing of view' infantilism and obsessed with their brains.
> Give it up. Open your window. It's a a vast intelligent universe.
> Doesn't give a shit about your penis or your brain. Neither
> are going to be of any use to you, nor will your emotions.
>
> Art is a result of communities, of that process for
> striving for consciousness. It's not a biz. It's
> not about your brain or your emotions. Nobody cares.
>
>
>
>
> > The "liberal left" considers its
> > group to be much broader than the "conservative right",
>
> There ain't no lefta nd right here babycheeks.
> We arwe not political. We are not business.
>
> > and the DEATH of 'innocents'
>
> The only innocents babycheeks are ENERGETIC YANG MALES.
> All others are in breach of universal laws :>
> Nevertheless, you won't find us trying to murder anyone
> for "causing problems" even though they DO.
>
> The only one involved in death of innocents is Y O U.
>
> > on either side of conflict are seen as a failure of the "liberal
> > left" group, while the "conservative right" view it as necessary to
protect
> > the survival of members of its narrowly defined group.
>
> Ooo. That was SO MEANINGFUL.
>
> Too bad it's ignorant infantile meaningless burble.
>
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
> simply not our responsibility. If you don't like it, change it.
> Be creative.
You are always insulting people on this list - & you are talking nonsense;
as usual. Pretentious verbalizations for effect, but sharing no essense as
usual...
marc
> On Sat, 21 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
> > Two people can engage in a dialog at which they just throw insults at
each
> > other
>
> Nobody has insulted you babycheeks. The reality of what you are is
> simply not our responsibility. If you don't like it, change it.
> Be creative.
>
> > an insist upon the "truth" of their position (such as you do),
>
> No dearest. We do not. Keeo your dictatorial impulses
> to yourself. The only one "insisting" on the "truth" of their
> position is YOU. You are attempting to DICTATE your
> wishful projection of what our behavior is as the TRUTH.
>
> We are not speaking of "our position".
> We do not have "opinions" We do not have "points of view".
> There is_ truth. It ain't all relative.
>
> And try and imagine, and chew, and swallow on this:
> There is OBJECTIVE TRUTH (even if you don't get
> what it is) and it is ACCESSIBLE.
>
>
> > or they can engage in a dialog
>
> No dearest. the nature of dialogue is destructive.
> Your inability to UNDERSTAND the above as a FACT is your own ILLITERACY.
>
> > in which they realize they have opposing positions,
>
> We do not have a "position".
> We are not speaking ftom a "point of view".
> What we say and what you drivel is NOT EQUAL.
> What's more, we are not even trying to force
> truth on you: we have indicated that you're unable
> to converse and we desire no contact with you.
>
> If you want to look at a dictatorial "right' ape
> look at yourself. The entireity of your "dialogue"
> has been attempts to FORCE YOUR OPINION that what WE
> DO is a RELATIVE OPINION.
>
> Guess what babycheeks. It is NOT.
>
> > are willing to discuss alternatives that might bring about mutually
acceptable
> > outcomes.
>
> There ain't nothing MUTUAL babycheeks.
> You are not WANTED. There is no compromise in
> which your delusions are somehow VALID.
>
>
> > In business parlance, this is called win-win negotiating.
>
> And in REALITY parlance it's called two sheep fucking each other
> in the arse. This is not busuness.
>
>
> >From my
> > observations of you, you either "win" or run away.
>
> No babycheeks. You are not cabapble of OBSERVING anything besides your
> own ego. We neither "win" nor "run away".
>
> Keep your wisful projections to yourself.
>
> And if you want to see one RUNNING AWAY, look at yourself.
>
> Every time you're demonstrate an infantile idiot
> you respind with infantile "creative" meaninglessness.
>
>
> Tell us again how the basic universal truth if buddhism are
> just like your christian aunt polly?
>
> But would you admit being wrong? No.
>
> That ain't the only example.
>
> You are NOT a shaman. You attempt to dress yourself as one
> in order to explit it. It's a FACT.
>
> You're self-destructive, ignorant and irresponsible.
>
> It's a FACT.
>
> This is NOt a compromisable situation.
>
> There is no "negotiation".
>
> As long as you stick your nose in our face you will be treated
> as WHAT YOU ARE.
>
> You were givena chance, very politely, to go away.
>
> > Worldview - the mental construct that people use to understand and
participate
> > in their environment, usually encompassing as much of the world of which
they
> > are aware.
>
> Meaningless drivel. The above is NONSENSE.
>
> > Any world view is incomplete as no person has a complete awareness
> > of the world.
>
> Absolute DRIVEL. You do not have any knowledge of awareness.
>
> > Thus, recognizing and accepting/participating with other world
> > views creates a more complete construct...this is GOOD.
>
> There is NO THUS. You peddled a delusion as a fact and "thus"..
>
> > Forcing everybody to accept your personal worldview is BAD
>
> We are not FORCINg anyone to accept anything baycheeks. YOU ARE.
> It is YOUR PERSONAL WORLDVIEW that WORLDVIEWS EXIST. Bleat.
> They don't.
>
> We are NOT presenting a personal worldview. Wea re IMPERSONAL.
> Nor are we FORCING IT ON ANYONE.
>
> Funny how what we do will either be relegated to YOUR game (it's an
> opinion) (that is it falls) or it will be false (it falls).
> We suppose that's win-win. Heads I win, tails you lose.
> Dictatorial brain obsessed ape.
>
> > - it creates a less complete construct.
>
> No it doesn't. There are no constructs.
> Reality is nota CONSTRUCT. Blind idiot.
>
> > So we should all march and jump off a cliff?
>
> That is entirely up to you. You are already ALL marching towards a
> cliff. BLINDLY. And that'sa FACT.
>
>
>
> > The reason we get togethor in little groups
>
> Burble burble. There is no "reason". You're not capable of reason.
>
> > is help each other survive as long as possible.
>
> Yes that's exactly the "reason" to get together in little groups.
>
> A healthy singular individual in a healthy environment
> condition is capable of surviving on its own quite nicely.
>
> Animalistic survival instincts produce HERDS.
> Communities are based on other things.
> Communities are based on CONSCIOUSNESS.
>
> > Then rules develop to help the groups exist.
>
> No they don't, idiotic dictatorial ape.
>
> There are only one "set of rules" : those of Reality.
> And hence you have MALE YANG LEADERS who can perceive
> Reality and create LAWS which REFLECT Reality.
>
> And a properly functioning community is one
> in which you have proper leaders.
>
> And if you want to see why humanity is in a shithole
> it is because all proper MALE (energetic config, not gender)
> are *leaving*--that is why you have breakdown of religious
> lines, monarchies etc. Instead you have increased
> MECHANICAL DICTATORIAL BRAIN DRIVEN FORCE, which expresses
> itself in technology.
>
> That is why you have schizophrenia, and alzheimer's and AIDS
> and all sorts of idiocy, among which the push to keep
> each human UNINITED and FFRAGMENTED (yin imbalanced).
> How's that candy bar by the way? Your "optimistic"
> "yin" is ignorant junkie shite. All is fine "bleat".
> Allow us to be crass and tell you one thing: mommy nature
> does not luv you. She raises you like animalz.
> And she slaughters you when she wants your skin. Bleeeat.
>
> And no "little groups" are gonna help you "survive"
> if she wants you dead. Humans of course are damn nice
> that way that they can 'avoid" the trap mommy sets up for them
> by developing CONSCIOUSNESS. That is the ONLY WAY.
> CONSCIOUSNESS entails developing AWARENESS of the OBJECTIVE
> LAWS AND TRUTHS of the UNIVERSE. And that is WHY you have
> those *awful, awful* yang males who set up religions.
> That is WHY communities were founded. TO FOSTER CONSCIOUSNESS.
>
> Your actions foster bleating blathering idiocy.
>
> They DENY the human ACCESS to OBJECTIVE REALITY.
>
> This amounts to MURDER.
>
> There is no THREE opinions, not even TWO about it.
>
> Oh and by the way babycheeks, the original MALE YANG
> LEADERS were of the FEMALE GENDER.
>
>
>
> > So - an individual's (premature) death represents a failure of the
group.
>
> Babycheeks you know NOTHINg about death besides infantile fantasies,
> delusions, and drivel. You in fact CAUSE premature death with your
> behavior.
>
>
> > Waving around DEATH is confronting a group with the possibility of its
failure.
>
> Bleat, bleat. Good to know. Thanks for admitting to being
> a death obsessed freak. Funny how when WE_ introduced death you accused
> us of being "death obsessed". Your hypocrisy is neverending.
>
> Secondly. DEATH is "introduced" PROPERLY by those who know how to.
> You're simply USING death to INCITE FEAR (possibility of its failure).
> The CORRECT (and there is CORRECT) introduction of death does
> the OPPOSITE. It pushes humans to act self-responsibly, trim idiocies
> out of their lives and quit fearing failure.
>
> Because actual_ awareness_ of death causes the human to act WITHOUT
> MISTAKES (be always right) (and that doesn't mean right over others)
> (we are perfectly capable and have stared so of existing among
> an infinite number of self-autonomous, 1001% always.right, AUTHORITIES)
> (and that's in fact what awaits humans after death). And because
> out there (after earth) there is no time for mistakes.
> Surely it is no sin for humans to make mistakes in the materia,
> but the "idea" is to evolve to a state in which you act
> in AWARENESS AND ACCORDANCE with natural laws.
>
> YOU want to keep humans always on the level of "opinionating"
> "pointing of view' infantilism and obsessed with their brains.
> Give it up. Open your window. It's a a vast intelligent universe.
> Doesn't give a shit about your penis or your brain. Neither
> are going to be of any use to you, nor will your emotions.
>
> Art is a result of communities, of that process for
> striving for consciousness. It's not a biz. It's
> not about your brain or your emotions. Nobody cares.
>
>
>
>
> > The "liberal left" considers its
> > group to be much broader than the "conservative right",
>
> There ain't no lefta nd right here babycheeks.
> We arwe not political. We are not business.
>
> > and the DEATH of 'innocents'
>
> The only innocents babycheeks are ENERGETIC YANG MALES.
> All others are in breach of universal laws :>
> Nevertheless, you won't find us trying to murder anyone
> for "causing problems" even though they DO.
>
> The only one involved in death of innocents is Y O U.
>
> > on either side of conflict are seen as a failure of the "liberal
> > left" group, while the "conservative right" view it as necessary to
protect
> > the survival of members of its narrowly defined group.
>
> Ooo. That was SO MEANINGFUL.
>
> Too bad it's ignorant infantile meaningless burble.
>
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
Re: Re: An editing job for the ages
erect huge dictatorial edificies - that seems like your ego(s).
marc
> On Sat, 21 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
> > Well, it is pretty easy to go around pointing out what is wrong with
someone
> > else's position.
>
> Of course it is. After all, could you admit that you are WRONG?
> That possibly all "positions" are delusions of the ego?
> That maybe there is something else? Maybe like 93484787
> individualities which are not "just opinions" are "self-authorities"
> and perfectly capable of co-existing without debasing each other to
> "mere opinions."
>
> Could you capitulate that? No.
>
> You couldn't. Because you're so entangled in CONTENDING
> you're probably going to spit another mass of "metaphorical"
> 'drivel" or "YANG MALE LEADER" boogey man drivel,
> or something or other about how all religious leaders suck
> (like you've ever met any, been near any, havea clue what they do?)
>
> Instead you're going to go "building Constructs".
> Building rules. Building bleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeat "communities."
> You're going to erect huge dictatorial edificies.
> You want a statue on the market square for "saving humanity"?
> Constructing more and more delusions and enforcing them in
> materia to keep the "weak" down.
>
> That's nice. They all live long, bleat long, and produce lotsa energy
> for unconscious vampiric yin "constructs" as yourself.
>
> Bleat. If humans want to be "seductively" and "charmingly"
> "optimistically" and "collaboratively" fucked in the arse
> we suggesssst Hollywood. Or the pornographic industry.
> Or Britney Spears.
>
> And it's one thing to make mistakes in public
> as an artist, another to have an idiotic, not-even-a grunt-
> idiot who hasn't done an ounce of WORK on himself
> parading about attempting to play AUTHORITY OVER OTHERS
> which is what you're trying to PLAY babycheeks.
>
> We can't wait till you starta ttempting to peddle your "business"
> and "rules" for the "good of humanity".
>
> No wait, you're doing that.
>
> And of course you wouldn't like the idea of an OBJECTIVE TRUTH
> would ya? Cuz if all is RELATIVe, the biggest "brain-muscle"
> idiot can brutalize all the others.
>
> Guess what babycheeks. Reality aint relative. Aint subjective.
> Aint a point of view. And objectively_ you are not capable of
> perceiving ANYTHING about ANYBODY besides yourself.
>
> Not until you deal or start dealing with your ego, you cannot.
> It's not an opinion, and it's not a position.
>
> It's a FACT just like it's a FACT that you have two arms.
> You ain't a mountain dearest, abnd you do have two arms.
>
> So far all of your "dialogue" is an attempt to
> enforce your ego. Objectively "dialogue" is
> dictatorial and fascist. "Mutual" "linguistic" arrangements"
> are one brain impeding on another body.
>
> And in your case you're spastic and idiotic and completely
> ego driven.
>
>
> > However, it is much more constructive to understand the
> > objectives and aims of all participants and then go about building a
mutually
> > beneficial outcome.
>
> No such thing babycheeks. The only BENEFICIAL outcome has already been
> constructed. It's called Universal laws.
> Everything else breaks humans and destroys their chances of
> surviving death.
>
> You personally are kaput.
>
> Shove your "rules" and your "community".
>
>
>
marc
> On Sat, 21 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
> > Well, it is pretty easy to go around pointing out what is wrong with
someone
> > else's position.
>
> Of course it is. After all, could you admit that you are WRONG?
> That possibly all "positions" are delusions of the ego?
> That maybe there is something else? Maybe like 93484787
> individualities which are not "just opinions" are "self-authorities"
> and perfectly capable of co-existing without debasing each other to
> "mere opinions."
>
> Could you capitulate that? No.
>
> You couldn't. Because you're so entangled in CONTENDING
> you're probably going to spit another mass of "metaphorical"
> 'drivel" or "YANG MALE LEADER" boogey man drivel,
> or something or other about how all religious leaders suck
> (like you've ever met any, been near any, havea clue what they do?)
>
> Instead you're going to go "building Constructs".
> Building rules. Building bleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeat "communities."
> You're going to erect huge dictatorial edificies.
> You want a statue on the market square for "saving humanity"?
> Constructing more and more delusions and enforcing them in
> materia to keep the "weak" down.
>
> That's nice. They all live long, bleat long, and produce lotsa energy
> for unconscious vampiric yin "constructs" as yourself.
>
> Bleat. If humans want to be "seductively" and "charmingly"
> "optimistically" and "collaboratively" fucked in the arse
> we suggesssst Hollywood. Or the pornographic industry.
> Or Britney Spears.
>
> And it's one thing to make mistakes in public
> as an artist, another to have an idiotic, not-even-a grunt-
> idiot who hasn't done an ounce of WORK on himself
> parading about attempting to play AUTHORITY OVER OTHERS
> which is what you're trying to PLAY babycheeks.
>
> We can't wait till you starta ttempting to peddle your "business"
> and "rules" for the "good of humanity".
>
> No wait, you're doing that.
>
> And of course you wouldn't like the idea of an OBJECTIVE TRUTH
> would ya? Cuz if all is RELATIVe, the biggest "brain-muscle"
> idiot can brutalize all the others.
>
> Guess what babycheeks. Reality aint relative. Aint subjective.
> Aint a point of view. And objectively_ you are not capable of
> perceiving ANYTHING about ANYBODY besides yourself.
>
> Not until you deal or start dealing with your ego, you cannot.
> It's not an opinion, and it's not a position.
>
> It's a FACT just like it's a FACT that you have two arms.
> You ain't a mountain dearest, abnd you do have two arms.
>
> So far all of your "dialogue" is an attempt to
> enforce your ego. Objectively "dialogue" is
> dictatorial and fascist. "Mutual" "linguistic" arrangements"
> are one brain impeding on another body.
>
> And in your case you're spastic and idiotic and completely
> ego driven.
>
>
> > However, it is much more constructive to understand the
> > objectives and aims of all participants and then go about building a
mutually
> > beneficial outcome.
>
> No such thing babycheeks. The only BENEFICIAL outcome has already been
> constructed. It's called Universal laws.
> Everything else breaks humans and destroys their chances of
> surviving death.
>
> You personally are kaput.
>
> Shove your "rules" and your "community".
>
>
>
EMPTINESS...
------=_NextPart_001_001A_01C2A96C.0C4250F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Blank There is no "moderator" on rhizome, so far.
Sheesh! What a load of nonsense 'karei' - you are the moderator here - that=
is part of the problem...marc
------=_NextPart_001_001A_01C2A96C.0C4250F0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE id=ridTitle>Blank</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-125=
2"><BASE
href="file://C:Program FilesCommon FilesMicrosoft SharedStationery">
<STYLE>BODY {
MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; FONT=
-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica
}
P.msoNormal {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px; COLOR: #ffffcc; FONT-F=
AMILY: Helvetica, "Times New Roman"
}
LI.msoNormal {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px; COLOR: #ffffcc; FONT-F=
AMILY: Helvetica, "Times New Roman"
}
</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1126" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=ridBody bgColor=#ffffff
background=cid:001801c2a96c$0c3fdff0$0100a8c0@FURTHERFIELD>
<DIV><STRONG> There is no "moderator" on rhizome, so
far.</STRONG><BR><BR><STRONG>Sheesh! What a load of nonsense 'karei' - you =
are
the moderator here - that is part of the
problem...</STRONG><STRONG>marc</STRONG></DIV>
<P> </P></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_001_001A_01C2A96C.0C4250F0--
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Blank There is no "moderator" on rhizome, so far.
Sheesh! What a load of nonsense 'karei' - you are the moderator here - that=
is part of the problem...marc
------=_NextPart_001_001A_01C2A96C.0C4250F0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE id=ridTitle>Blank</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-125=
2"><BASE
href="file://C:Program FilesCommon FilesMicrosoft SharedStationery">
<STYLE>BODY {
MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; FONT=
-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica
}
P.msoNormal {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px; COLOR: #ffffcc; FONT-F=
AMILY: Helvetica, "Times New Roman"
}
LI.msoNormal {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px; COLOR: #ffffcc; FONT-F=
AMILY: Helvetica, "Times New Roman"
}
</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1126" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=ridBody bgColor=#ffffff
background=cid:001801c2a96c$0c3fdff0$0100a8c0@FURTHERFIELD>
<DIV><STRONG> There is no "moderator" on rhizome, so
far.</STRONG><BR><BR><STRONG>Sheesh! What a load of nonsense 'karei' - you =
are
the moderator here - that is part of the
problem...</STRONG><STRONG>marc</STRONG></DIV>
<P> </P></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_001_001A_01C2A96C.0C4250F0--