Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Trolling

Expand Messages
  • bikhe hozho
    ... ...and a big ego-trip. Tell me, has anyone on WC or elsewhere been converted or defeated by trolling against them? If the answer is No one , then what is
    Message 1 of 114 , May 1 8:03 PM
      > Taj: Absolutely, deceit is very romantic -- in fact, a powerful aphrodisiac. <

      ...and a big ego-trip.

      Tell me, has anyone on WC or elsewhere been converted or defeated by trolling against them?

      If the answer is "No one", then what is the difference between trolling an just ignoring them?

      Then all that energy and intelligence is wasted.

      Its agitation of the astral which in itself makes esoteric discussion impossible. Its self-defeating.

      I think trolling is a very seductive and addictive endeavor. Like battling the Borg: the more you fight it, the bigger it gets.

      You don't fight evil, even if you have correctly identified it as evil, which is usually not the case. You show it a better way.

      Assume the WC folks are evil, across the board, no exceptions, and completely so; no redeeming characteristics whatsoever, for the sake of discussion. At least they're upfront and without deceit about it: they think Steiner and Waldorf are crazy. So what you see is what you get.

      Does ridiculing them by relinquishing your own high ground, by being deceitful, make you a shining example that they would want to emulate?
      They are honest (in their ignorance), you are not.

      If spirits come to you, what is their bonafide? They are honest, they do not lie, they understand you and speak to your heart and to your mind with truth that is so true that it is its own proof.

      Are you like them, or are you like the deceiving demons?

      The end does not justify the means, the means create the ends.

      Anyway, time is short; how do you want to spend it? Making a difference or slinging better mud than someone else. Its like slapping mud on your face and expecting the other person to get dirty.

      It fucks with your own head, too. Just look at how spiteful and ungenerous the people on this list are with each other. There's no cooperation or mutuality, but lots of snarky cynicism.

      To be expected when even on a list with its lofty advertised aims (read the homepage statement), someone can question whether Steiner was speaking literally of in allegory when he referred to spiritual beings, and no one had the nerve to say that he was speaking as literally as he possible could, and that people should try and do the work so that they could see them, too. But no one talks about the failure of anthroposophy to produce more initiates, so of course Asuric cynicism and nihilism is the result of that failed Luciferic idealism.

      Remember: "You're either part of the solution or you're part of the problem." That's beyond initiate wisdom: that's common sense.

      Get a grip and get a life - and tell us about it.

      Stephen
    • elfuncle
      ... perhaps an Adorable Cherub, but I don t think he s really either. I think he s our first secular humanist fundamentalist. He expresses his views with such
      Message 114 of 114 , Jan 18, 2012
        --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@...> wrote:
        >
        > Tarjei has characterised Johan on WC as an Adorable Darling, or perhaps an Adorable Cherub, but I don't think he's really either. I think he's our first secular humanist fundamentalist. He expresses his views with such strength, and with such intransigence against all opposing views, that he's an oracle of secular humanism.

        He's supposed to be a riddle, an enigma, hard to define, impossible to understand. Obnoxious and irresistibly mysterious.

        > But, like Tom M, he seems unable to help himself throwing out interesting things amongst the chaos from time to time.


        Those are teasers, to keep them hooked and glued.

        > His latest post, accusing Alicia and Diana of being trolls (after accusing Janet Biel of being an eco-fascist!!. You can imagine Der Staudi's response :)) is one such and he references this fascinating Steiner critic blog that critiques the critics (this internecine warfare is starting to make my head spin). The authors are referring to our Diana, Alicia, Pete, and also another regular called Thetis Mecurio. Many of the abusive posts referred to as being on Alicia's blog have already been censored, as have these people, who have apparently been banned from the Alicias site, 'the Ethereal Kiosk'.

        He hates anthroposophy with a passion, he thinks it's extremely disgusting and reprehensible, dangerous and stomach-churning, Nazi and fascist and all that. Anthroposopphy is also eco-fascist, and Peter Staudenmaier is an eco-fascist agent for anthroposophy who is pretending to be a critic, and the others are his partners in crime.
        >
        > An Open letter to all those identifying themselves as Steiner/Waldorf Critics.
        >
        > 1. Do the critics generally approve of the aggressive behaviour of some critics towards people who've had negative experiences of the Steiner movement but whose methods may not be understood?


        Of course they do, no question about it.
        >
        > 2. Do these people who apparently see themselves as gatekeepers of Steiner criticism actually represent the views of all critics?


        Their views are highly suspect.
        >
        > We unfortunately have to report the fact that we have observed and experienced both passive aggression arising out of a self-protective "need" for anonymity which makes it very hard to call someone to account, and active aggression, which seeks to destroy that which it says it does not understand, by means of public mobbing behaviour.

        They are very aggressive, so he has to address that issue.
        >
        > Either of these forces could have a very negative effect on anyone, but especially on families coming out of damaging scenarios at Steiner schools, where they experienced the schools' cultish, xenophobic, and often brutish behaviour.  Finding such aggression among those apparently `critical' of the awful behaviour of Steiner schools, could very well become a wounding force even worse than the original, due to the secondary nature of the wounding together with a reasonable expectation of finding, among those claiming to be critical of Steiner education, at least a fair hearing.

        That's the point: They're pretending to be critical of Waldorf while they're secretly working for its global dominance.
        > ...
        >
        > It is shocking to have to flag up such behaviours in the critics, but it gets worse because in mobbing us, Alicia Hamberg has clearly positioned herself as a protector of Steiner Critics generally, with significant influence and the apparent power to "endorse" projects. In banning us and professing the need to warn others about us; she has acted as a Gatekeeper.

        There you go. They're Anthroposophists, Jesuits, Freemasons, and Fascists all of them, with gatekeepers and deceptions and a secret and dangerous totalitarian agenda.

        Tarjei
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.