NN, Max Herman, Eryk Salvaggio + J. McElroy

Largely of no use. These human invented architypes all fail to be complete and
are the hubris of the people who created them.

Speaking of that, I am creating my own set of architypes and am looking for
disciples to spread the word.


Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:

> The antithesis of Gurdjieff's autonomous individual with awakened
> conscience was the Hasnamuss (egotist) who "never hesitates to sacrifice
> people or to create an enormous amount of suffering, just for his own
> personal ambitions." (Ouspensky, 1957b: 300). He likened them to
> unpredictable "mad machines" (Ouspensky, 1957a: 101). John Bennett defined
> the Hasnamussian individual as someone who "exploits Demiurgic powers that
> are in his nature, but does so for egotistic and self-destructive ends."
>
> articualrly apropos NN. No she ain't no Lilith.
>
> (Bennett, 1973: 291). Lentrohamsanin, "one of 313
> Hasnamussian-Eternal-Individuals,"
> was an amalgamation of Lenin, Stalin and Hitler, (Gurdjieff, 1950: 345).
> The Hasnammussian individual can be understood as a charismatic leader
> with the power to drive their group into conflict (Harff and Gurr, 1998:
> 562) for their own purposes. This is despite the probability that "war
> involvement has a negative impact on the survival rate of political
> leaders." (Mousseau and Shi, 1998: 644).
>
>
> Ie, description of self-righteous martyr-hero impulse (ego driven).
>
> During Russia's revolutionary upheavals in February 1917, Gurdjieff
> explained to Olga de Hartmann that "when you live among wolves, you have
> to howl like a wolf; but you should not be taken over by the psychosis of
> war, and inside you should try to be far removed from all this." (de
> Hartmann, 1983: 7).
>
> Observing Max.G2K insists that people be taken over by said psychosis:
> and those who aren't he harrasses.
>
> Also: screaming America sucks in the current situation would only
> knee-jerk humans to escalating military nationalism (nationalistic ego).
> Moreso than ever Americans need to turn towards conscious work,
> abr. the exmples are less than encouraging.
>
> No amount of politicking is going to justify this behavior,
> nor the attempts to abuse people being rattled by Sept 11
> for egotistiacl (memetic-ego distribution) purposes. Aka G2K.
>
> watch the ape. The Ape during war. Spastic ejaculatory behavior.
>
> Mis-identification with local cultural norms as "objective values" meant
> that discussing 'freedom', 'justice' or 'peace' was largely illusory.
>
> People used the words without self-inquiry about why this labeling
> occurred, or changing "mental models" to gain a systemic view of the
> inter-relationship between different intellectual concepts.
>
>
> Ie, lexical shifting.
>
> "Most people think that justice is about getting what we want and not what
> we deserve," Gurdjieff observed. "Justice must mean some co-ordination
> between actions and results of actions." (Ouspensky, 1957a, 205).
> Gurdjieff's dis-identification with war-time sociological propaganda meant
> that he hid Jews in war-time France while collaborating with the Germans.
> (Webb, 1980: 469). He focused on
>
> daily survival
>
> his inner-aims
>
> not loyalty to a national group
>
> or abstract ideal (changing the world, making the world a better place,
> saving the human story, etc.)
>
> Technological innovation has increased warfare, not lessened it. "All
> these theories about universal peace, about peace conferences," Gurdjieff
> reasoned, "are again simply laziness and hypocrisy." (Ouspensky, 1957a:
> 103).
>
> "Wars cannot be stopped," he told Ouspensky. "War is the result of the
> slavery in which men live." (Ouspensky, 1957a: 103).
>
> The only way to stop war is to evolve out of ego-slavery.
>
> Max.G2K wrote: what's wrong with appropriating /enslaving other people's
> belief mechanisms?
>
> Max.G2K wrote: We must stop the war.

–
Joseph Franklyn McElroy
Cor[porat]e [Per]form[ance] Art[ist]

Generally the idea of archetypes simply doesn't work accept perhaps as a
representation of how some societies work, even then though it seems
pretty clear that it's a redundant idea. But I enjoy the idea of
non-human invented archetypes…

contemporary wars during the past 200 years have all been fundamentally
extensions of the economic…perhaps they always have been - hence the
irrelevance of notions such as the 'ego'

s

Joseph Franklyn McElroy Cor[porat]e [Per]form[ance] Art[ist] wrote:

>Largely of no use. These human invented architypes all fail to be complete and
>are the hubris of the people who created them.
>
>Speaking of that, I am creating my own set of architypes and am looking for
>disciples to spread the word.
>
>
>Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
>
>>The antithesis of Gurdjieff's autonomous individual with awakened
>>conscience was the Hasnamuss (egotist) who "never hesitates to sacrifice
>>people or to create an enormous amount of suffering, just for his own
>>personal ambitions." (Ouspensky, 1957b: 300). He likened them to
>>unpredictable "mad machines" (Ouspensky, 1957a: 101). John Bennett defined
>>the Hasnamussian individual as someone who "exploits Demiurgic powers that
>>are in his nature, but does so for egotistic and self-destructive ends."
>>
>>articualrly apropos NN. No she ain't no Lilith.
>>
>>(Bennett, 1973: 291). Lentrohamsanin, "one of 313
>>Hasnamussian-Eternal-Individuals,"
>>was an amalgamation of Lenin, Stalin and Hitler, (Gurdjieff, 1950: 345).
>>The Hasnammussian individual can be understood as a charismatic leader
>>with the power to drive their group into conflict (Harff and Gurr, 1998:
>>562) for their own purposes. This is despite the probability that "war
>>involvement has a negative impact on the survival rate of political
>>leaders." (Mousseau and Shi, 1998: 644).
>>
>>
>>Ie, description of self-righteous martyr-hero impulse (ego driven).
>>
>>During Russia's revolutionary upheavals in February 1917, Gurdjieff
>>explained to Olga de Hartmann that "when you live among wolves, you have
>>to howl like a wolf; but you should not be taken over by the psychosis of
>>war, and inside you should try to be far removed from all this." (de
>>Hartmann, 1983: 7).
>>
>>Observing Max.G2K insists that people be taken over by said psychosis:
>>and those who aren't he harrasses.
>>
>>Also: screaming America sucks in the current situation would only
>>knee-jerk humans to escalating military nationalism (nationalistic ego).
>>Moreso than ever Americans need to turn towards conscious work,
>>abr. the exmples are less than encouraging.
>>
>>No amount of politicking is going to justify this behavior,
>>nor the attempts to abuse people being rattled by Sept 11
>>for egotistiacl (memetic-ego distribution) purposes. Aka G2K.
>>
>>watch the ape. The Ape during war. Spastic ejaculatory behavior.
>>
>>Mis-identification with local cultural norms as "objective values" meant
>>that discussing 'freedom', 'justice' or 'peace' was largely illusory.
>>
>>People used the words without self-inquiry about why this labeling
>>occurred, or changing "mental models" to gain a systemic view of the
>>inter-relationship between different intellectual concepts.
>>
>>
>>Ie, lexical shifting.
>>
>>"Most people think that justice is about getting what we want and not what
>>we deserve," Gurdjieff observed. "Justice must mean some co-ordination
>>between actions and results of actions." (Ouspensky, 1957a, 205).
>>Gurdjieff's dis-identification with war-time sociological propaganda meant
>>that he hid Jews in war-time France while collaborating with the Germans.
>>(Webb, 1980: 469). He focused on
>>
>>daily survival
>>
>>his inner-aims
>>
>>not loyalty to a national group
>>
>>or abstract ideal (changing the world, making the world a better place,
>>saving the human story, etc.)
>>
>>Technological innovation has increased warfare, not lessened it. "All
>>these theories about universal peace, about peace conferences," Gurdjieff
>>reasoned, "are again simply laziness and hypocrisy." (Ouspensky, 1957a:
>>103).
>>
>> "Wars cannot be stopped," he told Ouspensky. "War is the result of the
>>slavery in which men live." (Ouspensky, 1957a: 103).
>>
>>The only way to stop war is to evolve out of ego-slavery.
>>
>>Max.G2K wrote: what's wrong with appropriating /enslaving other people's
>>belief mechanisms?
>>
>>Max.G2K wrote: We must stop the war.
>>
>

On Sat, 21 Sep 2002, Joseph Franklyn McElroy Cor[porat]e [Per]form[ance] Art[ist] wrote:

> Largely of no use. These human invented architypes all fail to be complete and
> are the hubris of the people who created them.

Not at all. Nothing is 'human invented'. Nor are these archetypes.
As for hubris–your commentary betrays lack of understanding.
But that's no surprise–you're not qualified to understand these.

Before you deal with your Self–you will not be.


> Speaking of that, I am creating my own set of architypes and am looking for
> disciples to spread the word.

Ie, sheer self-destructive egotistical idiocy.

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

On Sat, 21 Sep 2002, sbrockbank wrote some idiotic drivel:

> Generally the idea of archetypes simply doesn't work

Meaningless drivel.

> accept perhaps as a representation of how some societies work,

This is not what archetypes are. Nor are they ideas.
Nor 'models.' Nor a product of anyone's brain.

> even then though it seems pretty clear that it's a redundant idea.

All empty idea(ations) are redundant. The ones typed by you,
in particular.

> But I enjoy the idea of non-human invented archetypes…

Archetypes are not 'invented'.

> contemporary wars during the past 200 years have all been fundamentally
> extensions of the economic.

No, they haven't. Schoolboy in pre-school idiotic drivel.

> perhaps they always have been

Let's project that mal-informed crippled thought formed
without direct understanding ALL OVER THE PLACE.
YEHA!

> - hence the irrelevance of notions such as the 'ego'

Brilliant that thought. Start with erroneoud premises,
and then conjecture about things you're not qualified
to make judgements about.


Baa. I can shift lexical categories. Look ma,
my brain –no hands!

the term you seem to be looking for, you idiotic fuckwit is probably
'ideology' - what is it with the endless desire to be an agressive moron?

-IID42 Kandinskij @27+ wrote:

>On Sat, 21 Sep 2002, sbrockbank wrote some idiotic drivel:
>
>>Generally the idea of archetypes simply doesn't work
>>
>
> Meaningless drivel.
>
>>accept perhaps as a representation of how some societies work,
>>
>
> This is not what archetypes are. Nor are they ideas.
> Nor 'models.' Nor a product of anyone's brain.
>
>>even then though it seems pretty clear that it's a redundant idea.
>>
>
> All empty idea(ations) are redundant. The ones typed by you,
> in particular.
>
>>But I enjoy the idea of non-human invented archetypes…
>>
>
> Archetypes are not 'invented'.
>
>>contemporary wars during the past 200 years have all been fundamentally
>>extensions of the economic.
>>
>
> No, they haven't. Schoolboy in pre-school idiotic drivel.
>
>>perhaps they always have been
>>
>
> Let's project that mal-informed crippled thought formed
> without direct understanding ALL OVER THE PLACE.
> YEHA!
>
>>- hence the irrelevance of notions such as the 'ego'
>>
>
> Brilliant that thought. Start with erroneoud premises,
> and then conjecture about things you're not qualified
> to make judgements about.
>
>
> Baa. I can shift lexical categories. Look ma,
> my brain –no hands!
>
>

On Sat, 21 Sep 2002, sbrockbank wrote:

> the term you seem to be looking for,

No, I used the term I meant to use.
Avoid dictating to me what words to use.

> you idiotic fuckwit

No, the only 'idiotic fuckwit' here is you.

> is probably 'ideology'

No, it isn't.

> - what is it with the endless desire to be an agressive moron?

I don't know: you're the one doing it, so you tell me.

There is no 'endless desire to be an aggressive moron' here.

Don't project your internal states on me.

The ones whose solar plexus chakra is asleep always re-act in fear
perceiving a fully functional one as an 'aggressive threat'.

Deal with yourself.

I LOVE YOU!—- Original Message —–
From: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>
To: "Joseph Franklyn McElroy Cor[porat]e [Per]form[ance] Art[ist]"
<[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 6:37 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: [thingist] NN, Max Herman, Eryk Salvaggio + J.
McElroy


> On Sat, 21 Sep 2002, Joseph Franklyn McElroy Cor[porat]e [Per]form[ance]
Art[ist] wrote:
>
> > Largely of no use. These human invented architypes all fail to be
complete and
> > are the hubris of the people who created them.
>
> Not at all. Nothing is 'human invented'. Nor are these archetypes.
> As for hubris–your commentary betrays lack of understanding.
> But that's no surprise–you're not qualified to understand these.
>
> Before you deal with your Self–you will not be.
>
>
> > Speaking of that, I am creating my own set of architypes and am looking
for
> > disciples to spread the word.
>
> Ie, sheer self-destructive egotistical idiocy.
>
> `, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
>
> + une dans la gueule, and two for tea !
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> 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
>
>

Marvellous

–
Joseph Franklyn McElroy
Cor[porat]e [Per]form[ance] Art[ist]

I LOVE YOU!
—– Original Message —–
From: "Joseph Franklyn McElroy Cor[porat]e [Per]form[ance] Art[ist]"
<[email protected]>
To: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 10:04 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: [thingist] NN, Max Herman, Eryk Salvaggio + J.
McElroy


> Marvellous
>
> –
> Joseph Franklyn McElroy
> Cor[porat]e [Per]form[ance] Art[ist]T
> Take the survey they are all talking about…
> http://www.electrichands.com/genius2000
> Electric Hands, Inc
> 212.255.4527
> www.electrichands.com
> [email protected]
>
>
> Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
>
> > On Sat, 21 Sep 2002, Joseph Franklyn McElroy Cor[porat]e [Per]form[ance]
> > Art[ist] wrote:
> >
> > > Largely of no use. These human invented architypes all fail to be
complete
> > and
> > > are the hubris of the people who created them.
> >
> > Not at all. Nothing is 'human invented'. Nor are these archetypes.
> > As for hubris–your commentary betrays lack of understanding.
> > But that's no surprise–you're not qualified to understand these.
> >
> > Before you deal with your Self–you will not be.
> >
> >
> > > Speaking of that, I am creating my own set of architypes and am
looking for
> > > disciples to spread the word.
> >
> > Ie, sheer self-destructive egotistical idiocy.
> >
> > `, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
>
>
>
>
> + une dans la gueule, and two for tea !
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> 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
>
>