On Karei, AKA, What I Did On My Vacation

I find that some of what Karai says about me is not without truth, so I start
wondering if I am being converted or awakened. And then I get insecure, for if
it is the latter, and I reject the conversion, what do I do about the truths I
found? It means a hell of a lot of work. I have just gotten used to the idea
that there is no identifiable truths, which conclusion results similarly from
an uninformed knowledge of religion and rejection of its corrupted structures,
and now that supposed foundation is shaking. I am also irritated by Karai's
insistence upon his perfection when his obvious misreading of various posts and
other mistakes are evidence to the contrary. In fact, it is this insistence,
that makes me reject him while at the same time I am interested in what he has
to say.


joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy

go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]





Quoting Eryk Salvaggio <[email protected]>:

>
>
>
> What's interesting is, after removing myself from the pit for a while, I
> pretty much agree with a lot of what Karei has to say. There are some
> things I don't quite accept- that religion is concerned with the
> liberation of individuals from mass programming, for example. From my
> experience with religion- which is limited in actual practice to
> Protestant Catholicism; the ideas are there- as they are in all
> religion- but are taught, more often than not, by people who abuse it.
> But the point that confusing "religion" with "abuse of religion" is
> extremely valid. But I still have to wonder, if something very true is
> corrupted, and the corrupted version is taught, is it still the truth? I
> mean the reason I have criticized organized religion in the past has
> been because of the corruption of very true ideas.
>
> I've also, from matters removed from the internet art world, been
> considering the role of delusion in my own life, and it has been
> abundant. I have gone on an "art vacation", that is, I've ceased
> creating any work, or contemplating work, and have instead focused on
> the means with which I interact with other human beings; and a great
> deal of work remains to be done concerning the means of manipulating
> others as a manner of achieving what I want. I certainly have a bit of a
> fascist streak; and I don't intend to. I think a truly powerful person
> would have a mastery over thier own intent, and making sure it lines up
> with thier actions, consistently. That has got to be really hard, and I
> am starting to even figure out how this can be done. The problem is that
> even what I "want" can be so obscured by denials of wanting it; or
> distractions of wanting things, based on my own concept of who I am. It
> is interesting to have an actual epiphany concerning my own desires;
> where they come from and why I have them, what gaps they are addressed
> to fill.
>
> I don't really agree with a lot of past statements; or the methods I've
> used to put them across. It is not because of Karei that I've realized
> this- I realized it on my own, by looking at myself long enough, and
> then realized that a lot of what I was starting to see matched up with
> some of Karei's observations. Not all, however. Like, I don't see a
> problem with any of the art I've made. I like the work I've done lately.
> I think it's good, and I really don't see my own ego in it at all. It
> could be better though. It does deal with the external world, and what I
> have seen and how I have interpreted it. I do wonder if there is a
> possible method for creating art that isn't based on abstraction, but
> still addresses some kind of internal reflection. I think there must be.
> Suggestions would be welcome.
>
> The other interesting thing I've noticed is that I can have an
> immediate, very real understanding of things in the field of Zen and
> Sufism, but then I memorize them. The memorization process is a very
> cold killer, I believe, for any real internal action (and memorization
> isn't the same as internalization.) When I memorize something, I turn it
> into a "trick," which is also something Karei had pointed out before.
> Having a "trick" isn't good enough I don't think, I mean you can't apply
> these things in a dead way. I think it's really nice to say to myself
> that I'm really good at living in the moment, that I am a good person
> all the time, that my ambitions are pure and clean, but in actuality
> they may not even be. I can't tell until I really look at them. It may
> be true for other people, so I am just posting some observations on the
> process as a sort of greetings, since I have signed back on to the list
> now that I am more accepting, and not so frustrated with things and
> hopefully not as willing to toss tantrums, no matter how indirect. I'm
> extremely hesitant to say this, but I will, anyway, but I feel I owe
> Karei an apology for my past behavior towards him/her. A large part of
> my behavior was, as was stated, knee jerk reactions to positions that
> put me on the defensive. I don't take criticism very well; it's an ego
> thing, it stems a lot from insecurity, though, and this perception that
> I was getting kicked in the teeth put me into a pretty negative state. I
> kind of think it's up to the individual to decide when to look at
> themselves, but at the same time I think it is such an urgent matter for
> people.
>
> I think it can be a bad thing to be entirely comfortable with who I am;
> in a way where I live with responses that are entirely appropriate. I
> think after looking for a while I've finally rediscovered the means of
> surprising myself (and naturally, not by way of thrill seeking or
> novelty hunting, like, not by distractions but by clumsy attempts at
> awareness), which is a really great experience, even if it is, at the
> same time, completely terrifying. But sometimes it's also funny; its not
> like getting crushed but like being lifted up. I mean, here are some
> questions: How do I get back to a true zero, a blank state free of
> external influences? I mean look at everything I have: gender, race,
> economy, nationality, social standing. I mean, being born with a single
> parent or married parents or a parent who dies young or who is
> overbearing, these things can change who think one thinks they are and
> block access to who one actually is. It is almost infinite how many
> things stand in the way of "the face we have before we are born," and it
> does, indeed, take a great deal more work than reading books on zen and
> sufism and memorizing slogans such as that one. I mean I have to wonder
> if I am alone in reading books like that and pretending like I know all
> of it.
>
> So I'm not going to make any real art for a while, I think that's good
> to do, I kind of want to blank out the storage bin in my head for self
> concept. I'm no master, obviously, and probably even writing this email,
> on the subject of "I," is a kind of arrogance, but it's not harming
> others, I don't believe, so I am not very worried. I think there's a
> level beyond a level, I mean you can say "I do A because of B, and I do
> B because of C," but sometimes its good to say, "I do, and why?" and not
> have a very linear explanation for it. I've come up with some surprising
> concepts that way, I mean that's what surprises me about myself.
>
> Also, I do believe all people have the capacity to "become good" but I
> think I'd rather define it as "becoming true," and I don't agree that
> one either is or isn't. I think there is a process where a lot of it is
> in between, and I think being in between can make some people really
> beautiful, if only in pockets, because there will be pockets of being
> true, followed by stumbling. I guess I don't want to condemn people for
> stumbling, but I see Karei as creating a sort of spiritual ashphalt
> where if you stumble on the truth, you scrape your knees. I think I have
> preferred the soft grass approach, where people can stumble and lie down
> for a while in the delusional world. I guess I have always figured that
> if I stumble it means I am trying, but I do need to get up again as fast
> as possible, instead of focusing on the nobility of "try."
>
> Anyway, that's just what I have been thinking about. I kind of feel like
> Karei deserves a bit of credit, I mean, beyond arguments over whether
> mailing lists are the place to approach this sort of thing, which is
> definately arguable on some level, but if it has had some effect on
> what's been happening lately [and it's entirely possible] then I think
> the point is mute.
>
>
> -e.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> 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

This is in danger of becoming a K lovein. K does make some interesting
points. But, he is such a rude and obnoxious shit, that who really cares?
Cheers, Happy Xms and shame about Joe Strummer, Ivan
–
Ivan Pope
[email protected]
www.ivanpope.com


"Faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death"
Hunter S. Thompson

> From: "joseph (yes)" <[email protected]>
> Reply-To: "joseph (yes)" <[email protected]>
> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 15:06:47 +0000
> To: Eryk Salvaggio <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: On Karei, AKA, What I Did On My Vacation
>
> I find that some of what Karai says about me is not without truth, so I start
> wondering if I am being converted or awakened. And then I get insecure, for if
> it is the latter, and I reject the conversion, what do I do about the truths I
> found? It means a hell of a lot of work. I have just gotten used to the idea
> that there is no identifiable truths, which conclusion results similarly from
> an uninformed knowledge of religion and rejection of its corrupted structures,
> and now that supposed foundation is shaking. I am also irritated by Karai's
> insistence upon his perfection when his obvious misreading of various posts
> and
> other mistakes are evidence to the contrary. In fact, it is this insistence,
> that makes me reject him while at the same time I am interested in what he has
> to say.
>
>
> joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
> frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
>
> go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
> call me 646 279 2309
>
> SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
> [email protected]
>
>
>
>
>
> Quoting Eryk Salvaggio <[email protected]>:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> What's interesting is, after removing myself from the pit for a while, I
>> pretty much agree with a lot of what Karei has to say. There are some
>> things I don't quite accept- that religion is concerned with the
>> liberation of individuals from mass programming, for example. From my
>> experience with religion- which is limited in actual practice to
>> Protestant Catholicism; the ideas are there- as they are in all
>> religion- but are taught, more often than not, by people who abuse it.
>> But the point that confusing "religion" with "abuse of religion" is
>> extremely valid. But I still have to wonder, if something very true is
>> corrupted, and the corrupted version is taught, is it still the truth? I
>> mean the reason I have criticized organized religion in the past has
>> been because of the corruption of very true ideas.
>>
>> I've also, from matters removed from the internet art world, been
>> considering the role of delusion in my own life, and it has been
>> abundant. I have gone on an "art vacation", that is, I've ceased
>> creating any work, or contemplating work, and have instead focused on
>> the means with which I interact with other human beings; and a great
>> deal of work remains to be done concerning the means of manipulating
>> others as a manner of achieving what I want. I certainly have a bit of a
>> fascist streak; and I don't intend to. I think a truly powerful person
>> would have a mastery over thier own intent, and making sure it lines up
>> with thier actions, consistently. That has got to be really hard, and I
>> am starting to even figure out how this can be done. The problem is that
>> even what I "want" can be so obscured by denials of wanting it; or
>> distractions of wanting things, based on my own concept of who I am. It
>> is interesting to have an actual epiphany concerning my own desires;
>> where they come from and why I have them, what gaps they are addressed
>> to fill.
>>
>> I don't really agree with a lot of past statements; or the methods I've
>> used to put them across. It is not because of Karei that I've realized
>> this- I realized it on my own, by looking at myself long enough, and
>> then realized that a lot of what I was starting to see matched up with
>> some of Karei's observations. Not all, however. Like, I don't see a
>> problem with any of the art I've made. I like the work I've done lately.
>> I think it's good, and I really don't see my own ego in it at all. It
>> could be better though. It does deal with the external world, and what I
>> have seen and how I have interpreted it. I do wonder if there is a
>> possible method for creating art that isn't based on abstraction, but
>> still addresses some kind of internal reflection. I think there must be.
>> Suggestions would be welcome.
>>
>> The other interesting thing I've noticed is that I can have an
>> immediate, very real understanding of things in the field of Zen and
>> Sufism, but then I memorize them. The memorization process is a very
>> cold killer, I believe, for any real internal action (and memorization
>> isn't the same as internalization.) When I memorize something, I turn it
>> into a "trick," which is also something Karei had pointed out before.
>> Having a "trick" isn't good enough I don't think, I mean you can't apply
>> these things in a dead way. I think it's really nice to say to myself
>> that I'm really good at living in the moment, that I am a good person
>> all the time, that my ambitions are pure and clean, but in actuality
>> they may not even be. I can't tell until I really look at them. It may
>> be true for other people, so I am just posting some observations on the
>> process as a sort of greetings, since I have signed back on to the list
>> now that I am more accepting, and not so frustrated with things and
>> hopefully not as willing to toss tantrums, no matter how indirect. I'm
>> extremely hesitant to say this, but I will, anyway, but I feel I owe
>> Karei an apology for my past behavior towards him/her. A large part of
>> my behavior was, as was stated, knee jerk reactions to positions that
>> put me on the defensive. I don't take criticism very well; it's an ego
>> thing, it stems a lot from insecurity, though, and this perception that
>> I was getting kicked in the teeth put me into a pretty negative state. I
>> kind of think it's up to the individual to decide when to look at
>> themselves, but at the same time I think it is such an urgent matter for
>> people.
>>
>> I think it can be a bad thing to be entirely comfortable with who I am;
>> in a way where I live with responses that are entirely appropriate. I
>> think after looking for a while I've finally rediscovered the means of
>> surprising myself (and naturally, not by way of thrill seeking or
>> novelty hunting, like, not by distractions but by clumsy attempts at
>> awareness), which is a really great experience, even if it is, at the
>> same time, completely terrifying. But sometimes it's also funny; its not
>> like getting crushed but like being lifted up. I mean, here are some
>> questions: How do I get back to a true zero, a blank state free of
>> external influences? I mean look at everything I have: gender, race,
>> economy, nationality, social standing. I mean, being born with a single
>> parent or married parents or a parent who dies young or who is
>> overbearing, these things can change who think one thinks they are and
>> block access to who one actually is. It is almost infinite how many
>> things stand in the way of "the face we have before we are born," and it
>> does, indeed, take a great deal more work than reading books on zen and
>> sufism and memorizing slogans such as that one. I mean I have to wonder
>> if I am alone in reading books like that and pretending like I know all
>> of it.
>>
>> So I'm not going to make any real art for a while, I think that's good
>> to do, I kind of want to blank out the storage bin in my head for self
>> concept. I'm no master, obviously, and probably even writing this email,
>> on the subject of "I," is a kind of arrogance, but it's not harming
>> others, I don't believe, so I am not very worried. I think there's a
>> level beyond a level, I mean you can say "I do A because of B, and I do
>> B because of C," but sometimes its good to say, "I do, and why?" and not
>> have a very linear explanation for it. I've come up with some surprising
>> concepts that way, I mean that's what surprises me about myself.
>>
>> Also, I do believe all people have the capacity to "become good" but I
>> think I'd rather define it as "becoming true," and I don't agree that
>> one either is or isn't. I think there is a process where a lot of it is
>> in between, and I think being in between can make some people really
>> beautiful, if only in pockets, because there will be pockets of being
>> true, followed by stumbling. I guess I don't want to condemn people for
>> stumbling, but I see Karei as creating a sort of spiritual ashphalt
>> where if you stumble on the truth, you scrape your knees. I think I have
>> preferred the soft grass approach, where people can stumble and lie down
>> for a while in the delusional world. I guess I have always figured that
>> if I stumble it means I am trying, but I do need to get up again as fast
>> as possible, instead of focusing on the nobility of "try."
>>
>> Anyway, that's just what I have been thinking about. I kind of feel like
>> Karei deserves a bit of credit, I mean, beyond arguments over whether
>> mailing lists are the place to approach this sort of thing, which is
>> definately arguable on some level, but if it has had some effect on
>> what's been happening lately [and it's entirely possible] then I think
>> the point is mute.
>>
>>
>> -e.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
>> -> 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
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> 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
>

he won't let you love him
:)

joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy

go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]





Quoting Ivan Pope <[email protected]>:

> This is in danger of becoming a K lovein. K does make some interesting
> points. But, he is such a rude and obnoxious shit, that who really cares?
> Cheers, Happy Xms and shame about Joe Strummer, Ivan
> –
> Ivan Pope
> [email protected]
> www.ivanpope.com
>
>
> "Faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death"
> Hunter S. Thompson
>
> > From: "joseph (yes)" <[email protected]>
> > Reply-To: "joseph (yes)" <[email protected]>
> > Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 15:06:47 +0000
> > To: Eryk Salvaggio <[email protected]>
> > Cc: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: On Karei, AKA, What I Did On My Vacation
> >
> > I find that some of what Karai says about me is not without truth, so I
> start
> > wondering if I am being converted or awakened. And then I get insecure, for
> if
> > it is the latter, and I reject the conversion, what do I do about the
> truths I
> > found? It means a hell of a lot of work. I have just gotten used to the
> idea
> > that there is no identifiable truths, which conclusion results similarly
> from
> > an uninformed knowledge of religion and rejection of its corrupted
> structures,
> > and now that supposed foundation is shaking. I am also irritated by
> Karai's
> > insistence upon his perfection when his obvious misreading of various posts
> > and
> > other mistakes are evidence to the contrary. In fact, it is this
> insistence,
> > that makes me reject him while at the same time I am interested in what he
> has
> > to say.
> >
> >
> > joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
> > frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
> >
> > go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
> > call me 646 279 2309
> >
> > SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
> > [email protected]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Quoting Eryk Salvaggio <[email protected]>:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> What's interesting is, after removing myself from the pit for a while, I
> >> pretty much agree with a lot of what Karei has to say. There are some
> >> things I don't quite accept- that religion is concerned with the
> >> liberation of individuals from mass programming, for example. From my
> >> experience with religion- which is limited in actual practice to
> >> Protestant Catholicism; the ideas are there- as they are in all
> >> religion- but are taught, more often than not, by people who abuse it.
> >> But the point that confusing "religion" with "abuse of religion" is
> >> extremely valid. But I still have to wonder, if something very true is
> >> corrupted, and the corrupted version is taught, is it still the truth? I
> >> mean the reason I have criticized organized religion in the past has
> >> been because of the corruption of very true ideas.
> >>
> >> I've also, from matters removed from the internet art world, been
> >> considering the role of delusion in my own life, and it has been
> >> abundant. I have gone on an "art vacation", that is, I've ceased
> >> creating any work, or contemplating work, and have instead focused on
> >> the means with which I interact with other human beings; and a great
> >> deal of work remains to be done concerning the means of manipulating
> >> others as a manner of achieving what I want. I certainly have a bit of a
> >> fascist streak; and I don't intend to. I think a truly powerful person
> >> would have a mastery over thier own intent, and making sure it lines up
> >> with thier actions, consistently. That has got to be really hard, and I
> >> am starting to even figure out how this can be done. The problem is that
> >> even what I "want" can be so obscured by denials of wanting it; or
> >> distractions of wanting things, based on my own concept of who I am. It
> >> is interesting to have an actual epiphany concerning my own desires;
> >> where they come from and why I have them, what gaps they are addressed
> >> to fill.
> >>
> >> I don't really agree with a lot of past statements; or the methods I've
> >> used to put them across. It is not because of Karei that I've realized
> >> this- I realized it on my own, by looking at myself long enough, and
> >> then realized that a lot of what I was starting to see matched up with
> >> some of Karei's observations. Not all, however. Like, I don't see a
> >> problem with any of the art I've made. I like the work I've done lately.
> >> I think it's good, and I really don't see my own ego in it at all. It
> >> could be better though. It does deal with the external world, and what I
> >> have seen and how I have interpreted it. I do wonder if there is a
> >> possible method for creating art that isn't based on abstraction, but
> >> still addresses some kind of internal reflection. I think there must be.
> >> Suggestions would be welcome.
> >>
> >> The other interesting thing I've noticed is that I can have an
> >> immediate, very real understanding of things in the field of Zen and
> >> Sufism, but then I memorize them. The memorization process is a very
> >> cold killer, I believe, for any real internal action (and memorization
> >> isn't the same as internalization.) When I memorize something, I turn it
> >> into a "trick," which is also something Karei had pointed out before.
> >> Having a "trick" isn't good enough I don't think, I mean you can't apply
> >> these things in a dead way. I think it's really nice to say to myself
> >> that I'm really good at living in the moment, that I am a good person
> >> all the time, that my ambitions are pure and clean, but in actuality
> >> they may not even be. I can't tell until I really look at them. It may
> >> be true for other people, so I am just posting some observations on the
> >> process as a sort of greetings, since I have signed back on to the list
> >> now that I am more accepting, and not so frustrated with things and
> >> hopefully not as willing to toss tantrums, no matter how indirect. I'm
> >> extremely hesitant to say this, but I will, anyway, but I feel I owe
> >> Karei an apology for my past behavior towards him/her. A large part of
> >> my behavior was, as was stated, knee jerk reactions to positions that
> >> put me on the defensive. I don't take criticism very well; it's an ego
> >> thing, it stems a lot from insecurity, though, and this perception that
> >> I was getting kicked in the teeth put me into a pretty negative state. I
> >> kind of think it's up to the individual to decide when to look at
> >> themselves, but at the same time I think it is such an urgent matter for
> >> people.
> >>
> >> I think it can be a bad thing to be entirely comfortable with who I am;
> >> in a way where I live with responses that are entirely appropriate. I
> >> think after looking for a while I've finally rediscovered the means of
> >> surprising myself (and naturally, not by way of thrill seeking or
> >> novelty hunting, like, not by distractions but by clumsy attempts at
> >> awareness), which is a really great experience, even if it is, at the
> >> same time, completely terrifying. But sometimes it's also funny; its not
> >> like getting crushed but like being lifted up. I mean, here are some
> >> questions: How do I get back to a true zero, a blank state free of
> >> external influences? I mean look at everything I have: gender, race,
> >> economy, nationality, social standing. I mean, being born with a single
> >> parent or married parents or a parent who dies young or who is
> >> overbearing, these things can change who think one thinks they are and
> >> block access to who one actually is. It is almost infinite how many
> >> things stand in the way of "the face we have before we are born," and it
> >> does, indeed, take a great deal more work than reading books on zen and
> >> sufism and memorizing slogans such as that one. I mean I have to wonder
> >> if I am alone in reading books like that and pretending like I know all
> >> of it.
> >>
> >> So I'm not going to make any real art for a while, I think that's good
> >> to do, I kind of want to blank out the storage bin in my head for self
> >> concept. I'm no master, obviously, and probably even writing this email,
> >> on the subject of "I," is a kind of arrogance, but it's not harming
> >> others, I don't believe, so I am not very worried. I think there's a
> >> level beyond a level, I mean you can say "I do A because of B, and I do
> >> B because of C," but sometimes its good to say, "I do, and why?" and not
> >> have a very linear explanation for it. I've come up with some surprising
> >> concepts that way, I mean that's what surprises me about myself.
> >>
> >> Also, I do believe all people have the capacity to "become good" but I
> >> think I'd rather define it as "becoming true," and I don't agree that
> >> one either is or isn't. I think there is a process where a lot of it is
> >> in between, and I think being in between can make some people really
> >> beautiful, if only in pockets, because there will be pockets of being
> >> true, followed by stumbling. I guess I don't want to condemn people for
> >> stumbling, but I see Karei as creating a sort of spiritual ashphalt
> >> where if you stumble on the truth, you scrape your knees. I think I have
> >> preferred the soft grass approach, where people can stumble and lie down
> >> for a while in the delusional world. I guess I have always figured that
> >> if I stumble it means I am trying, but I do need to get up again as fast
> >> as possible, instead of focusing on the nobility of "try."
> >>
> >> Anyway, that's just what I have been thinking about. I kind of feel like
> >> Karei deserves a bit of credit, I mean, beyond arguments over whether
> >> mailing lists are the place to approach this sort of thing, which is
> >> definately arguable on some level, but if it has had some effect on
> >> what's been happening lately [and it's entirely possible] then I think
> >> the point is mute.
> >>
> >>
> >> -e.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> >> -> 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
> > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > -> 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
> >

On Mon, 23 Dec 2002, Ivan Pope wrote:

> This is in danger of becoming a K lovein. K does make some interesting
> points.

We have no interesting points.

> But, he is such a rude and obnoxious shit, that who really cares?


Yeah Ivan. You just can't take it can ya.
Standard eho-boosting self-inflating technique.
Yeah "has some points, but..".
You just HAVE to try and condescend.
Guess what babycheeks. You have no authority to judge us.
In any capacity.

Avoid projecting your wishful derogatory commentary
onto us. It IS NOT us.

The only rude and obnoxious shit here is you, babycheeks.
And you wouldn't be able to discern an "interesting point" if
it hit you in the face. You're ignorant, idiotic, arrogant,
blind, deaf, and dumb.

Go attempt to peddle your ego elsewhere, idiotic ape.

On Mon, 23 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:

> he won't let you love him
> :)

You're not capable of love.

If you were capable of it, there'd be no need for me to "let" you.

Love is. And you've yet to meet it.

This is also for Eryk : it's not just automatically slammed into your
mailbox.

On Mon, 23 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:

> I find that some of what Karai says about me is not without truth, so I start
> wondering if I am being converted or awakened.

Neither.

> And then I get insecure, for if it is the latter, and I reject the
> conversion,

There is no conversion. In fact it has been indicated that you are
incapable of handling such subjects at present time.

> what do I do about the truths I found? It means a hell of a lot of work.

Sure does. Including observing yourself behave like a murderous farmer
ape. Tak.

You have attempted techniques which are to induce states of weakness +
catatonia in another fancying yourself "fighting".

You are in fact self-destructing + inducing self-damage.
You are erroding your own foundations.
You may not "believe" it, however it is a "fact."
And reality does not care about your delusions.
Neither do we. Nor will "reactionary denial" affect
anything.

We had reconsidered a lengthier "exposition" of your
dictatorial control obsessed routines, yet only this:

http://www.realfighting.com/0702/laurart.html

That emotions are in fact something far more complex
and connected to the body directly has been known
in the real sense to some "ancient old males".
Aspects of it are known to "scientific" West,
and are used in EMOTIONAL PROGRAMMING in cults.
military. police.

Your behavior has featured standard + standard + standard
cult-brainwashing dictatorial attempts. This is not a "personal
accusation".

> I have just gotten used to the idea that there is no identifiable truths,

Truths are knowable to those who can know.
Gotten used to the idea?

Emotional programming + "belief" (idea) : what makes kamikazes?

Ideology or dictatorial memetic programming.

Yes FAUX religion can be used as a device.
So can art, and language.


> which conclusion results similarly from an uninformed knowledge of religion

Uninformed beliefs. Knowledge you're not capable of (currently).


> and rejection of its corrupted structures,

You cannot reject something that exists only as a hallucinatory
programmatic "idee fixee".

> and now that supposed foundation is shaking.

Religion is not a cult. How is that for a start?
Most (current) humans have no experience of religion.
Or good wine. The plastik uber-kitsch substitute.
With a very high price tag.


> I am also irritated by Karai's insistence

We do not "insist".

> upon his perfection

We have "insisted on perfection" not.
Why do you get irritated about something that isn't? :)


> when his obvious misreading of various posts

No dearest. We have not misread anything at all.
Nor are you capable of perceiving 'the obvious'.
Your delusional projections are not what we do,
no matter how much you label them "obvious".

> other mistakes

We have madea bsolutely no mistakes.

> are evidence to the contrary.

There has been no such evidence, besides in your
wishfil passive-aggressive murderous knee-jerk projections.

Your illiteracy + lack of ability to see are your_ own_ problema.

> In fact, it is this insistence, that makes me reject him

No dearest. YOU + only YOU are responsible for your
reactionary knee-jerks. Avoid attempting to justify
your passive-aggressiveness with something about
us which is merely a wishful projection on your part.

Reality cannot be 'rejected' no matter how much one
types 'reject'.

> while at the same time I am interested in what he has
> to say.

You have capability to be interested?

The push-pull. Luv-hate. Lik-dislik.
Spring of desire.

-IID42 Kandinskij @27+ wrote:

>This is also for Eryk : it's not just automatically slammed into your
>mailbox.
>

I turned off the filter anyway.

>
>
>On Mon, 23 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
>what do I do about the truths I found? It means a hell of a lot of work.
>
>
> Sure does. Including observing yourself behave like a murderous farmer
> ape. Tak.
>

I don't really get the farmer thing, but the murder thing is getting a
lot clearer (and I don't think the farmer bit is for me anyway.) I've
been observing it pretty often. I work in a store that sells things that
people buy each other for christmas, people come and ask me questions
and sometimes I just want them to go away, so I have noticed a tendency
towards alienating them, sending signals that they are not wanted, that
sort of thing, which is an act of aggression, really, a rejection of a
request for communication. But I shouldn't be at the job I'm at anymore
really, I'm there now to kind of see if I can get better even in such an
extreme environment. I'd like to be able to sustain constant, true
empathy with everyone I come in contact with; without blaming my job for
failing. Of course true empathy is work and it is exhausting work, but I
am doing it because there's no choice, really. I'm not sure if empathy
is the real word.



>You have attempted techniques which are to induce states of weakness +
> catatonia in another fancying yourself "fighting".
>
> You are in fact self-destructing + inducing self-damage.
> You are erroding your own foundations.
> You may not "believe" it, however it is a "fact."
> And reality does not care about your delusions.
>

I've always considered myself a pacifist until I was reading the essay
posted here by Paul Goodman, which talked a lot about the nature of
pacifism soaking in a lot farther than anti-war rhetoric and actually
coming across in daily life and interactions, that is, a rejection of
aggression. Identifying my own aggressive behaviors has become a kind of
hobby for me now and I really have a sense of delight in finding them
because then I can control them (and actually take accountability for
the disparity between who I am and who I imagine myself to be.) Driving
is ridiculous, and one of the hardest things for me to get a handle on
is road rage, this sense of "die motherfucker" when I get cut off
changing lanes, taking secret delight in the fantasy of a speeding car
getting pulled over or having a tire blow out or something. It's really
terrible, and it happens and I act really quickly to cover up even the
acknowledgement that I have those thoughts. But I've been acknowledging
them and so I've come to this conclusion- which is a very no-irony
realization, that I have an emotional balancing act to perform, and that
I need to put energy towards areas of my psyche that are lying
undeveloped and rotted, covered up by this rage, which itself is also
concealed by "knee jerk" refusals to admit that they even happened.

One thing is, I've been forgetting that people die, things die, the
earth dies, and I've been forgetting to put energy into remembering that
I will die and that people will die. I used to do it a lot, and I think
that is another problem, is I have phases where I intellectually
acknowledge this fact, and phases where I really, truly acknowledge this
fact. The problem is, I stay delusional and imagine that intellectually
knowing is enough. But knowing is not enough. I'm still moved towards
"doing good," considering the nature of charity, helping others, etc,
but I have to say I don't think I am actually capable of really focusing
on that aspect of life until I have an actual, working self to do it
with. I'll have it, I know for a fact, really, but it might take some
time, because it does take work and work takes time. (But that work is
not an excuse for covering up what I know I should be doing, either.)

>
> Truths are knowable to those who can know.
> Gotten used to the idea?
>

I may be speaking too soon, but there are one or two things that I used
to "know" that I "forgot to know" but still remembered; which is
different from knowing, and I don't know if I can describe it, it is the
same way I feel when I know I am in love; I mean, it's the same type of
knowing that takes place on a pre-verbal [or maybe even post-verbal] level.


>Emotional programming + "belief" (idea) : what makes kamikazes?
>
> Ideology or dictatorial memetic programming.
>
> Yes FAUX religion can be used as a device.
> So can art, and language.
>

Can't, in fact, anything inspiring emotion, be twisted to use as a
programming tool? An ounce of truth makes a more convincing lie, isn't
that a Hitlerism?



>>and rejection of its corrupted structures,
>>
>
> You cannot reject something that exists only as a hallucinatory
> programmatic "idee fixee".
>


I have firsthand experience of a corrupted vision of a religion being
taught to people; filed under Buddhism. I know the problem is not with
Buddhism, but with the twisted interpretations it can inspire [which
then get taught.] I feel like maybe it is the responsibility of the
individual to study the original texts in his or her own way when
teachers are so hard to find and most of it cannot be transmitted
through teachings anyway- all a teacher can do, really, is show you how
to stumble into yourself when you're looking at him. [which was an
element of sufism, where there were levels you could get through with a
teacher, but after that, you were on your own.] What do you think of
"church"? I don't feel the same sense of awe for church as I do for
religion, and yet religion is what gets filed under church, even if it's
abuse of the term, whereas independent studying and reflection of
religion gets termed "spirituality." Which has its own problems- the
issue of self declared shamans and boddhisattvas, rejecting the
"organized" elements of the religion for better or for ill. But you know
what, that problem is easy to solve, I just, simply, don't do that
anymore. I mean, I am writing about my observations about myself, but
that's a far cry from telling other people that I "know" the way…


>
> Religion is not a cult. How is that for a start?
>

Religion is not a cult, but cults are cults, and cults can be based on
faux-religiosity. There are vague multiplicities in the meanings of
words like "religion" and "knowledge." Religion vs "Religion." The
common and oftentimes false understandings of words as opposed to what
the words actually mean- Caeser Salad, for example, is not Caeser Salad
most of the times you are eating it, but that doesn't mean Caeser Salad
isn't made with sardines. One problem I have had with Karei is the
refusal to acknowledge the meanings of terms when they're used to
describe thier faux meanings, but this is, in hindsight, perfectly
right. Religion is Religion, and Religion is not "Religion," ie, false
religion. It is messier, I think, to use the same word to mean its exact
opposite the way I have, with regards to the words religion, knowledge,
love, and kindness.

-e.

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

> You have capability to be interested?

I recently realized that when I met a new person, I didn't see them but instead
tried to place them in the supposed great future of joseph franklyn mcelroy.
An illusion (delusion) in my brain.

I just spent the trip for the holiday driving an RV 1500 miles. Instead of
going into daydreams, I tried to see the road, the trees, the buildings, the
animals, the people … I tried to stay conscious of what was actually passing
by me. It was difficult, I kept wandering off into dream state. I got better
as the trip progressed.

I was just on the roof fixing the satellite receiver, which had been moved
while I was gone. I found myself imagining a "evil" Direct TV repairman being
the culprit…once I caught myself in this imagining, I looked more clearly and
found a piece of plastic had actually formed a parachute that with sufficient
wind would have pulled the receiver out of place.

As I write this, I am trying to avoid projecting what potential response might
be - from both active and passive participants… again this is difficult. I
already censored myself once and added the above paragraph. How to critically
review without an eye towards manipulation? Or is it the type of manipulation?

I find this interesting.


joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy

go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]







> This is also for Eryk : it's not just automatically slammed into your
> mailbox.
>
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
> > I find that some of what Karai says about me is not without truth, so I
> start
> > wondering if I am being converted or awakened.
>
> Neither.
>
> > And then I get insecure, for if it is the latter, and I reject the
> > conversion,
>
> There is no conversion. In fact it has been indicated that you are
> incapable of handling such subjects at present time.
>
> > what do I do about the truths I found? It means a hell of a lot of work.
>
> Sure does. Including observing yourself behave like a murderous farmer
> ape. Tak.
>
> You have attempted techniques which are to induce states of weakness +
> catatonia in another fancying yourself "fighting".
>
> You are in fact self-destructing + inducing self-damage.
> You are erroding your own foundations.
> You may not "believe" it, however it is a "fact."
> And reality does not care about your delusions.
> Neither do we. Nor will "reactionary denial" affect
> anything.
>
> We had reconsidered a lengthier "exposition" of your
> dictatorial control obsessed routines, yet only this:
>
> http://www.realfighting.com/0702/laurart.html
>
> That emotions are in fact something far more complex
> and connected to the body directly has been known
> in the real sense to some "ancient old males".
> Aspects of it are known to "scientific" West,
> and are used in EMOTIONAL PROGRAMMING in cults.
> military. police.
>
> Your behavior has featured standard + standard + standard
> cult-brainwashing dictatorial attempts. This is not a "personal
> accusation".
>
> > I have just gotten used to the idea that there is no identifiable truths,
>
> Truths are knowable to those who can know.
> Gotten used to the idea?
>
> Emotional programming + "belief" (idea) : what makes kamikazes?
>
> Ideology or dictatorial memetic programming.
>
> Yes FAUX religion can be used as a device.
> So can art, and language.
>
>
> > which conclusion results similarly from an uninformed knowledge of religion
>
> Uninformed beliefs. Knowledge you're not capable of (currently).
>
>
> > and rejection of its corrupted structures,
>
> You cannot reject something that exists only as a hallucinatory
> programmatic "idee fixee".
>
> > and now that supposed foundation is shaking.
>
> Religion is not a cult. How is that for a start?
> Most (current) humans have no experience of religion.
> Or good wine. The plastik uber-kitsch substitute.
> With a very high price tag.
>
>
> > I am also irritated by Karai's insistence
>
> We do not "insist".
>
> > upon his perfection
>
> We have "insisted on perfection" not.
> Why do you get irritated about something that isn't? :)
>
>
> > when his obvious misreading of various posts
>
> No dearest. We have not misread anything at all.
> Nor are you capable of perceiving 'the obvious'.
> Your delusional projections are not what we do,
> no matter how much you label them "obvious".
>
> > other mistakes
>
> We have madea bsolutely no mistakes.
>
> > are evidence to the contrary.
>
> There has been no such evidence, besides in your
> wishfil passive-aggressive murderous knee-jerk projections.
>
> Your illiteracy + lack of ability to see are your_ own_ problema.
>
> > In fact, it is this insistence, that makes me reject him
>
> No dearest. YOU + only YOU are responsible for your
> reactionary knee-jerks. Avoid attempting to justify
> your passive-aggressiveness with something about
> us which is merely a wishful projection on your part.
>
> Reality cannot be 'rejected' no matter how much one
> types 'reject'.
>
> > while at the same time I am interested in what he has
> > to say.
>

> The push-pull. Luv-hate. Lik-dislik.
> Spring of desire.

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

> Religion is not a cult. How is that for a start?

Ok - cult is a method and/or organization of worship.

Religion is theory/knowledge of causes and access to powers that control
destiny.


joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy

go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]





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

> This is also for Eryk : it's not just automatically slammed into your
> mailbox.
>
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
> > I find that some of what Karai says about me is not without truth, so I
> start
> > wondering if I am being converted or awakened.
>
> Neither.
>
> > And then I get insecure, for if it is the latter, and I reject the
> > conversion,
>
> There is no conversion. In fact it has been indicated that you are
> incapable of handling such subjects at present time.
>
> > what do I do about the truths I found? It means a hell of a lot of work.
>
> Sure does. Including observing yourself behave like a murderous farmer
> ape. Tak.
>
> You have attempted techniques which are to induce states of weakness +
> catatonia in another fancying yourself "fighting".
>
> You are in fact self-destructing + inducing self-damage.
> You are erroding your own foundations.
> You may not "believe" it, however it is a "fact."
> And reality does not care about your delusions.
> Neither do we. Nor will "reactionary denial" affect
> anything.
>
> We had reconsidered a lengthier "exposition" of your
> dictatorial control obsessed routines, yet only this:
>
> http://www.realfighting.com/0702/laurart.html
>
> That emotions are in fact something far more complex
> and connected to the body directly has been known
> in the real sense to some "ancient old males".
> Aspects of it are known to "scientific" West,
> and are used in EMOTIONAL PROGRAMMING in cults.
> military. police.
>
> Your behavior has featured standard + standard + standard
> cult-brainwashing dictatorial attempts. This is not a "personal
> accusation".
>
> > I have just gotten used to the idea that there is no identifiable truths,
>
> Truths are knowable to those who can know.
> Gotten used to the idea?
>
> Emotional programming + "belief" (idea) : what makes kamikazes?
>
> Ideology or dictatorial memetic programming.
>
> Yes FAUX religion can be used as a device.
> So can art, and language.
>
>
> > which conclusion results similarly from an uninformed knowledge of religion
>
> Uninformed beliefs. Knowledge you're not capable of (currently).
>
>
> > and rejection of its corrupted structures,
>
> You cannot reject something that exists only as a hallucinatory
> programmatic "idee fixee".
>
> > and now that supposed foundation is shaking.
>
> Religion is not a cult. How is that for a start?
> Most (current) humans have no experience of religion.
> Or good wine. The plastik uber-kitsch substitute.
> With a very high price tag.
>
>
> > I am also irritated by Karai's insistence
>
> We do not "insist".
>
> > upon his perfection
>
> We have "insisted on perfection" not.
> Why do you get irritated about something that isn't? :)
>
>
> > when his obvious misreading of various posts
>
> No dearest. We have not misread anything at all.
> Nor are you capable of perceiving 'the obvious'.
> Your delusional projections are not what we do,
> no matter how much you label them "obvious".
>
> > other mistakes
>
> We have madea bsolutely no mistakes.
>
> > are evidence to the contrary.
>
> There has been no such evidence, besides in your
> wishfil passive-aggressive murderous knee-jerk projections.
>
> Your illiteracy + lack of ability to see are your_ own_ problema.
>
> > In fact, it is this insistence, that makes me reject him
>
> No dearest. YOU + only YOU are responsible for your
> reactionary knee-jerks. Avoid attempting to justify
> your passive-aggressiveness with something about
> us which is merely a wishful projection on your part.
>
> Reality cannot be 'rejected' no matter how much one
> types 'reject'.
>
> > while at the same time I am interested in what he has
> > to say.
>
> You have capability to be interested?
>
> The push-pull. Luv-hate. Lik-dislik.
> Spring of desire.

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

> Why do you get irritated about something that isn't? :)

I am irritated by my own construct. I accepted the program of imperfection and
insist upon it for others, when I in fact, do not know whether perfection is
possible or not. I do not know whether you are perfect or not, I should not
let your statement of such be anything other than an observable statement. If
or when I know perfection, I will know the truth of your statement.

joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy

go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]





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

> This is also for Eryk : it's not just automatically slammed into your
> mailbox.
>
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
> > I find that some of what Karai says about me is not without truth, so I
> start
> > wondering if I am being converted or awakened.
>
> Neither.
>
> > And then I get insecure, for if it is the latter, and I reject the
> > conversion,
>
> There is no conversion. In fact it has been indicated that you are
> incapable of handling such subjects at present time.
>
> > what do I do about the truths I found? It means a hell of a lot of work.
>
> Sure does. Including observing yourself behave like a murderous farmer
> ape. Tak.
>
> You have attempted techniques which are to induce states of weakness +
> catatonia in another fancying yourself "fighting".
>
> You are in fact self-destructing + inducing self-damage.
> You are erroding your own foundations.
> You may not "believe" it, however it is a "fact."
> And reality does not care about your delusions.
> Neither do we. Nor will "reactionary denial" affect
> anything.
>
> We had reconsidered a lengthier "exposition" of your
> dictatorial control obsessed routines, yet only this:
>
> http://www.realfighting.com/0702/laurart.html
>
> That emotions are in fact something far more complex
> and connected to the body directly has been known
> in the real sense to some "ancient old males".
> Aspects of it are known to "scientific" West,
> and are used in EMOTIONAL PROGRAMMING in cults.
> military. police.
>
> Your behavior has featured standard + standard + standard
> cult-brainwashing dictatorial attempts. This is not a "personal
> accusation".
>
> > I have just gotten used to the idea that there is no identifiable truths,
>
> Truths are knowable to those who can know.
> Gotten used to the idea?
>
> Emotional programming + "belief" (idea) : what makes kamikazes?
>
> Ideology or dictatorial memetic programming.
>
> Yes FAUX religion can be used as a device.
> So can art, and language.
>
>
> > which conclusion results similarly from an uninformed knowledge of religion
>
> Uninformed beliefs. Knowledge you're not capable of (currently).
>
>
> > and rejection of its corrupted structures,
>
> You cannot reject something that exists only as a hallucinatory
> programmatic "idee fixee".
>
> > and now that supposed foundation is shaking.
>
> Religion is not a cult. How is that for a start?
> Most (current) humans have no experience of religion.
> Or good wine. The plastik uber-kitsch substitute.
> With a very high price tag.
>
>
> > I am also irritated by Karai's insistence
>
> We do not "insist".
>
> > upon his perfection
>
> We have "insisted on perfection" not.
> Why do you get irritated about something that isn't? :)
>
>
> > when his obvious misreading of various posts
>
> No dearest. We have not misread anything at all.
> Nor are you capable of perceiving 'the obvious'.
> Your delusional projections are not what we do,
> no matter how much you label them "obvious".
>
> > other mistakes
>
> We have madea bsolutely no mistakes.
>
> > are evidence to the contrary.
>
> There has been no such evidence, besides in your
> wishfil passive-aggressive murderous knee-jerk projections.
>
> Your illiteracy + lack of ability to see are your_ own_ problema.
>
> > In fact, it is this insistence, that makes me reject him
>
> No dearest. YOU + only YOU are responsible for your
> reactionary knee-jerks. Avoid attempting to justify
> your passive-aggressiveness with something about
> us which is merely a wishful projection on your part.
>
> Reality cannot be 'rejected' no matter how much one
> types 'reject'.
>
> > while at the same time I am interested in what he has
> > to say.
>
> You have capability to be interested?
>
> The push-pull. Luv-hate. Lik-dislik.
> Spring of desire.