From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@yahoo.com)
Date: Sun Jul 20 2003 - 20:57:01 MDT
--- Natasha Vita-More <natasha@natasha.cc> wrote:
> At 01:34 PM 7/20/03 -0700, Mike wrote:
>
> >Well, I don't think so, nor do many others who have emailed me with
> >their support. Nor can you point to any actual accomplishments,
> >either.
> >The Luddites continue to win, legislatively, commercially, and in
> >public sentiment.
>
> I have said this to you many time, Mike: Start your own
> organization. If you can do it better than anyone else, then do it!
That isn't the point. You claimed that you were achieving things. I
asked you to name them. You can't, so you deflect.
>
> > > But I'm not going to state here what my plans are at this time.
> >
> >This is par for the course.
>
> No, it is not par for the course.
>
> You just went to a meeting where you were inspired to pursue your
> activistic yearnings and now you are blaming me for there not being
> an outlet for you to be an activist.
This isn't about me, Natasha, so stop trying to flip it over. Nor did I
"just went to a meeting", since I've been a member of the FSP since it
started in 2001, about the same time as Extro5 when you announced the
formation of Pro-Act. I used the FSP as an example of how a successful
organization works (and how successful it has been in the same time
period that Pro-Act has been in existence) to contrast with your utter
and abject failure and lack of communication, cooperation, or
commitment.
> I am not the person to be
> blaming. The fact that I did not pass on the baton for Pro-Act is
> (1) no one qualified to take it on emailed me asking to help out;
i.e. when I emailed you, offering my help and support, and I got
absolutely no response from you, it is because you thought I was not
qualified... which confirms my earlier statement that you used Pro-Act
to deflect the community from supporting my efforts which preceded
yours.
> (2) I could not think of any one person who was objective enough to
take it on;
Which only demonstrates you have no idea what it takes to run an
activist organization. Objectivism doesn't count as a major
qualification, moreover your opinion of me as not being objective is
only because my anti-Green leanings conflict with your Green leanings.
How objective is that on your part?
> (3) I was not sure if Pro-Act was indeed the right direction to
> go in with dealing with the current political and social global
> anti-biotechnology leanings.
Then why did you even start it? Perhaps because you saw my efforts as a
threat to your position as the queen of extropia?
>
> While Pro-Act was timely and could have been an effective activist
> organization for warding off the luddites, in hindsight it was not
> the direction I think best uses our extropic transhumanist ideas.
> Instead of fighting the opposition, it is might be more meaningful to
> communicate with the opposition. After so much name calling between
> the transhumanist organizations - Socialist, Libertarian,
> libertarian, Democratic, Marxist, Facist, Republican, etc. et al.,
> it seemed that moving beyond the obvious politicalized transhumanist
> sentiment is a better way of dealing with how people "think."
Communicating with the opposition doesn't work when they are outlawing
your existence. Do you really think that Lenin was at all interested in
receiving communication from the Mensheviks? That Mao was at all
interested in parlaying with the Nationalists?
Nor is communicating with luddites something we should even deal with.
Activism in a polarizing plenum is the way it works and the way people
do it, BECAUSE that is the way that DOES work best. It aint pretty, and
it can be stressful, but it is necessary because neither side is going
to quit until they are proven wrong by history.
>
> I am more interested in the architecture of how people think and the
> "design" of changing thinking than I am "fighting" the opposition.
That isn't the sort of attitude that makes ANY sort of progress
possible.
> We may never change the way a many in the Greenpeace community or
> the Rifkin community, or the Leon Cass community, but we can
> design ways that will help people communicate about the problems
> more effectively.
That isn't going to be worth anything when they've obsoleted your
exisence and purpose by draconian legislation.
>
> In the latest newsletter I asked people to comment. That would have
> been a great opportunity to you to communicate with me about what we
> are doing.
Cut the horseshit, Natasha. I've attempted to communicate with you
several times over the last two years about this issue and I've been
totally rebuffed. Greg Burch knows this because I've communicated with
him my concerns and asked him what the hell is going on with you
people. You have not returned any of my emails about this issue since Extro5.
=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
- Gen. John Stark
Blog: Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com
Flight sims: http://www.x-plane.org/users/greendragon/
Pro-tech freedom discussion:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/exi-freedom
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jul 20 2003 - 21:04:57 MDT