Radical Honesty SA to Elly Mgwamba Elly Mgwamba: Req evidence for allegations of ‘serious mental issues’ and ‘lying to the world’? Elly MGwamba Twitter: @Elly_mgwamba 18 June 2011 Dear Mr. Mgwamba, I received your tweets. For Your Information: I have no links to Shrien Dewani. I have never met him. First I heard of him was after the murder in Gugulethu. Re: your tweet: ―@WhiteRefugee Shame you have some serious mental issues, STOP LYING TO THE WORLD‖1. My entire culture is founded on a social contract of truth telling and the most up to date scientific findings on psychological health. Consequently I am more curious to find out what psychological theory you are relying upon for your allegation that I have ‗mental issues‘; and what your evidence is about me ‗lying to the world‘. Where did I tell a lie? It would really be helpful if you could provide me with the psychological theoretical information you are relying upon, and whatever statements of mine you include as evidence for your conclusions. Respectfully,
Lara Johnstone Radical Honesty SA
1
http://twitter.com/#!/Elly_mgwamba/status/28798427273895936
Radical Honesty Culture & Religion Brief Overview: Lara Johnstone is a member of the Radical Honesty culture and religion. Radical Honestly highly values sincere and serious honourable constructive criticism; no matter how blunt. If you consider yourself an honourable social liberal, and your remarks were founded on scientific journalistic or ethical theoretical principles and relevant evidence; please share your evidence for your conclusions with us. Radical Honesty‘s psychological, political, ecological, emotional, socio-economic etc policies and principles are founded on the best science we can find. We are always on the lookout for sincere and serious constructive criticism founded on scientific evidence, so that our policies can be updated with the latest scientific knowledge. We have no allegiance whatsoever to political correct left or right, extreme left or right, communist, socialist, capitalist, nazi, liberal, libertarian, anarchist, multi-cultural, black or white ideologies. Our primary concern in applying any ideological problem-solving blueprint to any particular circumstance is: DOES IT WORK for the individuals involved? Does it solve their problem? If it doesn‘t work in that circumstance; we flush it down the toilet. Undoubtedly our ‗does it work‘ problem solving attitude has resulted in a degree of problem solving that has not been replicated by any other culture in the world (to my knowledge). Our culture has no murderers; no rapists, nor have any of our members conceived any unwanted children. Our members have total freedom of speech; we do not subscribe to any socialist, capitalist, nazi, liberal, black or white political correct Victimology stories. We have no lawyers. Our members are taught our – being specific about anger and forgiveness social contract2 – communication and noticing skills of honourably resolving our disagreements with each other face-to-face. Our political, cultural and religious leadership is 100% transparent including any corporate or individual funding of any project or campaign. Anyone who has any honourable sincere serious constructive criticism of Radical Honesty policies or practices is invited to share such constructive criticism to Radical Honesty members themselves.
2
http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/090611_sqworms_prh-social-contract?mode=a_p
For the Record: SA Media’s Censorship of Scientific Journalism Campaign: Details of SA Media‘s censorship and cover up of Radical Honesty SA‘s legal and activism efforts on behalf of scientific journalism campaign: (I) to expose the media‘s censorship of the PopulationEnvironment Connection (How and Why Journalists Avoid the Population-Environment Connection); (II) establish a Scientific Journalism Media Publication rating system, which could be monitored by anonymous Media Inspectors, similar to Restaurant and Hotel Inspectors, can be found at: Censored: The War You Don’t See: Root Cause Problem Solving: Scientific Journalism Campaign3: To issue an advisory ruling, with expert witness input from Wikileaks and/or OpenLeaks ‗scientific journalism‘ experts, in support of a clear classification system of ‗media corporations‘; similar to Hotel Star Ratings and Smoking Label warnings. For example: (a) Three Star Media Corporations practice unbiased and politically incorrect scientific journalism; (b) Two Star media corporations practice left or right ideological propaganda when it contradicts scientific journalism truths, and withhold from their readers access to the original documents they are reporting their bias upon; (c) One Star gutter yellow smear propaganda journalism, which has no interest whatsoever in scientific truthful reporting, only profiting from spreading gossip and malice. All media corporations are required to publish their ‗scientific journalism‘ hierarchical star status, in a designated space on their front page, clarifying their Star Status, and what that start status means regarding the scientific journalism or not quality of factual information being sold to the reader.
For the Record: Radical Honesty Leadership Paradigm: Radical Honesty‘s leadership paradigm refuses to bullshit the psychological infant public4 -particularly those afflicted with Dunning and Kruger 5 Cognitive Biases6, such as Status-Quo Bias7, Anchoring8, Bandwagon Effect9; and Primacy Effect10 -- with public relations lies and illusions. Bluntly, Radical Honesty only appeals to people who11: 1. Are Sick to death of relationships founded on political correct sycophancy and lies. 2. Refuse to wade through the ever-rising tide of corporate and political bullshite. 3. Had enough of being burned, duped, fooled, conned, scammed and screwed over. People who have confronted the reality that: Truth-Telling And Transparent Leadership are currency. Radical Honesty leaders would rather have no fans, no followers (we only have colleagues), than any ignorant moron imbecile schmuck who believes that you can solve relationship problems, by political correct arse-kissing; or that you can solve socio-economic or political problems, by refusing to address their root causes. Radical Honesty solve relationship and socio-political problems, like engineers solve engineering problems. We find the true source of the problem. We eliminate the source of the problem. End of Problem. As you can no doubt gather, Radical Honesty do not practice any form of public relations image management whatsoever. Unlike image Edward Bernaysian PR management chameleons who put forth a false image to the public, and hide any possible perspective that could be negatively interpreted by citizens who suffer from Dunning and Kruger12 Cognitive Biases13; with Radical 3
http://why-we-are-white-refugees.blogspot.com/2011/06/censored-war-you-dont-see-root-cause.html http://www.hellomynameisblog.com/2009/02/greatest-branding-secret-in-history-of.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect 6 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_bias 7 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_quo_bias 8 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring 9 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwagon_effect 10 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primacy_effect 11 http://www.hellomynameisblog.com/2009/02/greatest-branding-secret-in-history-of.html 12 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect 13 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_bias 4 5
Honesty: WHAT YOU SEE IS WHAT YOU GET! We don‘t do the Bernaysian Chameleon PR corporate and political bullshite. ―Love your neighbor as yourself‖ doesn't mean that you are supposed to lie about anger; it means to tell the petty, unreasonable, unjustifiable truth—good and loud and direct so you can authentically get over it so you can love that neighbor for real again, not phony it up and talk about how nice they are while lying through your teeth. Try treating other people as poorly as you treat yourself. At times, being honest about your anger is the only way you have of sharing who you are. Love is sharing what you have, even if you're having a fit. Telling the truth is loving your neighbor.‖ – Brad Blanton, Practicing Radical Honesty
Of course this requires a measure of courage, honour and integrity, not to measure a herculian commitment to transparency; and psychological security; no longer obedient to the Ego‘s psychological infant bicameral mind: That type of psychological infancy also demands that ‗I Think, therefore I am‘ be considered Sui Generis, i.e. Unique as the only concept of Self, and an absolute, which cannot be questioned. But it is not Sui Generis (unique) because there are many other concepts of Self. Mr. McBride seems to think that his mind is who he is; does he? But he forgets that it is his mind whom he has put in charge of making that decision? That means there is a conflict of interest, his mind has to make a decision as to whether his mind is who he – Mr. McBride – is? So surely his mind should clarify the decision-making process of how his mind came to that conclusion, based upon what psychological and philosophical and neuro-science evidence? Cause minds just like politicians don‘t always tell the truth! So, is Mr. McBride‘s mind, who he is? Or does Mr. McBride consider his being, the little baby of head, arms and legs, who grew up to be a being of a man, while growing a mind, a being whose eyes see, whose ears hear, and whose skin touches, a being that effortlessly provides this seeing, hearing, touching feedback information to the mind that he grew in his brain, to analyse and then provide his being with a final report about the feedback provided to it? If we are a conscious being, then our being uses our mind – an analytical tool -- to evaluate information, from numerous sources, analyse it and come to a conclusion. What is Mr. McBride‘s mind‘s concept of self, the foundations for his belief in his dignity, etc? It is a fragile-ego autocratic dictatorial mind that chooses ‗I think, I am Unique‘, and the right to psychological infancy (sycophancy), as its definition for dignity; but if that is what Mr McBride‘s mind wishes to be, it has such a right, but it should practice transparency and disclose that information, and take responsibility: I am a psychological infant, and I demand the right to psychological infancy and sycophancy, based on whatever evidence he wishes to put forth. [..] The meme is a unit of information (or instruction for behaviour) stored in a brain and passed on by imitation from one brain to another. Dawkins gave as examples; ideas, tunes, scientific theories, religious beliefs, clothes fashions… The most obvious (and scary) conclusion from modern neuroscience is that there is simply no one inside the brain. The more we learn about the way the brain functions the less it seems to need a central controller, a little person inside, a decider of decisions or an experiencer of experiences. These are just fictions - part of the story the brain tells itself about a self within (Churchland and Sejnowski, 1992; Dennett, 1991). We seem to live in a muddle that we think matters to a self that doesn‘t exist. I want to find out why. 14 (Radical Honesty Concourt Amicus: Citizen v. McBride15)
14
Waking from the Meme Dream: Who Am I? Do I Exist?; by Susan Blackmore; Paper presented: The Psychology of Awakening: International Conference on Buddhism, Science & Psychotherapy Dartington 7-10 November 1996; also The Psychology of Awakening: Buddhism, Science & Our Day-to-day Lives. Ed. G.Watson, S.Batchelor and G.Claxton; London, Rider, 2000, 112-122 15 The Radical Honesty perspective of the ‗right to psychological infancy‘ concept of ‗dignity‘ was submitted to the Constitutional Court (The Citizen v. McBride) in [B] Sui Generis Me-ism Sycophancy Deception, as part of: Ubuntu Brief of Amicus Curiae Lara Johnstone, Bushido Dischordian Futilitarian, In Support Of: Radical Honesty Common Sense Population Policy Social Contract Interpretations of Promotion of National Unity & Reconciliation Act, 34 of 1995: [A] A Purposive Sui-Generis Absurd Necessity: http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/cct2310_a_sui-generis?mode=a_p [B] Sui Generis Me-Ism Sycophancy Deception: http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/cct2310_b_suigeneris?mode=a_p C] Corp-Abstractism Just War Deception: http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/cct2310_c_corp-abst-decep?mode=a_p [D] Brincibia Just War SumMary: http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/cct2310_rhbd_d_just-war-summ?mode=a_p [E] Radical Ubuntu Tsedeq Interest: http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/cct2310_rhbd_e_tsedeq-love?mode=a_p
Radical Honesty Endorse Citizens Right to Choose Non-Radical Honesty Leadership: Radical Honesty however totally respects all citizens‘ rights to choose to: 1. Remain in relationships founded on political correct sycophancy and lies. 2. Drown in their leader‘s ever-rising tide of corporate and political bullshite. 3. Be burned, duped, fooled, conned, scammed and screwed over by their political, religious, corporate and media leaders. If or where Battered TRC Fraud Syndrome and Battered Voters Syndrome citizens suffering from Dunning and Kruger16 Status-Quo17, Anchoring18, Bandwagon19 and Primacy Effect20 Cognitive Biases21, are addicted to being lied to and deceived; we endorse them their right to experience the most superb burned, duped, fooled, conned, scammed and screwed over experiences, their psychological infant fragile ego‘s addiction to political correct sycophancy desire.
16
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_quo_bias http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring 19 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwagon_effect 20 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primacy_effect 21 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_bias 17 18