Guy’s World: The Real Slim Sludgy

I fell into a maelstrom of sludge slinging when I replied to a couple of emails from stroppy Libertarians responding to Sludge Report #60 – Free Tiger Woods that were forwarded to me at Scoop. I figured comparing libertarians to their socialist arch nemeses, and - worse – comparing some libertarians’ adherence to objectivism and Ayn Rand to Christian devotion, would get a rise. I got my reaction, with interest.

It began when I emailed an identical missive to Mike and ‘KP’, who both called Sludge an envy ridden knocker who’s jealous of Tiger Woods and ought to have the strength of his convictions to use his own name. Their initial emails can be viewed here: Sludge Report #60 Feedback

Like a cornered racoon, my new pen pal, libertarian Michael Gordge, accused me of being Sludge, took me for a dirty communist, set me straight on a thing or two about libertarianism, and asked me to come out and fight like a man.

Ordinarily, Guy’s World avoids subjects I know nothing about. The following email dialogue, however, is entertaining enough to break with Guy’s World’s avoidance of covering anything remotely resembling politics.

It is edited in the interest of brevity (sorry Mike, if some of your favourite stuff is missing, it happens to journalists all the time), but is otherwise the exact words of Mike and myself, spelling mistakes, grammatical errors and all.

----- Original Message -----
From: “Guy” guy@scoop.co.nz
To: "kp"; Mike Gordge wairaustonecentral@xtra.co.nz
Subject: Re: Whiners

Easy tiger,

Like Shaggy says, it wasn't me. I think you've identified a key element of the May Day protester psyche: envy. Envy and "it isn't fair" adolescent foot stamping and meet-other-people-with-a-hair cut-like-me swap-meet collectivism.

Ironic, however, that you Libertarianz espouse individualism, yet cower together collectively, with Objectivism as your gospel and Ayn Rand as your own personal Jesus.

Do read the sludge revolution [Sludge #61 - Revolution Edition] for reasoned support of May Day. Once again, not written by me, but infinitely more eloquent than the "capitalism sucks! fuck capitalism!" tantrums of the Wellington parade.

Not enough to make you vote Libertarianz, but pretty tiresome nonetheless.

From: "Mike Gordge" wairaustonecentral@xtra.co.nz
To: “Guy” guy@scoop.co.nz
Subject: Re: Whiners

Thanks for your reply, but hey two things, I didn't send the bit about pissing on you, mind you its not such a bad idea, (and two) not all libertarians are objectivists, jeez I have trouble even spelling the word, let alone know what it means.

Nah man, me, I am a down to earth Morrinsville born cowboy and I know LOGICALLY that if it wasn't for the "idea makers" the "thinkers" the "dream makers" the "go getters" the "inventors" the "risk takers" the world would simply never be.

Again I say, if what you print does not have an author who is "proud enough" to put their name to what they write, then they do not deserve to have it published.

And when anyone publishes ANY such unnamed CRAP, as that Tiger Woods stuff was, then that makes them NO better, in fact YOU logically CAN NOT claim, NOT to have written that shit about Tiger, until such time as YOU NAME the wanker who did. Come out from under your rock you mongrel coward and fight like man.

Michael Gordge

From: “Guy” guy@scoop.co.nz
To: "Mike Gordge" wairaustonecentral@xtra.co.nz
Subject: Re: Whiners

No worries,

It was just a few quick jottings about some of the stuff I'd been thinking about since covering the May Day parade, which was pretty gruelling. The Libz people I talked to were blessed relief from rampant conformism on display by the protesters.

I personally agree with you that the personal views in Sludge should be attributed to the author. As Sludge is anonomous, perhaps it shouldn't be used to push barrows. That's not my decision though.

I also agree that the movers and shakers - scientists, artists, businessmen etc, should be allowed to do their thing, without the less talented of society trying to bring them down to their level. These people are the reason we're not still living in grass huts. I don't begrudge Woods his talent, or the reward he's recieved for it, just as I don't begrudge the genius of Jimi Hendrix or Albert Einstein or Andre Agassi. Inequality is a reality - envy is an unfortunate reality of our emotions.

Guy (not Sludge)

From: "Mike Gordge" wairaustonecentral@xtra.co.nz
To: “Guy” guy@scoop.co.nz
Subject: Re: Whiners

Hey real cool reply, we are going to get along just fine. I hope you pass My thoughts along the right chains of command and please dont be offended, if you want me to f off just say.

Thanks
Mike

From: "Mike Gordge" wairaustonecentral@xtra.co.nz
To: “Guy” guy@scoop.co.nz
Subject: Re: Whiners

Hi Guy

Now this is a serious question, no name calling.

I see you called me an "objectivist" and this is the first time anyone has called me that, I have heard about it before, but until now I have never bothered to look up what it means.

My dictionary doesn't have a meaning for "Objectivist" but it does for 'Objective', From this meaning, it seams to mean that you have accused me of wanting to believe in "actual facts" as against believe in "thoughts and feelings" wow.

You imply in your email that "objectivism" is not a good thing and I'm darned if I can think why you should think that how you feel and think, is better than what IS factual or what is real.

Will you please help me to understand what I regard as an enemy of reality and reason. Why are feelings and thoughts, more or less important than facts and reality?

Now I'm no shrink, but I think if we can get people to WRITE DOWN THEIR OWN thoughts (as against ones they have been taught) and question why they think the way they do, which is what I'm trying to do with you, then maybe its a way to a better understanding each other, what say you?

Am I on the right track about your definition of "objectivist", if not where am I going wrong?

I think that as you have called me an objectivist, (albeit by accident) then you at very least, morally anyway, owe me an explanation.

Thankyou in anticipation

Michael Gordge

From: “Guy” guy@scoop.co.nz
To: "Mike Gordge" wairaustonecentral@xtra.co.nz
Subject: Re: Whiners

He Mike,

The comment about objectivism (look it up at www.objectivism.org.nz) was intended as a general observation illustrating the point that folks on both sides of the socialist/anticapitalist vs. free trade/libertarianism debate seem to me to be both sides of the same coin - people looking for an absolutist ideology.

Thats why, when I looked at the crowd of young anti-capitalist protesters I saw tomorrow's ACT voters. When their priorities change (from gathering with other people like themselves in dingy student flats, to nesting, having a house in Kelburn like mum and dad, providing for their children, having a nice car and a holiday in Bali) they swing violently (think Richard Prebble, Steven Franks, Roger Douglas), whereas more centrist/pragmatist types remain so.

This is nothing more than my own amateur anthropology based on my own gut reactions. It was not a direct accusation of yourself, or even a value judgement on objectivism. I don't know you. I was wildly generalising – that’s what rants are for.

I'm paid by Scoop to be a reporter and update the site. I don't think it would be appropriate for me to "out" Sludge (he's a lot of people - you're free to submit your own copy for sludge, though I dare say you'd prefer to use your own name).

The opinions of Sludge or editorial content of Scoop are not mine. I write a column, Guy's World which does contain my opinions - which tend to be about anything but politics.

Guy

From: "Mike Gordge" wairaustonecentral@xtra.co.nz
To: “Guy” guy@scoop.co.nz
Subject: Re: Whiners

If there was even a slight bit of consistency in the thoughts and actions of the 'socialist/anticapitalists' then you may have a point.

But as there is absolutely nothing 'absolute' about what the socialists want or say, there is no consistent 'ideal' in what they believe or do, they do not have a concrete ideology, so you cant at all logically make ANY connection between the two of us. If you listen hard enough, they actually want even MORE of what they despise in capitalists the most (money), they also want the ocean without the roar, they want lightening without thunder, they want what the inventions bring but they demand they set the price, that's not an ideology at all, that's totally illogical, inconsistent and idiotic theft.

The fundamental and extremely consistent cry of a libertarian is, "let people be free from the initiation of force" give yourself freedom while at the same time respecting your neighbours right to the same freedom.

Libertarians have NO desire to "initiate" force against the socialist/anticapitalists. If people of that like mind wanted to form a socialist collective in a libertarian world and live in their own democracy, they could, all we would demand in return is that they respect our right not to have a gun held at our head to live THEIR way. In fact our rights to that freedom would be enshrined in a constitution.

What's so hard to grasp about that? Why is that so bad that you say it must be tagged as an "ideology", it is nothing but THE fundamental right to life as a FREE human being.

> Thats why, when I looked at the crowd of young anti-capitalist protesters I saw tomorrow's ACT voters.

You only see that because these poor people have no political philosophy, they have no concept on what being free from the initiation of force means. Even if you asked an Act supporter what his political philosophy was, they would have no fucking idea.

> This is nothing more than my own amateur anthropology based on my own gut reactions. It was not a direct accusation of yourself, or even a value judgement on objectivism. I don't know you. I was wildly generalising - thats what rants are for.

hey 'rant' by all means, but you will do yourself no credibility at all by writing about subjects which you very respectfully have no knowledge of.

> I'm paid by Scoop to be a reporter and update the site. I don't think it would be appropriate for me to "out" Sludge (he's a lot of people - you're free to submit your own copy for sludge, though I dare say you'd prefer to use your own name).

Is that a prerequisite of Sludge, that you will only print if no name is given? wow now that is scary. Just who are the people behind Scoop, they must be real hmmmmmm, no I'll hold that thought for a while longer.

> The opinions of Sludge or editorial content of Scoop are not mine. I write a column, Guy's World which does contain my opinions - which tend to be about anything but politics.

A HUGE pity, New Zealand so desperately needs good POLITICAL journalists who are not afraid to question the real and objective reasons of political decisions, decisions which almost on a daily basis now erode more and more of yours and my freedom.

Mike

From: Guy “Guy” guy@scoop.co.nz
To: "Mike Gordge" wairaustonecentral@xtra.co.nz
Subject: Re: Whiners

Hey Mike,

So Mike, man enough to have your opinions attributed to you on a national news site, exactly as you wrote it?

From: "Mike Gordge" wairaustonecentral@xtra.co.nz
To: “Guy” guy@scoop.co.nz
Subject: Re: Whiners

Hi Guy

I think I feel honoured, thanks, well maybe when (if) the replies come in to me, you may be smirking a little, but hey I've got huge shoulders.

Feedback: guy@scoop.co.nz

To get the really big news on the important issues of the day, as it breaks, subscribe to Guy's World (it's free) at http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/myscoop/home.html

© Scoop Media