DA Youth: Christian Steyl's ‘lunatic’, ‘worm fondler’ and ‘domain of madness’ Tweets

Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 2:30 PM
To: Dian Cronje - DA; Melany Kuhn - DA; HQ - DA; Leader - DA; Angus Mackenzie - DA.Pub.Liaison; Jade Johnson - DA
Cc: Khume Ramulifho - DA Youth Gauteng; Skhumbule Mpitimpiti - DA - Youth EC ; Lead - DA Youth; M Pitimpitisk - DA Youth; Rodney Kritzinger - DA Youth; Lucky M - DA Youth
Subject: Ms. H. Zille; CC: C. Steyl; Re: DA Youth: Christian Steyl's 'lunatic' and 'domain of madness' remarks

TO: Helen Zille
TO: Christian Steyl
CC: Democratic Alliance

RE: Radical Honesty SA: DA Youth: Christian Steyl: Req. for Info: Is Mr. Steyl an Ignorant Moron Imbecile or Honourable Scientific Critical Thinking Problem Solver?

Dear Ms Zille,

DA Youth Member Mr. Christian Steyl made the following comments on Twitter: “Read Lara Johnstone’s lunatic comment..” and “Lara Johnstone does not like Afriforum, probably because they are encroaching into her domain of madness”; “Lara Johnstone.. worm fondler, and extremely delusional – approach with caution!”; among others; in response to my comments on Daily Maverick News Article: Open Letter to the Directors of Afriforum, by Xhanti Payi.

I am unaware whether Mr. Steyl is an ignorant moron imbecile; or an honourable scientific critical thinking problem solver. Perhaps he can clarify which he wishes to be perceived as.

Continued in attached PDF.

Respectfully,

Radical Honesty SA

Radical Honesty SA: DA Youth: Christian Steyl

Req. for Info: Is Mr. Steyl an Ignorant Moron Imbecile or Honourable Scientific Critical Thinking Problem Solver?

16 June 2011

Dear Ms Zille,

DA Youth Member Mr. Christian Steyl made the following comments on Twitter: “Read Lara Johnstone’s lunatic comment..” and “Lara Johnstone does not like Afriforum, probably because they are encroaching into her domain of madness”; “Lara Johnstone.. worm fondler, and extremely delusional – approach with caution!”; among others (*.*); in response to my comments on Daily Maverick News Article: Open Letter to the Directors of Afriforum, by Xhanti Payi.

I am unaware whether Mr. Steyl is an ignorant moron imbecile; or an honourable scientific critical thinking problem solver. Perhaps he can clarify which he wishes to be perceived as:


Radical Honesty Leadership Currency:

Radical Honesty’s leadership paradigm refuses to bullshit the psychological infant public -- particularly those afflicted with Dunning and Kruger Cognitive Biases, such as Status-Quo Bias, Anchoring, Bandwagon Effect; and Primacy Effect -- with public relations lies and illusions.

Bluntly, Radical Honesty only appeals to people who:

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 And Transparent Leadership are currency.
Radical Honesty leaders would rather have no fans, no followers (we only have colleagues), than some schmuck who is such an ignorant moron imbecile to believe 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.

We 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. Bingo!

As you can no doubt gather, we do not practice any form of public relations image management whatso-fucking-ever. Unlike image management practioner chameleons who put forth a false image to the public, and hide any possible perspective that could be negatively interpreted by the Dunning and Kruger Cognitive Biases Moron Imbecile public; with Radical Honesty: WHAT YOU SEE IS WHAT YOU GET! We don’t do the 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; that the average Dunning and Kruger Cognitive Biases Moron Imbecile secrecy addict who prefers to make all their judgements on their ‘first impressions’ and has no commitment to ‘innocent until proven guilty’ or ‘honourable fair impartial enquiries’; is incapable of. Nevertheless that of course does not stop the Dunning and Kruger Cognitive Biases Moron Imbecile individual from hating that which s/he wishes s/he had the courage to be; but cannot, due to their blind obedience to their 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. (Radical Honesty Concourt Amicus: Citizen v. McBride PDF)

[A] If Mr. Steyl is one of the DA’s Ignorant Moron Imbecile Dunning and Kruger Primacy Effect Schmucks:

Radical Honesty totally respect all citizens rights to choose to:

1. Remain in relationships founded on political correct sycophancy and lies.
   
2. Drown in their leaders ever-rising tide of corporate and political bullshite.
   
3. Be burned, duped, fooled, conned, scammed and screwed over by their addiction to secrecy political, religious, corporate and media leaders.

An unswerving commitment to the Politics of Co-dependency Abuse is not for the faint-hearted; only the psychopathic addicted to abusing and being abused. Please commend Mr. Steyl for upholding South Africa’s TRC fraud elite’s commitment to their ever-ever-rising tide of corporate and political bullshite. We hope his Ignorant Moron Imbecile Dunning and Kruger Primacy Effect schmuck followers suffering from Battered TRC Fraud Syndrome, and Battered Voters Syndrome experience the most superb burned, duped, fooled, conned, scammed and screwed over experience their toxic political correct TRC fraud psychological infant fragile ego’s desire.


[B] If Mr. Steyl Criticism was meant Honourably, Seriously and Constructively:

Radical Honestly highly values sincere and serious honourable constructive criticism. If Mr. Steyl considers himself an honourable person, who does not suffer from Dunning and Kruger Primacy Effect cognitive biases and his remarks were not those of an ignorant moron imbecile; but conscious honourable individual; founded on scientific evidence; we welcome him to share his evidence for his 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, 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; we discard it like toilet paper.

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. We have no lawyers. Our members are taught our – being specific about anger and forgiveness social contract – communication and noticing skills of honourably resolving their 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.

We look forward to hearing Mr. Steyl’s honourable constructive criticism suggestions.

Respectfully,

Lara Johnstone
Radical Honesty SA








» » » » [PDF Letter]