Prove that Einzige was smart

[Gustaf]

This is a thread for all the people lamenting his departure. It isn't really about Einzige, it is more about you. It will be interesting to see if anyone has anything to offer or if this view is as unsubstantiated as his own nonsense.

[Gustaf]

I'll add a little bit to my side:

When I deleted Einzige's infamous penis-smash-post he told me it was hypocritical of me if I did not delete a topic called "sluts" (or something like that) in some other board. He maintained that this was hypocritical of me even after I informed him that I couldn't delete it. (in fact I had to inform him twice because he didn't get it the first time).

Furthermore, in the thread about getting me de-modded he still attacked me for not deleting his posts in boards I did not moderate (apparently a tough concept for him). In fact, he claimed that I was abusing my position as moderator because I, despite my grudge on him, was not deleting his posts.

Clearly a bright fellow. And that's not even getting into those countries he confused. I can't recall if it was Portugal and Poland or Iceland and Ireland. Or the fact that his name was not in proper German.

[minionofmidas]

Or the fact that his name was not in proper German.

Lol. You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel here.

I'm not sure I've ever gotten seen an English-language printed source avoid that particular minor error when there was a chance not to.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Einzige wasn't intelligent. He was just arrogant and pretentious, and this apparently fooled some weak-minded individuals into thinking he was intelligent.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

What's wrong with being arrogant and pretentious at his age?

Seriously there are far worse posters here than Einzige. He just needed to chill a bit.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Einzige wasn't intelligent. He was just arrogant and pretentious, and this apparently fooled some weak-minded individuals into thinking he was intelligent.

So, just like you?

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Oh please, what this forum doesn't need right now (or EVAR) is a penis-size comparsion blaggart contest based on one's "intelligence" (whatever that is).

[Хahar 🤔]

Or the fact that his name was not in proper German.

Lol. You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel here.

I'm not sure I've ever gotten seen an English-language printed source avoid that particular minor error when there was a chance not to.

Do explain.

[Gustaf]

Or the fact that his name was not in proper German.

Lol. You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel here.

I'm not sure I've ever gotten seen an English-language printed source avoid that particular minor error when there was a chance not to.

Given his arrogance I don't consider it scraping the barrel. He was constantly referring to everyone else as uneducated hillbillies, even though it was made clear time after time that he didn't know that much himself. If it was a word he used in a text it'd be different but he picked this out as his username, despite clearly not knowing quite what it was about. That's minor, but still pretty symbolic for his way of functioning, wanting to look cool with a European user-name despite having a pretty dim view of what it meant.

[minionofmidas]

Hm? It's Stirner. Der Einzige und sein Eigentum.

Now, I don't think he's actually read that strange (going by what I've heard) book. Nor has anybody I know. But that's just fine. It's a goddam username on the internet.

Re Xahar: German adjectives (male or neutral, but not female) change form depending on whether they're preceded by the definite or the indefinite article (or none at all - that too takes the indefinite form). "Einzige" is the definite form (which unlike the indefinite is identical across all three genders), and thus false. You note it's preceded by the definite article in Stirner's book title.

[Хahar 🤔]

So it would correctly be Einzig?

[minionofmidas]

So it would correctly be Einzig?

No, Einziger.

[Gustaf]

Hm? It's Stirner. Der Einzige und sein Eigentum.

Now, I don't think he's actually read that strange (going by what I've heard) book. Nor has anybody I know. But that's just fine. It's a goddam username on the internet.

Re Xahar: German adjectives (male or neutral, but not female) change form depending on whether they're preceded by the definite or the indefinite article (or none at all - that too takes the indefinite form). "Einzige" is the definite form (which unlike the indefinite is identical across all three genders), and thus false. You note it's preceded by the definite article in Stirner's book title.

If he hadn't read it, trying to appear smart by pretending to was bad form, that's all I'm saying.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

What Gustaf you don't think this is the height of intelligence?

Anti-Christian. Whatever is en vogue with the great mass of Christian scum I will oppose, and whoever opposes them is my ally. If they become economically populist, I will be as fiscally conservative as a hawk; if they stand against gay marriage, I shall stand with the gays. Christians are degenerate psychological weaklings and must be opposed on all fronts, on all issues, whatever side of the issue they come down on.

EDIT: Also, and as a corollary to the above, anti-Southern. Let the scum-suckers learn to toot the Deutschlandlied, because they'd not be singing Dixie if I had my way with it.

[Mechaman]

Oh please, what this forum doesn't need right now (or EVAR) is a penis-size comparsion blaggart contest based on one's "intelligence" (whatever that is).

I completely agree.
Gustaf, I understand that Einzige really pissed you off, but shouldn't the fact that he's banned be enough solace for you?  I mean really, are you this insecure that you have to make post after post about how much of an asshole or dumbass you found him to be?
You're only stroking his ego by going on with this.

[paul718]

Not quite. Suffice it to say I have an accredited degree higher than a Master's (although, to be fair, I am not a Doctor of anything).

...

Einzige's first post:

I am a twenty-year-old Democrat

So very unlikely he has an accredited degree higher than a Master's, or any degree at all in fact besides a two-year one.

...

No, it wasn't. Yes, I lied about my age; nevertheless, I do hold a Master's in Applied Psychology from St. Louis University (or will, as of May 1st). I was an early graduate in High School and enrolled immediately at SLU.

...

Sure professor.

[phk]

Oh please, what this forum doesn't need right now (or EVAR) is a penis-size comparsion blaggart contest based on one's "intelligence" (whatever that is).

I completely agree.
Gustaf, I understand that Einzige really pissed you off, but shouldn't the fact that he's banned be enough solace for you?  I mean really, are you this insecure that you have to make post after post about how much of an asshole or dumbass you found him to be?
You're only stroking his ego by going on with this.

Einzige is basically a wild dog that should be "leashed" and than "unleashed" on another forum.

[Gustaf]

Oh please, what this forum doesn't need right now (or EVAR) is a penis-size comparsion blaggart contest based on one's "intelligence" (whatever that is).

I completely agree.
Gustaf, I understand that Einzige really pissed you off, but shouldn't the fact that he's banned be enough solace for you?  I mean really, are you this insecure that you have to make post after post about how much of an asshole or dumbass you found him to be?
You're only stroking his ego by going on with this.

As I said, this isn't really about Einzige. What pisses me off is not that some random guy was a bit deranged but that so many other people thought there was something good about him. There seems to be a sort of restoration movement going so I'm challenging you to rise to the occassion. This thread is your chance to prove that his ban is such a great loss to the forum. I am honestly curious, since I feel I can probably learn something about humanity by trying to understand how anyone could think Einzige was clever. 

I know he thought that I was orchestrating a ban of him but I wasn't aware that this idea of his has spread to his free-thinking followers. I didn't really play a great part in it though. Nor do I see how his ego gets stroken when he is banned.

[Torie]

I had a couple of interesting discussions with E I think, where he did show considerable albeit very idiosyncratic and iconoclastic intelligence. He is just very hard wired and stubborn, and thinks he knows more than he does, and fixates on certain issues in an extremely Manichean way, and has sharp elbows that one has to work through. It takes a lot of patience, which most are not willing to give. And some have a higher tolerance for being personally insulted than others, and that does tend to make discussions involving actually working through something, more difficult.

He may in fact be mildly schizophrenic come to think of it, with some of the symptoms, including being a loner self isolating oneself on Mt. Olympus, but who knows. I think over time that he will mellow out however. Heck, I thought he was here to some extent, except when he fell off the wagon, as happened of course with his tete a tete with Gustaf where he just totally lost his composure and went nutter, due I think in part perhaps to what appears to have been an intense personal dislike between the two for whatever reason.

[Lunar]

Gustaf doesn't seem intense about it Toriester

[Mechaman]

Oh please, what this forum doesn't need right now (or EVAR) is a penis-size comparsion blaggart contest based on one's "intelligence" (whatever that is).

I completely agree.
Gustaf, I understand that Einzige really pissed you off, but shouldn't the fact that he's banned be enough solace for you?  I mean really, are you this insecure that you have to make post after post about how much of an asshole or dumbass you found him to be?
You're only stroking his ego by going on with this.

As I said, this isn't really about Einzige. What pisses me off is not that some random guy was a bit deranged but that so many other people thought there was something good about him. There seems to be a sort of restoration movement going so I'm challenging you to rise to the occassion. This thread is your chance to prove that his ban is such a great loss to the forum. I am honestly curious, since I feel I can probably learn something about humanity by trying to understand how anyone could think Einzige was clever.  

I know he thought that I was orchestrating a ban of him but I wasn't aware that this idea of his has spread to his free-thinking followers. I didn't really play a great part in it though. Nor do I see how his ego gets stroken when he is banned.

Einzige's ego and lack of civility got him banned I believe I can agree with you on that point.
In hindsight many of Einzige's points (even if I agreed with them) contained mostly pseudointellectual speech, although occasionally he would come up with an interesting concept, like his "prophet" concept (although admittedly he copied it from Democratic Underground):

I'd like to preface this message with a link to a thread on Democratic Underground, which serves as good an introduction to this idea as any other:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

To simplify somewhat, this poster holds that political periods, at least in the modern era, are structured similarly: they are heralded in by a popular figure championing a new political paradigm (Roosevelt, Reagan), who are succeeded by a less popular and more 'mechanistic' figure with just enough effectiveness to continue to the old policies, but who is much more vulnerable to defeat (Truman, H.W. Bush); these 'bureaucrats' in turn find themselves displaced by moderate members of the opposition ideology (Eisenhower, Clinton), who themselves lead to a radicalization of the existing paradigm and its gradual dissolution (Johnson, W. Bush). And while there are certain elements in the two cycles of the twentieth century that differ from one another - Kennedy's role in the New Deal era has no corollary in our present Reaganist system - the similarities are there, I feel, and bear consideration.

The question in notions such as these, of course, is the placement of the Nixon-Ford-Carter years: it seems to upset the idea that political 'epochs' segue smoothly into each other. I am personally of the opinion that Nixon ought to have held the position of esteem among Republicans and conservatives generally that Reagan holds today; and while it's true that his economic policies were more liberal generally than Reagan's (and his support of liberal institutions like OSHA and the EPA certainly inveighs against his economic conservatism), it is certainly true that his rhetoric, his appeal to the 'Silent Majority', was the beginning of the end of the New Deal coalition. It seems to me that, had the Nixon Administration not ended in disgrace, that we'd have entered the conservative ('Reagan') cycle much sooner, with complete Republican dominance of Washington for the seventies, eighties, and most of the nineties, and we'd have entered a liberal re-alignment that much sooner.

Does that make Obama the Nixon-figure in this theory? I'd say so: Nixon was the first conservative political figure to strike a massive blow against the New Deal coalition; Obama seems to be the first center-left politician to demonstrate the inherent weaknesses of the Reaganite grouping.

Of course, there are parallels with both eras. Like Reagan, Obama's star seems to be ascending at the expense of a hugely unpopular incumbent President; but like Nixon he is running against a non-incumbent member of the dominant political party, who has largely subsumed the role of the President within the party (Johnson-Humphrey; Bush-McCain). Like Reagan, he has enormous charisma and has the ability to galvanize the masses, but again like Nixon, his proposed policies seem more pragmatic and remain located in the opposing (Reaganist) paradigm; just as Nixon was largely a moderate, Obama is more of a centrist than a traditional New Deal liberal, although like Nixon his rhetoric is relatively partisan.

Or perhaps this 'dialectical' mode of political history is bunk, and American politics really is more of a game of personalities than any back-and-forth swing of ideological sympathies. I'd be greatly interested in hearing the thoughts of the board on this matter.

[Mechaman]

In recent history I think Gustaf, you would be correct in saying that Einzige might not have carried forth the impression of being smart, but in the very beginning before he revealed himself to have mental problems, hurt ego, or aggressive tendencies he was very good at coming up with very unique ideas and opinions about politics.  Now whether or not that makes him smart depends entirely upon our own definitions of "smart".

[Vepres]

Oh please, what this forum doesn't need right now (or EVAR) is a penis-size comparsion blaggart contest based on one's "intelligence" (whatever that is).

I completely agree.
Gustaf, I understand that Einzige really pissed you off, but shouldn't the fact that he's banned be enough solace for you?  I mean really, are you this insecure that you have to make post after post about how much of an asshole or dumbass you found him to be?
You're only stroking his ego by going on with this.

As I said, this isn't really about Einzige. What pisses me off is not that some random guy was a bit deranged but that so many other people thought there was something good about him. There seems to be a sort of restoration movement going so I'm challenging you to rise to the occassion. This thread is your chance to prove that his ban is such a great loss to the forum. I am honestly curious, since I feel I can probably learn something about humanity by trying to understand how anyone could think Einzige was clever.  

I know he thought that I was orchestrating a ban of him but I wasn't aware that this idea of his has spread to his free-thinking followers. I didn't really play a great part in it though. Nor do I see how his ego gets stroken when he is banned.

Einzige's ego and lack of civility got him banned I believe I can agree with you on that point.
In hindsight many of Einzige's points (even if I agreed with them) contained mostly pseudointellectual speech, although occasionally he would come up with an interesting concept, like his "prophet" concept (although admittedly he copied it from Democratic Underground):

I'd like to preface this message with a link to a thread on Democratic Underground, which serves as good an introduction to this idea as any other:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

To simplify somewhat, this poster holds that political periods, at least in the modern era, are structured similarly: they are heralded in by a popular figure championing a new political paradigm (Roosevelt, Reagan), who are succeeded by a less popular and more 'mechanistic' figure with just enough effectiveness to continue to the old policies, but who is much more vulnerable to defeat (Truman, H.W. Bush); these 'bureaucrats' in turn find themselves displaced by moderate members of the opposition ideology (Eisenhower, Clinton), who themselves lead to a radicalization of the existing paradigm and its gradual dissolution (Johnson, W. Bush). And while there are certain elements in the two cycles of the twentieth century that differ from one another - Kennedy's role in the New Deal era has no corollary in our present Reaganist system - the similarities are there, I feel, and bear consideration.

The question in notions such as these, of course, is the placement of the Nixon-Ford-Carter years: it seems to upset the idea that political 'epochs' segue smoothly into each other. I am personally of the opinion that Nixon ought to have held the position of esteem among Republicans and conservatives generally that Reagan holds today; and while it's true that his economic policies were more liberal generally than Reagan's (and his support of liberal institutions like OSHA and the EPA certainly inveighs against his economic conservatism), it is certainly true that his rhetoric, his appeal to the 'Silent Majority', was the beginning of the end of the New Deal coalition. It seems to me that, had the Nixon Administration not ended in disgrace, that we'd have entered the conservative ('Reagan') cycle much sooner, with complete Republican dominance of Washington for the seventies, eighties, and most of the nineties, and we'd have entered a liberal re-alignment that much sooner.

Does that make Obama the Nixon-figure in this theory? I'd say so: Nixon was the first conservative political figure to strike a massive blow against the New Deal coalition; Obama seems to be the first center-left politician to demonstrate the inherent weaknesses of the Reaganite grouping.

Of course, there are parallels with both eras. Like Reagan, Obama's star seems to be ascending at the expense of a hugely unpopular incumbent President; but like Nixon he is running against a non-incumbent member of the dominant political party, who has largely subsumed the role of the President within the party (Johnson-Humphrey; Bush-McCain). Like Reagan, he has enormous charisma and has the ability to galvanize the masses, but again like Nixon, his proposed policies seem more pragmatic and remain located in the opposing (Reaganist) paradigm; just as Nixon was largely a moderate, Obama is more of a centrist than a traditional New Deal liberal, although like Nixon his rhetoric is relatively partisan.

Or perhaps this 'dialectical' mode of political history is bunk, and American politics really is more of a game of personalities than any back-and-forth swing of ideological sympathies. I'd be greatly interested in hearing the thoughts of the board on this matter.

He acted like it was his idea. I had seen this in a number of places before he posted it.

[Meeker]

^^^ It's also a completely invalid piece of garbage that could only be thought up by someone with no real understanding of American history.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

It also has a grand total of two examples, both of which have very obvious flaws in them.