[LINK] this list
link at todd.inoz.com
Wed Jun 15 11:26:00 EST 2005
>If you don't want me to stick my head up then I strongly suggest you
>avoid any displays of suffering from the effects of tall-poppyism.
>Tall poppyism is particular nasty form of un-enlightenment.
>It manifests in many ways, and dare I say it, virtually all debate on
>this list arrises when I step in defend tall poppies.
You've never defended me.
>As examples of tall-poppyism are anti-MS, anti-US, anti-wealth etc. The
>emotions that drive the tall-poppyist are fear and jealous and are often
>expressed as hate.
That's not tall-poppy. Tall Poppy is where one or more people try and cut
down the credibility of another person. It's personally directed and
It's created when people who are not part of the individuals process are
envious of their success or jealous of their abilities. So they group and
start to create innuendo and unthruths about the person in order that the
wider community gain a perception that isn't true.
I can't in my view, apply Tall-Poppy against a corporate opponent simply
because a corporate has customers and customers make the corporate
successful. No point feeling envious and creating innuendo about such a
situation, just go out and compete.
However, I think you are referring to the wider populations falling
tolerance of commercial abuse by monopolistic companies - akin more to a
communistic society structure, than a competitive alternative products regime.
Again, you have choice. If you don't like the things said on Link, go
somewhere else and say your piece.
>The tall-poppyist often attacks the tools and method
>that allow people to get ahead and support the means for the tearing
>down of tall poppies and redistribution to the not so tall poppies.
No, the tall-poppyist attacks the individual claiming they slept with the
investor, or they have a criminal past, or that they made success on the
back of some else's efforts or ....
In the 1980's the best Tall-Poppy attack was on Kylie Minogue - Soap Star
come Rock star. "Lets do the Locomotion"
The attack was not on her use of musicians or choice of music, the attacks
were on her using her Soap Stardom to pretend to become a singer. There
was no attack on Kylie about her ability to play an instrument, or her
ability to write songs. In fact most attackers were on her inability to
play an instrument and her inability to write anything creative.
They attacker her personally, they didn't attack the Record Company who
launched her career - the tool. They didn't attack her stardom in
Neighbors and the cross promotion that took place - also a tool.
They attacker HER - her voice, her inability to sing, her lack luster
Well, that's pure tall poppy. She's certainly shown all the tall-poppyists
that she's far more than they ever will be.
Then there is Michael Jackson. A personality that is unusual. But no one
attacks his music or his iconic and legendary history, no they tall-poppy
him and call him a child molester, not once, not twice, but three times and
you'd think in ten years of investigating, that they might have some solid
evidence! Even a setup! But no, nothing, not a video, not an audio
recording, not even a telephone call. Just a pile of tall-poppyists who
want to bring the guy down.
Who cares? Michael Jackson is old news. Sure, his infamy on stage will
live forever, and so it should, like any artists or creator who changes the
way a society things (BAD, We are the World, Black or White.)
Perhaps Michael was getting to close to something - funny how it all
started after the strong songs about social decay.
No, there was no attack on his music, or his record company, or his ability
to sing or perform, just his personality and his social status as a near
God to many.
Then there was good young Poppy King - remember her? The Cosmetic's queen
from Melbourne? OK sure, she got some funding from her Uncle, lucky
girl! But really, attacking the poor girl on her and her partners team to
use her as the icon for success is just pure tall-poppy. I don't see
attacks on Estea Lauder or MaxFactor or Avon!
So no, Tall Poppy isn't about attacking the tools.
Anti-Microsoft isn't about Bill Gates, it's about people's dis-satisfaction
with being controlled and limited in their choices.
Anti-US isn't about Tall-Poppy either. They don't exactly have a thriving
economy and anyone who elects a President who has interests in the worlds
most valuable resource, next to Gold, is a fool if they don't think that
the next largest oil producing country is the world isn't going to be
involved in a localised war!
No one is anti-wealth either. In fact, 99.9% of people try hard to earn an
income to become wealthy.
Sadly today, most of your income is removed by Government as Tax. And the
rest is put into Credit based spending - have it here and now, even though
you'll pay for it for the rest of your lives.
Some people are tired of that. They have decided not to spend using credit
- that doesn't make us tall-poppyists. It makes us economically sound. We
owe no money to anyone and we protect our privacy by not using Microsoft
products because they are flawed and we also don't back the USA because,
well, it's just another country and why can't we select our own to back?
>Like all good bigots the tall-poppyist enjoys wallowing in the rubric of
>justification for his or her particular infection. Like all bigots the
>tall-poppyist is blind to his or her disease.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say. It sounds like a defence to being
>Tall popyism is a mental disease just like any other form of narrow
Tall Poppy works both ways too. The Pro supporters are often the loudest
in Tall Poppy because they use their status as the Tall Poppy to personally
attack the attackers.
I prefer a different tact.
>The cure for tall popyism is the simple realisation that there is no
>correlation between evil and tall poppies. Just as there is no
>correlation between being black and being evil.
I'd totally agree with that statement.
>The tall poppyist assumes automatically that if you support a tall poppy
>you are opposed to the normal poppies. Examples are that if support
>Microsoft that I must be against open source. This is of course
I don't think that's true at all. I'd in fact suspect that very few people
except the really extremists are of such a view, or the opposing view.
I'm anti-Microsoft in some ways, perhaps more and more each year. But I
still selectively buy MS products for use in my business and personal life.
I also use Open Source, but not for everything.
>The most distilled form of tall popyism is the leftist ideologies and
>the most extreme example is socialism.
The opposite also applies and hence makes the rightist also a
tall-poppyist, however, you'll argue this point, hence proving it.
>I am increasingly becoming intolerant of socialism and its virulent memes
>or egalitarianism and have posted numerous rejections of this. I have made
>numerous post about the inevitability of difference and on the broad theme
>that there is nothing wrong with difference.
Numerous being the right word. By being a tall-poppyist, yourself, you
have alienated a lot of people.
>The tall poppyist often thinks of poppy sizes as a zero sum game and
>sometimes assumes that a tall poppy gets ahead at the expense of other
>poppies. This is clearly a logical fallacy.
But that's what you are saying, in the inverse situation!
>I have been asked off list why I am so tolerant of the difference of
>inequality and I think the correct question is why are you not?
Why should there be inequality? Why should some people have the ability to
oppress others to prevent the others from ever gaining status as equal to them?
Corporate Oppression is rife.
Most of the debate I've seen here is about individually being forced into
oppression by Corporate and Controlling powers, with no way of getting
around those barriers.
You may be in your own mind, at the Taller End of the ladder, but in
reality, you are nothing more than a puppet supporting the ideology of
those whom you aspire to be at their benefit and your expense.
You can NEVER be a Tall as Bill Gates. You will NEVER be Prime Minister of
Australia. Yet you proactively speak as if you are.
>I would like to think that from now on we will see a decline in
>tall-popyism on this list as people take a moment to think about what
>they post and check to see if they are indeed suffering from this form
>of malicious infliction.
I know I don't. I'm lucky, I can indulge both sides of a debate in my own
mind, and the decide to test the audience to see what their views,
strengths and weaknesses are.
>Which is in essence no different to racism, sexism etc.
Nothing wrong with sexism!
>Often the people who are out to "save the world" are in fact the very
>ones who the world needs saving from.
That applies in reflection upon yourself too.
I don't think I need to say more on the topic. I suspect many think or
feel the same. However, if the topic were to move more to how these issues
impact on society, Internet, Censorship and Telecommunications, then i'd be
happy to join the discussion!
(lowercase 'I' just for Howard!)
More information about the Link