<nettime> to -boldly go .at it digest (graham, recktenwald)

["nettime's_mann_ohne_eigenschaften" <nettime@bbs.thing.net>]

Subject: Re: <nettime> Fwd: Letter to Thomas Klestil
     Heiko Recktenwald <uzs106@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>
     Phil Graham <phil.graham@mailbox.uq.edu.au>
     Heiko Recktenwald <uzs106@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>
     Phil Graham <phil.graham@mailbox.uq.edu.au>
     Heiko Recktenwald <uzs106@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>
     Phil Graham <phil.graham@mailbox.uq.edu.au>
     Heiko Recktenwald <uzs106@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>
     Phil Graham <phil.graham@mailbox.uq.edu.au>

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  

Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 20:56:04 +0200 (CEST)
From: Heiko Recktenwald <uzs106@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>

I hate this shit, but this is very typical austria, not Haider !!

>     particularly worried, to learn that Haider had brought yet another lawsuit 
>     for an alleged defamation of character: this is his right, and has become 
>     his habit. What we do consider extremely troubling is the willingness of 

And the outcome of this particular case is just the opposite side of this
very special european sensibility in nazi things. Including germany and
france. Every word counts...

Heiko

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 07:27:50 +1000
From: Phil Graham <phil.graham@mailbox.uq.edu.au>

At 08:56 PM 15/06/00 +0200, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:

>I hate this shit, but this is very typical austria, not Haider !!

How sad for you. I couldn't give a flying fuck whether you hae it or not. I 
didn't write write it, nor did anyone in Austria. If you look at who did, 
you will see a list of US professors mostly.

> >     particularly worried, to learn that Haider had brought yet another 
> lawsuit
> >     for an alleged defamation of character: this is his right, and has 
> become
> >     his habit. What we do consider extremely troubling is the 
> willingness of
>
>And the outcome of this particular case is just the opposite side of this
>very special european sensibility in nazi things. Including germany and
>france. Every word counts...

What's that supposed to mean - "every word counts"? What is "the opposite 
side of this sensibility" ? Insensibility? Frankly, can you blame people 
for being especially sensible to totalitarian regimes in Europe? Do you 
think totalitarianism's all over and done with there?

>Heiko

Phil

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 00:20:15 +0200 (CEST)
From: Heiko Recktenwald <uzs106@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>

> >I hate this shit, but this is very typical austria, not Haider !!
> 
> How sad for you. I couldn't give a flying fuck whether you hae it or not. I 

Seems to be a misunderstanding, but, if I think again...

> didn't write write it, nor did anyone in Austria. If you look at who did, 
> you will see a list of US professors mostly.

How wise they are..

Defamation is austrias most popular thing, and so are the cases. This was
all, what I wanted to say, its not an invention of Haider.

Its not *his* habit, its the style of this country. 

> 
> > >     particularly worried, to learn that Haider had brought yet another 
> > lawsuit
> > >     for an alleged defamation of character: this is his right, and has 
> > become
> > >     his habit. What we do consider extremely troubling is the 
> > willingness of
> >
> >And the outcome of this particular case is just the opposite side of this
> >very special european sensibility in nazi things. Including germany and
> >france. Every word counts...
> 
> What's that supposed to mean - "every word counts"? What is "the opposite 
> side of this sensibility" ? 

Sorry for my poor english. But if you live in a contry full with
paragraphs, where you are allowed to say this and that, you can say thats
the other side of the coin, that it is a big insult not to choose the
right words, as in this case. Or do you think the judges in austria are
unfair etc ?

> Insensibility? Frankly, can you blame people 
> for being especially sensible to totalitarian regimes in Europe? Do you 
> think totalitarianism's all over and done with there?

Well, this is the beginning of the whole austria discussion again. Haider
isnt a totalitarian politician. Its not a question of liking him or not,
he simply isnt such a devil...if you stay in reality.

Anyway, best wishes from grey europe to black and white australia etc,

Heiko

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 10:00:48 +1000
From: Phil Graham <phil.graham@mailbox.uq.edu.au>

At 12:20 AM 16/06/00 +0200, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:

>Sorry for my poor english. But if you live in a contry full with
>paragraphs, where you are allowed to say this and that, you can say thats
>the other side of the coin, that it is a big insult not to choose the
>right words, as in this case. Or do you think the judges in austria are
>unfair etc ?

I have no idea what the judges in Austria are like. I was passing on a 
message I received. That's why I don't give a shit. However, from what I've 
read of the Pelinka case compared to Haider's comments on the public record 
in the past, I don't see how Pelinka could be fairly convicted. Haider 
*has* trivialised some pernicious aspects of National Socialism. He has 
done so publicly and has even apologised for doing so, or for at least 
giving the impression that he has done so.

> > Insensibility? Frankly, can you blame people
> > for being especially sensible to totalitarian regimes in Europe? Do you
> > think totalitarianism's all over and done with there?
>
>Well, this is the beginning of the whole austria discussion again.

No it's not. It's a response to your assertion about sensitivities to 
totalitarianism in Europe. You said it, not me. Not even the authors of the 
text I sent said it. You did.

Totalitarianism was not confined to Germany. In the late 20s - early 30s it 
was a populist movement in France, England, Italy, Australia, the US, 
Spain, the USSR, and Japan to name a few. It was an expression of the 
perceived need for "strong leadership" in the presence of increasing 
inequality and degraded social conditions throughout most of the West. It's 
a movement that is not over yet. In fact, I think government tends to be 
more totalitarian now than it's ever been, if you take the word in the 
sense that Mussolini meant it (and it was his invention). Common 
equivalents today are "whole of government approach", "joined up 
government", and so on. A misunderstanding of the meaning of "totalitarian" 
is the source of much wasted emotion and confused perceptions, yours 
included I think.

>Haider
>isnt a totalitarian politician. Its not a question of liking him or not,
>he simply isnt such a devil...if you stay in reality.

I didn't say he was. I have not seen enough of his policies to know what he 
is or isn't in terms of political traditions. I was responding to your 
comment about "European sensibilities", not commenting on Haider or the 
Freedom Party (although even such a name in today's negative public 
discourse immediately raises cause for concern in me because, based on 
general trends, it most likely means precisely the opposite. But then I am 
not claiming intimate knowledge of Austria).

My response is, again, clearly, unambiguously: who can blame Europeans for 
their sensibilities? Fifty years is not very long in human history, unless 
of course you subscribe to social amnesia as many today insist upon doing 
(cf. "The End of History" and all the "Third Way" idiots).

You seem to be very defensive of Haider and to know a lot about his 
political proclivities. Perhaps you can tell me: is Haider of the liberal, 
socialist, or conservative tradition. Or is he a mixture of two or three of 
these? Perhaps he is libertarian, but certainly not anarchist - neither of 
these I suspect. Perhaps a "social credit" type? A nationalist? 
Protectionist? What? What are his policies?

Tell me what political stripe Haider is, and why you think he is benign. 
These are genuine questions and requests for which I've yet to receive a 
clear answer from anybody.

>Anyway, best wishes from grey europe to black and white australia etc,

There is nothing black and white about Australia, but some people here are 
trying their hardest to make it so (I am assuming this last is a smartarsed 
comment from you and not a mistranslation). You are the one setting up 
good-evil binaries regarding Haider, not me. I was merely passing on a 
message that I thought would be of interest to others.

Phil

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 02:41:42 +0200 (CEST)
From: Heiko Recktenwald <uzs106@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>

> I have no idea what the judges in Austria are like. I was passing on a 
> message I received. That's why I don't give a shit. However, from what I've 

Well, my point was that in austria they have a very unique political
culture, going to the courts, that just isnt an invention of Haider.
As the text tried to suggest. Just a fact. Ask somebody from austria about
that.

> read of the Pelinka case compared to Haider's comments on the public record 
> in the past, I don't see how Pelinka could be fairly convicted. Haider 

I think, as I remember from the radio, he said something more.

Lets see, how the next courts decide.

And Pelinka isnt the poor victim as which he is described, sued by the rich 
Haider..

Quiet days in cliche..

Heiko

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 13:19:08 +1000
From: Phil Graham <phil.graham@mailbox.uq.edu.au>

Fine Fine Fine ... Tell me what sort of politician Haider is, will you? Or 
at least what the freedom party says it stands for. It must have at least 
one policy worth commenting on, or at least something that gives an 
indication of what sort of party it is, what sort of values it expresses as 
a group. Nobody seems to be prepared to do this, on either side of the debate.

Every time I pass on a critical message from Austria about Haider, you get 
annoyed. That's fine. I have no fixed opinion about Haider, and at this 
stage, no direct stake in the argument, political, intellectual, or 
otherwise (indirectly is a different matter). It reminds me of the "One 
Nation" party press beat up here in Australia to some extent.

But I want to know why you are so sure that Haider is benign, 
non-totalitarian, and non-racist. You have said all these things at 
different stages. I am quite prepared to believe you. You have told me 
everything Haider and FPO is not. Why can't you tell me what he is or what 
he stands for. If he is not totalitarian, does he hold or express liberal 
or individualist values, conservative ones, green ones, red ones? What?! 
Does he represent particular sections of the community that are 
identifiable, or is the freedom party constituency drawn from across the 
board? Are they nationalistic, or what? Can you give me any indication 
whatsoever, or just keep telling me that "he's not such a bad fellow after 
all"?

They're not such a hard questions, surely.

Phil

At 02:41 AM 16/06/00 +0200, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:

> > I have no idea what the judges in Austria are like. I was passing on a
> > message I received. That's why I don't give a shit. However, from what 
> I've
 <...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opinions expressed in this email are my own unless otherwise stated.
Phil Graham
Lecturer (Communication)
Graduate School of Management
University of Queensland
617 3381 1083
www.geocities/pw.graham/
www.uq.edu.au/~uqpgraha
http://www.angelfire.com/ga3/philgraham/index.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 05:40:54 +0200 (CEST)
From: Heiko Recktenwald <uzs106@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>

Hey,

> But I want to know why you are so sure that Haider is benign, 
> non-totalitarian, and non-racist. You have said all these things at 
> different stages. I am quite prepared to believe you. You have told me 

Dont become polemic, please. I just wouldnt call him "totalitarian" etc,
and I just think he isnt terrible enough.

> everything Haider and FPO is not. Why can't you tell me what he is or what 
> he stands for. If he is not totalitarian, does he hold or express liberal 
> or individualist values, conservative ones, green ones, red ones? What?! 
> Does he represent particular sections of the community that are 
> identifiable, or is the freedom party constituency drawn from across the 
> board? Are they nationalistic, or what? Can you give me any indication 
> whatsoever, or just keep telling me that "he's not such a bad fellow after 
> all"?
> 
> They're not such a hard questions, surely.

Bla, sorry, but you miss the point ;-)

What he as a person says is absolutely irrelevant, what he said then and
now, austria is a modern coutry. I am not a witch hunter.

Its more a question of proportions, this whole austria thing.

Nobody here in germany is for the boycott etc.

Heiko

<...>

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 14:21:59 +1000
From: Phil Graham <phil.graham@mailbox.uq.edu.au>

At 05:40 AM 16/06/00 +0200, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:
>Hey,
>
> > But I want to know why you are so sure that Haider is benign,
> > non-totalitarian, and non-racist. You have said all these things at
> > different stages. I am quite prepared to believe you. You have told me
>
>Dont become polemic, please. I just wouldnt call him "totalitarian" etc,
>and I just think he isnt terrible enough.

I'm not being polemic. They're straightforward questions. I am prepared to 
believe you if you would actually say something substantial about Haider or 
the FPO. In any case, totalitarians are not necessarily "terrible" people, 
at least not overtly (cf Hannah Arendt's "Banality of Evil"). Mussolini and 
Hitler cut quite attractive figures in their day, you know, like movie 
stars. They *were* movie stars. They transformed politics in that respect. 
I am not asking for a description of appearances. I am asking for some - 
even vague - description of the political platform of the FPO, what they 
*say* they stand for. Not even Haider - you don't even have to mention 
anything Haider said or didn't say.

In any case, totalitarian essentially means something different than 
"terrible". It is a type of politics, "holistic" government would mean the 
same, "whole of government". It means unions and bureaucrats working 
together in harmony, youth groups and buisness and education institutions 
all aligned to the single national purpose of economic growth and 
(sometimes) territorial expansion. The main emphasis is on efficiency, 
productivity, and national pride. Dissent is strongly dicouraged.

Are the freedom party socialist? "Freedom Party" sounds to me like a 
liberal or libertarian or human rights oriented group. Is that so? If not, 
what? Most totalitarian governments have been socialists of one sort or 
another.


> > everything Haider and FPO is not. Why can't you tell me what he is or what
> > he stands for. If he is not totalitarian, does he hold or express liberal
> > or individualist values, conservative ones, green ones, red ones? What?!
> > Does he represent particular sections of the community that are
> > identifiable, or is the freedom party constituency drawn from across the
> > board? Are they nationalistic, or what? Can you give me any indication
> > whatsoever, or just keep telling me that "he's not such a bad fellow after
> > all"?
> >
> > They're not such a hard questions, surely.
>
>Bla, sorry, but you miss the point ;-)

No. You do.

I understand exactly what you are saying: that Austria has a culture of 
suing people for defamation, and that therefore the Pelinka case is 
insignificant. Also, that Pelinka is not so poor. Also, implicitly, that 
Haider is being treated unfairly, he's just an artefact of Austrian 
culture. Okay. I'll believe you. Also, that the whole Austrian issue has 
been blown out of proportion in the media. I could easily believe that too.

But you also said a whole lot of other things as well. Now you won't answer 
questions about those aspects.

I do not misunderstand you at all, Heiko.

>What he as a person says is absolutely irrelevant, what he said then and
>now, austria is a modern coutry. I am not a witch hunter.

Nor am I a witch hunter. I sincerely want some answers about the freeodm 
party and nobody, least of all you, seems willing to supply them. Your two 
sentences above are non-sequitur, and you are again avoiding giving me any 
answers about issues you raised yourself. You are the one claiming this and 
that about what Haider is and is not. I have made no such claims for 
understanding. Nor do I now.

Tell me what he stands for. I sincerely want to know. I am not being 
polemic. I am asking a simple question: what politics is the freedom party 
preaching?

>Its more a question of proportions, this whole austria thing.

Proportions of what? Are you saying the whole Austria thing is out of 
proportion? As I said, I am willing to believe that.

>Nobody here in germany is for the boycott etc.

Neither am I. I never said anything about a boycott. Would you answer my 
questions please?

Phil
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opinions expressed in this email are my own unless otherwise stated.
Phil Graham
Lecturer (Communication)
Graduate School of Management
University of Queensland
617 3381 1083
www.geocities/pw.graham/
www.uq.edu.au/~uqpgraha
http://www.angelfire.com/ga3/philgraham/index.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net