Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
Dupin

Weird online TOS article

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Dupin said:

dream_weaver,

He wasn't even questioned about it !

During the entire investigation the police left him completely alone.


Then this is not the venue for making such a case. Present your findings via the proper channels. There is no statute of limitation on murder. I don't know of a statute of limitations exists for attempted murder.

Edited by dream_weaver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dupin said:

It is the sculptor Richard Minns whose middle initial is L, good grief.

Right, why do you think I said nevermind? At first I thought they were different people because nothing I saw mentioned his sculpting. The initial seemed to differentiate them. But once I looked up that court stuff, the same initial was used. So, yeah. It's kind of like a Roman Polanski situation, or OJ. He fled the country. The ruling on the case I linked isn't my point, because I don't think it says anything about guilt in the matter. 

29 minutes ago, dream_weaver said:

Was Richard Minns charged with Barbra Piotowski's attempted murder?

I appreciate your skepticism, but it isn't some super secret thing. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-07-21-me-18211-story.html

Doesn't have much to do with Barney's character though, or ARI, that would be speculation. I wouldn't be surprised though if Minns just knows how to scam fans of Rand really easily. Something like Donald Trump - a slippery liar who can commit and hide crimes or major moral transgressions and simultaneously claim to be a victim. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dream_weaver,

Richard Mimms presents himself as, and some people in Objectivist circles have called him, an “Objectivist sculptor.”  His history should be of interest to people interested in Objectivism.

Correct, there is no statute of limitation on murder.  But now Minns is 90 or pushing 90.  He got away with it as much as matters.

That the HPD didn’t touch him speaks to the corruption in the HPD.  Read the two court case links in my last post.  Even the judges thought the HPD was corrupt.

From the first:
“The State’s evidence shows that, in July, 1980, appellant [Bell] asked at least two people to kill complainant [Barbara] at the behest of Minns.”

From the second:
“This is a disturbing case-both in terms of what happened to Piotrowski and how members of the Houston Police Department (“HPD”) conducted themselves before and after the shooting. Piotrowski was shot and rendered a paraplegic by a hit man procured by her ex-boyfriend, Richard Minns. The evidence connected members of the Houston police and fire departments to Minns and his hired investigator Dudley Bell in acts that harassed and threatened Piotrowski before the shooting.”

 

Edited by Dupin
grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Eiuol said:

... it isn't some super secret thing. ...

...

Eiuol,

Indeed, it is very well known.  

An acquaintance who lived in the Houston area at the time said the hit and the aftermath was big news throughout the entire state of Texas.  (Minns was quite well known because of his health spa business.)

Some people in each of  ARI, TOS, and TAS have at one time or another promoted Minns.  They have no excuse for not knowing his history.  Everybody looks up people on the Internet.  Some of them must have found out, and the case is so horrendous they would have told the others about it.

Anyway, if they are reading this discussion they know now.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/2/2019 at 6:00 PM, Dupin said:

Richard Mimms [sic] presents himself as, and some people in Objectivist circles have called him, an “Objectivist sculptor.”  His history should be of interest to people interested in Objectivism.

I guess I don't know what an "Objectivist sculptor" is. Also, if Objectivism is what is of interest to me, there are better venues to pursue than studying Richard Minns history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Minns isn't an Objectivist. He's a religious fan of Ayn Rand. The TAS CEO who interviewed him in London called him an "Objectivist sculptor," most likely because she was trying to get more of his money. (It's quite disgusting what some of these money-chasers will do in order to retain big donors like Barney and Minns.) I don't see where Minns claims to be an Objectivist--though it wouldn't surprise me. He claims to be a lot of things. But he says his art is influenced by the Old Masters, and the majority of his subject matter is inspired by Greek and Jewish mythology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/2/2019 at 5:57 PM, Eiuol said:

Something like Donald Trump - a slippery liar who can commit and hide crimes or major moral transgressions and simultaneously claim to be a victim. 

Funny how no one can ever seem to prove these crimes or major moral transgressions.  If the reason they are never proven is that they never happened then he is justified in claiming to be the target of a witch hunt.  Given the intense scrutiny he now lives under and the annual IRS audits he has had for years given the complexity and large sums involved in his annual tax filings, it seems like a conspiracy theory to presume Trump is getting away with anything at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, MisterSwig said:

big donors like Barney

I fail to see why I should care about him. He was a Scientologist. Who cares.

17 minutes ago, MisterSwig said:

most likely because she was trying to get more of his money.

I don't see why that is more likely. It isn't a parsimonious theory, it requires many variables being just right, especially variables we don't know anything about and can't know anything about. Going off the information available, Minns manipulates people. I could easily make him sound like a Roarkian hero hated for his virtue. And I think fans of Rand often have bias a to think that whatever thinking method that they use is rational in all fields of thought. Pretty good marks if you ask me.

1 minute ago, Grames said:

Funny how no one can ever seem to prove these crimes or major moral transgressions.

I'm referring to the nature of telling a good narrative (it's a common phenomena where people will ignore moral failings even in the story that the person tells, because the story sounds so damn cool). "Slippery" as a way to describe a person who deliberately skirts moral norms of all sorts, and knows enough about psychology and rhetoric that destabilize your notion of what is a fact and what is an exaggeration. "No one can seem to prove" is not a valid objection, because that can easily be due to a failure creativity. For example, people and organize crime manage to avoid prosecution, that is, until people get creative in how they acquire information.. I mentioned Donald Trump specifically because Dupin likes Trump, and he wouldn't see the irony of hating on Minns. I think it had the effect I wanted.

Must we always remain skeptical of the character of a person because of unproven claims? Minns passes a threshold of bad character for me because of a number of associations and connections. Especially the hired hitmen. He fled the country, he was arrested for fraud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Eiuol said:

Must we always remain skeptical of the character of a person because of unproven claims?

Well, yes.  Otherwise you are partaking in gossip.

Quote

Minns passes a threshold of bad character for me because of a number of associations and connections. Especially the hired hitmen. He fled the country, he was arrested for fraud.

The hiring of hitmen, fleeing the country and the fraud arrest are reliable facts (as far as I have followed this thread).  That counts as evidence and therefore some degree of proof exists toward a negative evaluation.  Is there anything even remotely approaching that degree of criminality in Trump's life?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Eiuol said:

I fail to see why I should care about [Barney]. He was a Scientologist. Who cares.

Have you read the article at ARI Watch? I think it answers your concern.

2 hours ago, Eiuol said:
3 hours ago, MisterSwig said:

most likely because she was trying to get more of [Minns'] money.

I don't see why that is more likely. It isn't a parsimonious theory, it requires many variables being just right, especially variables we don't know anything about and can't know anything about.

Not many variables actually. ARI was making moves on Minns by co-hosting an event at his London gallery exhibit in 2014 and then using his sculpture as the Atlas Israeli Start-up Award starting in spring of 2016. New TAS leader, Grossman, then does what she can, visiting him in London in the fall of 2016 and then basically penning a love letter to her real life Greek god.

1915279867_Screenshot_20191102-1702332.thumb.png.ab73445a500d6b72fe51c71c6a807ad3.png

Good grief. I'm sure it was love at first sight (of his riches). I wonder what happened to make her ultimately remove the interview from the TAS website and turn passive-aggressive in an article the following spring.

1470904574_Screenshot_20191103-2014372.thumb.png.c21e78aa889812069d346f56317179fb.png

Uh oh, I guess the honeymoon was over. 

Edited by MisterSwig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Eiuol said:

Minns passes a threshold of bad character for me because of a number of associations and connections. Especially the hired hitmen. He fled the country, he was arrested for fraud.

He also pleaded the Fifth fifty-one times when Piotrowski's lawyer tried to take his deposition in 1984 while he was serving time in Federal prison. A judge cited him for contempt, but the Feds were then allowed to deport him after he renounced his US citizenship. It seems that the criminal case against him relied upon his PI friend spilling the beans--and that didn't happen. That would have required the PI to admit to a murder conspiracy. By keeping his mouth shut, he received a relatively light sentence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dream_weaver,

I’m not sure what an Objectivist sculptor is either but that’s what the TAS CEO called Minns.

When I wrote “his history should be of interest to people interested in Objectivism”  I should have said “the Objectvist movement.”  The murder-for-hire and Minns' subsequent history is a disaster from a propaganda point of view, that is, the spread of Rand’s ideas.


Eiuol,

If you investigate this affair I don’t think you would say Minns “skirts moral norms.”   He hired a hit man who pumped four .44 caliber rounds into Barabara Piotrowski’s back. Who or what has pretty good marks?

Apparently Minns sees himself as a Roarkian hero hated for his virtue.  I don’t see the point in trying to enter into his self-deception.


MisterSwig,

Where did you unearth the “Artist as Atlas” article?  I’d very much like to have a link.

Minns claims to be an Objectivist and even boasts that he is a Rand hero.  See for example (bracketing the dot in dot com so as not to increase the search ranking):
hayhillgallery[.]com/minns/atlas3.htm
hayhillgallery[.]com/minns/atlas1.htm
artlyst[.]com/whats-on-archive/richard-minns-meet-the-artist-evening-hay-hill-gallery

 

Edited by Dupin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dupin said:

When I wrote “his history should be of interest to people interested in Objectivism”  I should have said “the Objectvist [sic] movement.”

Is the "Objectivist movement" where the "Objectivist sculptor's" hang out? Or is an "Objectivist movement" more like a Swiss movement using a quartz mechanism?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dream_weaver,

Ever since Rand wrote The Fountainhead her defenders have had to deal with people claiming that she advocated “walking over and stomping on anybody you don’t like” – something along those lines.   And now ARI, TOS, TAS promote someone who does just that, and who claims Rand had a “profound influence” on his life, and who calls himself an “Ayn Rand archetype” – see any of the three links at the end of my last post.

To repeat, a propaganda disaster.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dupin said:

Minns claims to be an Objectivist and even boasts that he is a Rand hero.

You'll have to quote the passage where he claims to be an Objectivist. I've reviewed the pages. He's a little clever and sneaky with his phrasing. For example, Objectivism "had a profound influence on [his] early life." In 1957, at age 26, he "had already become an Ayn Rand archetype" (before Atlas Shrugged was even published). And now, as an old man, he's an "exponent of Ayn Rand's Individualism." The best part, however, has to be this line: "One could say that Richard's Atlas is really Howard Roark and that Howard Roark is actually Richard Minns." Whoa, that must make Richard Atlas! But note that he doesn't actually claim to be an Objectivist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MisterSwig,

You should be a lawyer, LOL.

Objectivist or not he sure can spout Objectivist boilerplate:

hayhillgallery·com/minns/atlas1.htm
“... because of increasing government controls to establish a state of total collectivism, the weight of freeloaders is too much [for Atlas] to bear. ... Atlas breaks out of the suffocating World of Collectivism.  ... After Atlas is free of the world of Collectivism, he will then create his own perfect world ..., conceived in freedom of individual rights and embodied in laissez-faire capitalism ...

artlyst·com/whats-on-archive/richard-minns-meet-the-artist-evening-hay-hill-gallery
“[Atlas] challenges us to exert our individual force, shatter the state of total collectivism and live freely. This struggle of individualism versus collectivism is not a political ideal but concerns a man’s soul. The idea mirrors Ayn Rand’s beliefs that the individual is of supreme value, the “fountainhead” of creativity, and that selfishness, properly understood as ethical egoism, is a virtue.”

Properly understood!  Express your disgust in 25 words or less.

Edited by Dupin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dream_weaver,

It's pretty obvious.  Independent, unorganized, intellectuals promoting the best of Rand.

Rand in The Objectivist, May 1968, refers to “a philosophical or intellectual movement, in the sense of a growing trend among a number of independent individuals sharing the same ideas.”  She approves of such an intellectual movement but not an organized movement (like ARI, which of course she doesn't mention explicitly not having a crystal ball).

Rand in The Objectivist, June 1968:  “I regard the spread of Objectivism through today’s culture as an intellectual movement – i.e. a trend among independent individuals who share the same ideas – but not as an organized movement."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dupin,

It seems you may be omitting considerations that arise from her article What Can One Do.

Or do you consider ARI to be "proclaiming some vaguely generalized, undefined (and, usually, contradictory) political goals"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps we can all agree on this:  ARI is the sort of organization that promotes the likes of Carl Barney (predatory Church of Scientology honcho turned government fraudster) and Richard Minns (self-righteous murderer, braggart, egomaniac, and textbook psychopath).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't we back to the initial point regarding Carl Barney and the "weird" TOS article, only instead of directing your concerns to Craig Biddle and staff, it would take the form of the following.

Have you directed your concerns to the folks at ARI?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Grames said:

Well, yes.  Otherwise you are partaking in gossip.

If the distance away from proof was far enough, it would be gossip. If there is reason to be confident, even if I can't prove with certainty, there can easily be enough information to judge moral failing. Or I can use other moral failings to infer how confident I should be about allegations on them.

9 hours ago, MisterSwig said:

New TAS leader, Grossman, then does what she can, visiting him in London in the fall of 2016

I'm not saying they didn't seek money from him, I'm saying they probably sought money from him because he manipulated them. Nothing complicated.

10 hours ago, MisterSwig said:

Have you read the article at ARI Watch?

I don't trust that source, and when I looked at it, nothing was super concerning to me. I honestly don't care about ARI, it's just interesting to me to think sometimes what the Oists in that type of world are like. I don't think I would like them very much anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Dupin said:

Rand in The Objectivist, June 1968:  “I regard the spread of Objectivism through today’s culture as an intellectual movement – i.e. a trend among independent individuals who share the same ideas – but not as an organized movement."

Something has occurred to me, but it's a deeper and broader issue than the current focus. So if Dupin is not interested perhaps this post can be deleted or moved to its own topic.

When we ask "what is an Objectivist movement?" we are not only trying to identify a particular type of movement, but we are simultaneously trying to differentiate it from that which it is not. And since an intellectual movement is simply a number of like-minded idea-spreaders, we are essentially trying to distinguish one class of idea-spreaders from all the others in the world. This basic fact explains why serious idea-spreaders regularly attack those whom they regard as charlatans in their midst: they don't want these fraudulent types seen as representatives of the class to which they themselves belong. It's an effort to apply identity to their very existence by promoting proper, objective classifications.

Another, more universal example of this primary motivation is the ongoing criticism of transgenderism. Many people resist the attempt to classify men with women, particularly in the biological, anatomical, and sexual senses. Like those of us who resist the inclusion of pseudo-Objectivists in the Objectivist class, there are those, myself included, who resist the inclusion of pseudo-women in the women class (and vice versa), no matter how feminine they look and act. We don't do this because we hate pseudo-Objectivists or pseudo-women. We do this because consciousness is identification. Pointing out absurdity and irrationality is an aspect of our proper mental functioning. To look the other way and go along with contradictory nonsense would be us literally not conscious of reality--or us evading facts and evidence as best we can.

Edited by MisterSwig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said, MisterSwig.

It is why those in the Objectivist intellectual movement, especially those who want to promote its concept of egoism (and even if they disagree among themselves on some other matters) must separate themselves from Barney and Minns and call them out as the phonies that they are.

 

 

Edited by Dupin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Consider O.J. Simpson.  Even after being found innocent at trial (incompetent judge, incompetent defense attorney, jury with an agenda) there is no question he was the murderer.  Leonard Peikoff wrote a brief article in Tracinski’s now defunct The Intellectual Activist at the time decrying the verdict.

That Minns wasn’t even questioned in the Piotowski Affair says more about Houston Police Department corruption than it does about his innocence.  Minns was the prime mover in the shooting, the trigger-man behind the trigger-man.

Now that Peikoff is retired he is not paying attention to what is happening in the very organization he founded.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...