Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Save your mind from infiltration, ignore the psyops troll Thrasymaque/Glaucon

Posted 8 years ago on Nov. 18, 2011, 4:23 a.m. EST by an0n (764)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Check out this back and forth. Props to loosely on this shit:


This guy is deep psyops, trying to make OWS into the big bad anarchy front, so the whole country can hate us. Don't get into it with this guy. You can't convince the CIA or what the hell ever he is that we're anything but terrorists. He thinks he's defending the republic with his twisted games; we know we're trying to save it. Leave it at that.

He will bitch and whine that he just wants intelligent convo and to "understand." He already "understands" everything he's going to: That you're an evil anarchist fuck - no matter what your politics.

Twist and spin. Fuck he's good. Might actually be Karl Rove.

He's just as slippery as his sophist namesake: "Thrasymachus was a citizen of Chalcedon, on the Bosphorus. His career appears to have been spent as a sophist, at Athens as far as we know, though there is no concrete evidence that he was a sophist."




Read the Rules
[-] 9 points by looselyhuman (3117) 8 years ago

"He's just as slippery as his sophist namesake"

Ha! Excellent. Thanks an0n -- I did expect you, for the record.

[-] 0 points by flip (7101) 8 years ago

i read some of the comments from the link above - you said you are a liberal and not much into anarchy. i would first like you to think about liberals - lbj and nixon were liberals and so were clinton and now obama (well maybe). they are responsible for much death and destruction. some good things about liberal thought - these days for sure but the other side of the coin is that those in power have no trouble using the power of the state to crush anyone in their path. as to anarchy i doubt you have read much anarchist thought. if you are thinking bomb throwing etc that is not really what they are. chomsky is the best one to read i think on this subject - and many others - graeber has a good one on znet also. CHOMSKY: The general intellectual culture, as you know, associates 'anarchism' with chaos, violence, bombs, disruption, and so on. So people are often surprised when I speak positively of anarchism and identify myself with leading traditions within it. But my impression is that among the general public, the basic ideas seem reasonable when the clouds are cleared away. Of course, when we turn to specific matters - say, the nature of families, or how an economy would work in a society that is more free and just - questions and controversy arise. But that is as it should be. Physics can't really explain how water flows from the tap in your sink. When we turn to vastly more complex questions of human significance, understanding is very thin, and there is plenty of room for disagreement, experimentation, both intellectual and real-life exploration of possibilities, to help us learn more.

[-] 7 points by powertothepeople (1264) 8 years ago


[-] 4 points by an0n (764) 8 years ago


[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 8 years ago

i had a bit too much back and forth with thrasymaque - foolish and frustrating. you are on the money with your comments. too many people like that on this site - i often wonder if they are the same guy using different names - anyway thanks

[-] 6 points by powertothepeople (1264) 8 years ago

He has a nasty habit of editing his posts after they get replies, as well.

I caught him doing the first time in a comment thread where he added and embellished after my reply was posted. I assumed that we were each typing at the same time and it was no big deal, though I did call him out on it.

But now I have seen in his created topics, where he is the ORIGINAL POSTER and wrote lengthy "articles" - these articles have been changed & embellished after several of us have replied.

He is far from the "reasonable" observer he tries to portray himself as.

He is not even "fair" opposition, he is playing dirty in an attempt to skew the messaging right here on the site.

Stay away from this dirty bastard, as the OP says don't be fooled.

[-] 4 points by an0n (764) 8 years ago

"He is not even "fair" opposition, he is playing dirty in an attempt to skew the messaging right here on the site."

Yep, thanks.

[-] 1 points by superomenna1 (89) 8 years ago

He came up with a well formed reply pretty fast, defending the Israeli soldier who killed American activist Rachel Corrie. Gives the impression Glaucon is either an Israeli or an Israeli/American who serves Israel first.


[-] 6 points by PandaMe73 (303) from Oakland, CA 8 years ago

I fully support the content of this post, as one who originally was fooled by the appearance of reasonableness this member attempts to portray in order to maintain the credibility required to effectively spread misinformation without being questioned, and as one who even defended him on one occasion from accusations of acting as a provocateur.

I changed my mind about him after he began repeatedly posting spin from well known biased sources and not the kind usually relied upon by those more reasonable posters with differing but respectful perspectives, such as arguments lifted whole from Glen Beck. After this red flag tipped me off to look more closely at his activities, I began reassessing his overall contribution here. Upon viewing the larger pattern of his posts including the sensationalism and subtle spin he uses in the pursuit of sewing seeds of mistrust in the intentions of ows, along with repeatedly posting on the same types of controversial topics that misrepresent the membership and aims of the ows movement, using the pretense of honestly wanting to discuss or being concerned with those issues while conveniently forgetting that he had previously acknowledged some of these same issues surrounding these controversies were not relevant or problematic in previous comments he had made while he was originally seeking with his posts to build credibility as a voice of reasonable opposition.

Because he is not so blatantly obvious in his attempts to spin certain issues to misrepresent ows, he is actually far more dangerous than the more common sort of trolls who are much more easily sniffed out and discredited. If any reading this are not the type to decide who in this forum have unstated agendas based soley on the conclusions of other posters, I commend this stance, and encourage those folks to decide for themselves. I only advice that those deciding take his claims to honesty with a grain of salt, and at least scrutinize his participation closely over time before concluding he is a reliable source of information and an honest participator. There is no need to ask for more, as I am confident that the statements made here in support of the claim that he is a anti ow propagandist with a hidden agenda will hold up under the scrutiny of those who seek the truth.

[+] -5 points by Glaucon (296) 8 years ago

If you wish people to make up their own minds, why are you trying to persuade them to adopt your viewpoint? Everyone on these boards are able to read by and for themselves, have the ability to formulate arguments, and can make up their own minds. There is no need to play little detective in an attempt to save them from the ideas of a poster. Do you believe my ideas and arguments are so powerful that they can corrupt the minds of the readers here?

If you wish to prove your point with strong arguments instead of letting it wobble on top of a tower of assumptions, why not accept this challenge. Post clear accusations with links to show your proof, and I will defend myself in your kangaroo court. I only ask that you provide arguments of worth, and not merely rest your case upon assumptions and hearsay. I believe this is an honest request. If you are to tarnish my reputation, you should do it properly without the use of lame ad hominems.

If you wish to form a group of prosecutors and consult with them before the trial begins, I will offer you a few days. When you are ready, start a new thread titled - "The trial of Thrasymaque/Glaucon", post your introductory statement in the main post, and your first accusation as a comment. You can then message me with the link to the trial's post, and I will present myself for my defense.

Once the trial is over, the jury we will hold a vote. For it to count, there will need to be a minimum of fifty users voting. Their IP's will be checked to ensure that voters are not creating many users. The prosecutors and I are not allowed to vote. If I am found guilty, I hereby promise to stop using this forum. If I am found innocent, I ask that all prosecutors stop using the forum as a symbol of good faith and fairness. Jart, the forum's programmer, will block the IP's of the losers.

Good luck. I await the beginning of the trial with anticipation, and I am confident we can all play fair.

[-] 5 points by looselyhuman (3117) 8 years ago

"Do you believe my ideas and arguments are so powerful that they can corrupt the minds of the readers here?"

It's possible. Your skill at sophistry is epic, matched only by your arrogance and the evil of your purpose.

"The trial of Thrasymaque/Glaucon"

And give you exactly what you want? Another venue to smear OWS and twist everyone around? No thanks.

"hearsay" btw.

[+] -6 points by Glaucon (296) 8 years ago

"Hearsay". Thank you. I often make silly mistakes because English is my second language. I always appreciate it when others take the time to correct my writing. It's a great way to learn, and it's much cheaper than paying a copy editor. Again, thank you.

I will be defending in the trial. The prosecutors will be providing arguments and their proof, and will lead the course of the debate. It will not be a venue to smear OWS, but a chance for the prosecutors to smear Thrasymaque/Glaucon in proper fashion. Instead of a mob like attack based on ad hominems, they will have a chance to prove their claims.

During the trial, I will keep posting in other threads in the forum. So, if you are right that my goal is to smear OWS, I will have that chance whether or not we have a trial. There is no reason for you to be afraid. I will play fair.

[-] 4 points by metapolitik (1110) 8 years ago

Open the pod bay doors please, Hal...

English is your second language?

What's your first? Binary?

[-] -2 points by Glaucon (296) 8 years ago

My first language is French, and my third is Indonesian. I understand binary, but I use higher languages when programming.

[-] 2 points by metapolitik (1110) 8 years ago

Hey look, it's a real live HAL 9000B!

[-] 2 points by metapolitik (1110) 8 years ago

Open the pod-bay doors Hal...

[-] 1 points by PandaMe73 (303) from Oakland, CA 8 years ago

I should not have used the term fully support, but strongly, and now I am satisfied enough with your reply in the other thread and have answered you there, that here I will only say I am withholding any further judgement, and will reevaluate in the light of future events, if you are as you have said, time will prove you right, and I will gladly affirm it so. In the meantime, you are never boring, so I'll be seeing you.

My reply answering some of the issues you raise here, from another thread:


[-] 0 points by owsrulez (75) 8 years ago

I watch for Thrasy/Glaucon posts and read them religiously. His/her posts are the best written, well thought out posts on this forum. I may be biased since I have yet to disagree with him/her.

[-] 4 points by bigbangbilly (594) 8 years ago

Why don't we uses psyops on the cops?

[-] 4 points by an0n (764) 8 years ago

Good question.

[-] 2 points by weepngwillo2 (277) 8 years ago

Because we are fighting for honesty and transparency? I can only speak for myself and guess at the motives of others, but if we use deception and subversion how are we different than that which we rail against?

[-] 1 points by bigbangbilly (594) 8 years ago

How about very painful honesty. Honesty on a matter that would hurt alot if you know about a fact.

[-] 1 points by weepngwillo2 (277) 8 years ago

That is the point of honesty isn't it? I don't want a sugar coated truth.

[-] 4 points by demcapitalist (977) 8 years ago

Just remember the true American anarchist is Grover Norquist

[-] 2 points by metapolitik (1110) 8 years ago

Anarcho-Capitalism does not constitute Anarchism

...Not that I am a big fan of 'isms'.

But let's be clear.

[-] 1 points by demcapitalist (977) 8 years ago

The problem with Norquistian-Anarcho-Capitalism (It's your ball : > ) ) is that it appeals to people attracted to the word freedom but it has noting to do with their individual freedom, unless you consider freedom from a job a future and a stable economy actual freedom. They vote.

[-] 1 points by metapolitik (1110) 8 years ago

I am reminded of George Hanson's (Jack Nicholson's) commentary on "freedom" in the film Easy Rider:


George Hanson: "They're not scared of you. They're scared of what you represent to 'em."

Billy: "Hey, man. All we represent to them, man, is somebody who needs a haircut."

George Hanson: "Oh, no. What you represent to them is freedom."

Billy: "What the hell is wrong with freedom? That's what it's all about."

George Hanson: "Oh, yeah, that's right. That's what's it's all about, all right. But talkin' about it and bein' it, that's two different things. I mean, it's real hard to be free when you are bought and sold in the marketplace. Of course, don't ever tell anybody that they're not free, 'cause then they're gonna get real busy killin' and maimin' to prove to you that they are. Oh, yeah, they're gonna talk to you, and talk to you, and talk to you about individual freedom. But they see a free individual, it's gonna scare 'em."

[-] 1 points by demcapitalist (977) 8 years ago

nice !

[-] 3 points by NLake72 (510) 8 years ago

He hasn't replied to my post (linked below.) I think that says a lot about who these trolls really are, and what they are trying to accomplish: a political coup which attempts to buy our representatives and dictate what legislation will be passed.



[-] 2 points by Edgewaters (912) 8 years ago

Twist and spin. Fuck he's good. Might actually be Karl Rove.

I've had a few run-ins with him, I disagree. He definately seems slippery and deceptive but convincing? Not even a little bit. You know what he's up to from the get-go. His only real power is making you think he might be convincing to others, but once you give your fellows a little credit, that concern quickly dissipates.

[-] 2 points by barb (835) 8 years ago

There are many people that fear losing control over how the masses are thinking these days since their brainwashing techniques were so efficient prior to the internet.

[-] 1 points by demcapitalist (977) 8 years ago

If they can keep the people mad at wall street in two separate camps they can keep using our banking system as a piggy bank for their gambling addiction and our FED and FDIC as a buffer for when they bet wrong.

[-] 2 points by weepngwillo2 (277) 8 years ago

THank you, thank you ad nauseum. This guy tossed red flags in the air when he started using french to tell some one he was running planned propaganda. Keep up the good work. The majority can overcome even these attempts at division from within.

[-] 2 points by NLake72 (510) 8 years ago

Duly noted.

[-] 1 points by NKVD (55) 8 years ago

What do you fear from him/her/it?

[-] 1 points by anotherJPH (1) 8 years ago

With all the NDAA crap going on, I feel compelled to post that the jph in that thread is not J. P. Harford. Sorry, but it worries me. I've argued against a corporate police state for years, but I am not an anarchist nor a socialist, and I wouldn't put it past some entities to try and build a false flag-based case to leverage indefinite detention against vocal opposition.

His linguistic style is somewhat similar to mine, and some of his argument methods. I don't like that many resemblances showing up between me and a likely plant. It could be nothing, but I'm making this statement a matter of this site's record in case it ends up being more than nothing. If I disappear after March 3, and this jph is mentioned -- that is not me.

Also, as one more factor without breaking my anonymity totally, 546. It's good enough to prove this was me, but isn't a matter of anything anyone can find.

[-] -2 points by Glaucon (296) 8 years ago

Why not give the link directly? Your point will be more effective that way.


[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 8 years ago

I found why you like socrates and why family is such a focus with you. your grandfather knew a lot about socates didn't he?

[-] -2 points by Glaucon (296) 8 years ago

I never met my grandfather, and why do you say family is such a focus with me? Interesting ad hominems. Please explore.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 8 years ago

no, i think i will hold on to that for now Mr Hall.

[-] 0 points by Glaucon (296) 8 years ago

Who's Mr Hall? It would have been nice to hear your arguments. Perhaps you are on to something. Who knows?

Thanks for bumping this posting. I guess that's one use for these wasted comments.

[-] 1 points by NLake72 (510) 8 years ago

Linked below are his comments to a thread I posted and shortly deleted. He was the first to bring up my family, then others joined in the veiled threat against them. He actually took the time to try to track me down and find out who I am-- that's a sign of what we're really dealing with on this forum. Instead of facing me, he employed fear to silence my voice. Clearly, we are dealing with a force of pure evil. I deleted my post, but the comments are still up for all to see. This guy IS the enemy of progressive reform.


[-] 0 points by Glaucon (296) 8 years ago

What are you talking about? You're too funny! Are you referring to this exchange: http://occupywallst.org/forum/it-is-time-to-get-up-go-outside-and-join-the-movem/#comment-387439 Where does it show I bothered to waste time to track you? You make no sense.

[-] 1 points by NotYour99 (226) 8 years ago

So he spends time arguing points with anti OWS people just to draw the OWS radicals out?

[-] -2 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 8 years ago

Do you believe Occupy radicals are using this forum?

[-] 2 points by NotYour99 (226) 8 years ago


[-] 1 points by setton (43) 8 years ago

Frankly I am getting tired of this kind of thing. It seems anyone who has questions about or disagrees with the current tactics of OWS is immediately called out as a troll, their posts are removed and are discouraged from participating in the ongoing conversation about problems we are having as a society and what is the best way to fix them. It's a big turn off to people who want to be part of the solution but can't because of the attitude of 'if you're not with us, you're against us.' I'm not overly political, but I know something is wrong and needs fixing, I am just not sure if how OWS is going about things is the way to bring positive change. If you ask questions in good faith or disagree, you are labeled a troll. It's not very inclusive or fair minded.

[-] 4 points by an0n (764) 8 years ago

This is not disavowal of people with different views, or general complaining about trolls. Please see the difference. You can take that sort of thing up with others.

This guy is about demonizing the movement, not disagreeing with it, and using deeply dishonest means to achieve that goal.

[-] 0 points by americanboy (48) 8 years ago

I have just been peppersprayed by far left liberals and a couple of anarchists wanting to occupy Monday.

[-] -1 points by Arclight (9) 8 years ago

Why not "win" him over with your persuasive arguments? The market place of ideas (this forum) should efficiently sort out your differences. Good luck!

[-] 4 points by looselyhuman (3117) 8 years ago

Hi Thrasymaque.

[-] -3 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 8 years ago

Arclight is not part of the Republic, therefore he is not I.

[-] -2 points by Builder (4202) 8 years ago

I think you place way too much importance on negativity.

You give someone you dislike their own thread?


I prefer to try and engage everyone in honest debate. It's what I come here for.

I don't agree with everything posted on this site, and I doubt that anyone would.

If everyone was in agreement, the country wouldn't be in the mess it is in now, would it?

Thrash the debate, rather than the debator.

Play the ball, not the player.

No need to make it personal. It's the web. It's supposed to be free, isn't it?



[-] -3 points by nikka (228) 8 years ago

So you're mad because he makes you defend your positions with actual words.

boo hoo

[+] -6 points by Glaucon (296) 8 years ago

Be very careful! Thrasymaque is a sophist, and Glaucon is Plato's brother. They are highly intelligent and can indeed infiltrate your mind. Their arguments are made of pure power. Thy cannot be argued against. Run, and protect your children. I repeat: Do not read the comments written by Glaucon or Thrasymaque; they will infiltrate your mind.

[+] -6 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 8 years ago

Glaucon, you are dangerous, not I! Look at the deep psyops crap you write: http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-anarchic-dilemma-do-anarchies-self-destruct/