“ASS-U-ME” & The Fierce Battle Between Identical Twins And The Assumption Threatening Division!

“ASS-U-ME” really do make an ASS out of U and ME, especially when no one gives “benefit of doubt” or take the higher road or perspective. But understanding this common “principle”of engagement and interaction is indispensable to  preserving the integrity of the transaction or interactions and discussions between parties. Parties who must also safeguard against hurting strong ties which usually exists between some participants in debates and other types of human exchanges.

I was recently blocked by my twin brother from calling or texting him following a debate or an “exchange” we had via a text group about “why I write” or better yet “why I Blog”. Yes you heard right, my twin brother blocked and boycotted Me of all persons! 

A little bit about what I do. I blog freelance, since 2010, when I started my second masters at Penn, as a way to develop my thoughts and writing and maybe publish a book. But lately I’ve been writing and blogging much more since my intention to finish my PHD and also since what has been happening in the country with Covid and the backlash against Police Violence which was magnified more sharply by the George Floyd Killing. But importantly I wanted to provide a platform for crtical thinking and to join the efforts to create change through a medium that challenges  everything so as to arrive at an understanding or discoveries of truth and perspectives of opinion. After all I live to do or find rewarding is thinking and thinking about thinking and what I’ve thought and writing about it and talking about it. It is through such discourses and vocation that Plato and Aristotle and Socrates et al develop groundbreaking concepts that spawn  new ways of thinking, revolutions and new inventions that has led to improved ways of human living and humanitarianism. Now I do not claim to be one of the Greats or Classical Philosophers. But those greats were once mundane and usual and their philosophies came from casual conversations with themselves and others generated from and driven by critical and radical thinking. 

But back to the story with me and my brother.... I have sent several of my blog links to my twin. This last time he responded which led to a line of reasoning that concluded in his decision to boycott me. 

On Monday August at 8:19pm I sent him a text with a blog link entitled: What’s Joe Biden’s Campaign Slogan? ? ?????😳🤔😶” . You can view the blogpost by clicking on this link:

http://renaldocmckenzie.blogspot.com/2020/08/whats-joe-biden-campaign-slogan.html

He replied to my blog saying:

“We are stronger together” now that’s a slogan!

CB joined in and said:

It works

Ricardo replies: I do t know Joe’s

I don’t know Barack’s

Hell, I don’t know any of them. Then again, I don’t remember what I had for lunch last week Monday. Or can’t remember the movie I watched yesterday. Hell, to some slogans matter. To me.... not so much. Don’t preach to me Renaldo. I already made up my mind who I will vote for. No surprise there. Talk to other ignorant 40% 

😂

Then I LOL

Ricardo: 

And as always and to no surprise, Trump had to dig up Ronald Regan’s old slogan, “Make America Great America” his MO. Steal and act like you created it. Another Christopher Columbus saga. Well to Columbus defense, he was a great navigator. Well, Trump did score extremely high on his SATs and went to the most prestigious school and got a 4.0 GPA and was among the top ten in his class. Lmao 😂 

Then he started to go deeper and questioned my intentions.

Ricardo: So Renaldo, who are you voting for? What is your role in all this? I want to know your end, your motives. It seems to be going on and on without a main goal. 

I asked: What main goal 

Ricardo: What’s your objectives 

Renaldo: It is in doing so that I’m already achieving my purpose and my goal to facilitate critical thinking and to generate activism 

Ricardo: I would prefer you please do not include me or try to engage me

That doesn’t answer my question. 

What is your objectives? 

Renaldo: Well it answer mine 

Ricardo: Again, stop being selfish

I asked you a question. What’s your objectives. 

Renaldo: I answered 

Ricardo: So it’s just to throw a bone to get people to blow up. They really don’t know where you stand. Its just to get people who think they already made up their minds to think twice or to let liberals know they don’t have it in the bag, they have a weak or weak candidates and so they should not vote because they are the minority and Trump already won. That’s it. I got it. 

Renaldo: Again to provide a platform to for engagement of thought which may lead to a book. It is developing my ability to think and write and I have been meeting people in the industry and it helps with my ability to argue and debate and reason and it creates a platform to think as I’m doing and eventually I may be able to do more such as attract a while following who I can create a business etc. but blogging facilitated my vocation as a philosopher king. I write widely don’t be parochial. I write about a lot of things 

Ricardo: So your book is about politics. The upcoming election?

Renaldo: My blog has hundreds of articles 

Renaldo: About health sports police reform politics economics society religion 

Idk 

But writing should be free 

Ricardo: Hmmmmm

Renaldo: Writing is my vocation 

Ricardo: Well, it should be, but don’t you want people to buy a book that lead them somewhere? 

Renaldo: You wouldn’t understand because you’re not someone who engages is thinking about everything and then developing a pattern of thought and then writing about it from a perspective or to challenge a perspective. Some smoke weed and others get high on thinking and writing and writing about politics may be something that may develop idk such is thinking and writing 

Ricardo: Your book will be based on people’s opinions. I see, the elections is just a convenience and also money making. Well, that I can latch on to. I am a capitalist. It better make money. 

Renaldo: But in the mean time I share my thoughts 

Ricardo: Do not insult my intelligent 

Renaldo: You make a lot of assumptions even in your questions 

If I want to write freely about anything and what I write follows thought and logic and good reason then let it flow. 

Ricardo: Do not interpret my lack to engage in buffoonery as reasoning to draw a conclusion on my critical thinking skills. As a so called philosopher. I think your conclusion about me is juvenile.

Ricardo: What conclusion about you 

Ricardo: This is a debate. Everyone should begin with assumptions that how it all begins. You said, I wouldn’t understand. That is a conclusion. Should I retype you comment about my thinking? That is in fact a conclusion. 

Renaldo: Nope assumptions about insulting your intelligence 

I’m not insulting anyone. 

Ricardo: Oh really.  It was not your intention, but it was clear enough. 

Renaldo: It was clear... what was 

Where was it that is was it is so 

Ricardo: Renaldo. This and other conversations between my thinking or lack of critical thinking is over. Please remove me from this and other messages relating to politics. I will still to my area, sports. 😂 

Renaldo: Lol 😂 

Ricardo: You made a comment and then try to walk it back or say you didn’t. Please read your statement clearly and place yourself in that persons shows and then you can text me about how you expect that person to interpret your insulting comment 

Ricardo: Phone is dying...Sorry PB and CB. This conversation is over. 

Ricardo then texted me direct: You need to call me now. I need to have a side bar conversation b4 my phone dies and I am on the road. How dare you assume I don’t think or engage. WhAt were we just doing? How dare you assume I don’t think or engage. WhAt were we just doing? Then in a setting like that you insult me? Renny Mrs Crawford called me stupid and I will not let you or anyone do that without blocking them. ThAt is one thing you can do that I will never forgive you for. 

I did not respond to his direct texts as I was engaged with him in the group texts and didn’t see the direct texts. I then tried calling and texting back but no reply. 
CB then joined in by sending this link to the group: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/31/business/amazon-drone-delivery.html?referringSource=articleShare

PB responded: Lol. What happened here? Renny, gracious your shit is garbage. I thought you knew this and were doing it on purpose. Like writing the worst researched, worst argued points of all time. Hahaha. 

For real tho your writing is as low a life-form of commentary as humanely possible. Who would even try to make heads or tails of these crackhead manifestos? You should thank Ricardo profusely for even making it through one of your “blogs”

I responded to Charlie: Renaldo: Drone delivery wow no more mail workers in a few month’s 

 

I responded to PB:

Renaldo:

“One man’s garbage is another man’s gold. And one man’s gold is another’s garbage. Yet garbage has use. So your point is nonsense. I’m not looking for cheerleaders I’m looking for people who can think widely. And discoveries aren’t set in a Rock! Yet people do who are really critical thinkers and who are not held hostage by identity politics or a parochial form of life that’s mundane. 

I (Renaldo) responded to Ricky: Renaldo: Ricky whatever illusion you’re creating about walking back keep it there. I don’t take back anything I clarify and correct. You made a comment which is incorrect. You have not made or prove your weak point 

 

PB: Renny, please stop. You’re making us all dumber by each syllable you attempt to weave together. 

Renaldo: If you claim to be dumb don’t blame me for looking dumber 

PB: Your attempts at argument and prose are a joke. Maybe stop wasting everyone’s time including your own and find a real way to contribute?

Renaldo: That’s an alleged certainty or a question begging epithets. You assume to be an authority in writing when you know nothing about writing and the various types and forms of writing. So my way is not real because it does not fit your idea of what is writing or the status quo. You claim to be liberal yet you are here telling me what to do. You may not find my writing interesting, but you think I’m a bit interested in that. I continue to write and thousands like it and are inspired by it. David Friedman to Carly Fiorina etc have all made comments about it and even reshared and reposted it. I have even been asked to write and have already written and published articles and thesis and now will work on the book. So you’re point is still a ware of your time .

... no reply...

I then texted this link: Police Chief Engages In “Argumentum Ad Absurdum” To Justify Jacob Blake’s Shooting http://renaldocmckenzie.blogspot.com/2020/08/police-chief-engages-in-argumentum-ad.html

...  no response from the group.

I then texted this link about a story of a very close friend that was shot and killed.

http://renaldocmckenzie.blogspot.com/2020/09/remembering-corey-tribble.html

No reply...

Days after I texted and sent messages and called Ricky but all went unanswered and undelivered. 
Then I was talking to a friend about not being able to reach my brother. He then replied that maybe he blocked you and you can tell if someone block you I’d text messages are not delivered. So I tested his assertion and texted my brother from my phone and no delivery notification. I then used my friend’s phone and eureka there was absent delivery notification. I then realized that it may be true that my brother blocked me.

I then sent him a text all in vein: 

I just noticed those / texts messages. Wait are you upset 😡? I didn’t know that. Thought we were having a debate. And as I have said... when did I insult you or how? If I did you please help me to understand how I did by pointing out how or what exactly I said. That’s fair to the integrity of the conversation cause I ain’t tryna do that. This is what I have said:
“You wouldn’t understand because you’re not someone who engages is thinking about everything and then developing a pattern of thought and then writing about it from a perspective or to challenge a perspective. Some smoke weed and others get high on thinking and writing and writing about politics may be something that may develop idk such is thinking and writing”. Now how’s this an insult or saying you’re “stupid. What’s going on? And several other texts but no reply. 
So I tried reaching out to him via text groups with a few close family members to get their take on the matter...
If I say this responding to someone. How’d you take it: I sent picture image of our conversation and sent my main reply to Ricardo that I thought drew Rickys reaction to boycott..,
Renaldo: “You wouldn’t understand because you’re not someone who engages is thinking about everything and then developing a pattern of thought and then writing about it from a perspective or to challenge a perspective. Some smoke weed and others get high on thinking and writing and writing about politics may be something that may develop idk such is thinking and writing” ✍️ 

My nephew Sheldon reponded:

You’re being condescending 

I replied:

It would seem but how so and why so and who am I? Those should also come into to play when making such allegations 

And then what about giving someone the “benefit of the doubt” that’s part of the understanding when communicating. Or debating. I guess we have lost that or that’s not also part of the understanding of negotiations and interacting? And if so what about feedback for clarification 

And you notice how I end the statement I wrote “such is writing and thinking” and honestly idk how someone could get condescending from what I wrote about the process of thinking and writing ... it baffles me but then I said it is a perspective and there are many but what gives meaning to things and color to interpretation? 

Sheldon: I agree with your point but what I was saying is that, if you were responding to someone m, then I can see how he or she could interpret it as being condescending. 

Renaldo: But if that’s an interpretation and that interpretation is a low one or a negative and such negative must always be explored and clarified as is the responsible thing to do in the rules of engagements. Example we ask people to use “I-Messages” as a way to minimize and mitigate any interpretational bias that may create conflict and contention in interactions and communication. It is for this very reason that this is so. To avoid the mistake of applying ones own perspective to a point that was never authored by you and so as to have a clean air within a debate or argument. It is what being a people’s person is about giving one the benefit of doubt and that was needed if one think I was being condescending or making a passing on one’s intelligence because after all it is the other that has informed and injected that assertion or opinion and even after clarification one still applied one owns perspective at the expense of ones relationship or the integrity of my own meaning and intentions

Sheldon: ok

Renaldo: 😂 great reply

Sheldon: 😂

The conclusion on the whole matter is yet to be determined or seen. Did my brother allow this assumption procuring from some insecurities stemming from unresolved issues of a past childhood encounter which influenced his interpretation and therefore his decision to pause a great relationship.? Was there reconciliation? None as of yet. Ricky did text back the number I used to text him to inquire about the message sent to him from the unknown number. He said who is this? And after he was sent a text saying it was Renaldo’s friend and that he who needed help. Ricky replied to the text saying if renaldo wants to reach me he knows. How to. Renaldo did reach out to Ricardo via friends but Ricky was not there. He tried calling the number again after the allegation of blocking but ricardos number still appeared unreachable via renaldosnphobe. Until then... keep following the blog for the conclusion if there can be one. 

But where does this assumption come from about “insulting one’s intelligence”? Where does this assumption about “lack to engage is buffoonery” comes from? Where does this feeling of stupidity and “dumbness come from that I’m being accused of facilitating or ascribing as if I’m God? Ricardo is accomplished, he is the VP and a senior exec of a private firm in NYC. He earns a very good salary and has a strong partnership and home. He is financially stable and has obtained a masters defeee in HRM. He is a member of the SHRM and is respected among his peers and family. Ricardo is also athletic in great physical shape has good physique and commands the attention of many in his sphere of influence. So why would Ricardo of all persons feel as though his intelligence was insulted or blighted? Why should he feel less than himself and his accomplishments. And even if a critique of such magnitude was levied at him Why should he allow it to interfere with his self confident? Unless he has unresolved issues that has led to insecurities that color his understanding and assumptions and feelings about what was said in our engagement. Ricardo did admit in our interactions here that “...you insult me? Renny Mrs Crawford called me stupid and I will not let you or anyone do that without blocking them. ThAt is one thing you can do that I will never forgive you for”. 
Indeed, Ricardo like many other ms have not let go off the past unpleasant experiences which has created insecurities that seeps into their interactions and exchanges with others and how they may view a conversation or a person. And unless this is resolved through confronting this ”blind” or “seen” spot, or weakness one cannot successfully engage effectively in hyman interaction especially of an investigative, critical and philosophical nature. It will fuel assumptions  and doubts in conversations and exchanges which will defy the  principle”of engagement and interaction which is indispensable to  preserving the integrity of the transaction or interactions and discussions between parties who must also safeguard against hurting strong ties which usually exists between some participants in debates and other types of human exchanges.
Tim Elmore writes in his book that  “People like to feel insecure honor them. In effect, he is saying that people are weak and like the pleasantries of platitudes that obfuscate and deviate from deep psychological issues that they have repressed. Responses that reveal insecurities about themselves that are in the subconscious that they’re projecting onto other things and exchanges. If People like to feel good about themselves and we must honor them, that “feeling of goodness” must be cultivated from without, those things that promote that feeling be it fake or real. They cannot feel good within themselves, for themselves by themselves irrespective of attacks on their “glass houses” that they live in. They are not confident enough to formulate a self concept or self esteem for themselves without popular or outside perception. Or past experiences have shattered their self concept that they are constantly seeking self aggrandizement from their daily exchanges. 
So Tim suggest that in order to help people that are already broken to respond to others with wholly. He wants to perpetuate this weakness by providing for people beautiful responses that are nice and placate the issue. But I would suggest that if people are all insecure and need to be honored. Then today can’t expect the same people who are also broken to honor people who are insecure with honor. What must happen is for people to recognize that they bring their brokenness and past in human engagements and not to allow that subjective to interfere in those exchanges. They should only serve as a guide but not the basis. If people cannot separate themselves from the past by dealing amicably with it when engaging with life then you cannot expect us to put a tape on it by being nice. Life is complex and tough. Deal with those things that clouds ones judgements of all things bad or good so that one can preclude or reserve premature or bad judgements about people or things which jeopardizes human connections and relations which is what is all about... “people and how they communicate”. 

The End ... until ... There is a conclusion on the matter. 
.., And now the conclusion that I’d like to add. Simply put, disagreements from assumption and wrong context gave way to sense, reason and love. My brother and I ended up reconciling not our relationship as that remained always intact, as our relationship runs deep, but placed into right perspective through effective feedback and the give and takes of it, our bone of contention and clarified assumptions and muschaterizations.
The End ...