How Does The Shutdown Relate To Me?
Everyone knows ads are propaganda, but what happens when you have an ad for propaganda? While you sip your first Guinness and try to figure out why China's government can only ever shut down once, you can ponder this ad:
The only reason you haven't spit nitrogen bubbles on your screen is I haven't shown you the other half of this outstandingly accurate abomination. You should get yourself a towel and another drink.
I.
Intelligent people like to tell each other that they aren't liberal or conservative but independent; that Fox and MSNBC are biased and can't be trusted, that partisanship, "special interests" and "lobbyists" have destroyed America; in essence, that they are not ideologues but practical, reasonable people who just want the system to do what's right. Then you ask them what exactly "right" is, and the yelling starts.
Intelligent people, like racists, are fluent in describing themselves in opposition to what they are not, but ask them to define themselves by what they are, tell you what they do believe in, and they're lost. They have opinions on issues, sure, but ask for an overarching ideology and their face botoxes. Overarching ideology? Only people with manifestos have ideologies, not having an ideology is the whole point of being independent, the only thing they deal in is "facts" or "reality", and gun to head if they believe in anything it's "science." Not physics or chemistry, but evolution. You know, whatever ideologues hate.
I phrase it this way not to insult a group, but to show you how very easy it is to brand identify a group, because when a group becomes a demo it loses most of its freedom of action and becomes baa baa black sheep. Do you want to see the consequence? Turn on CNN.
II.
"The government shut down just shows that our government doesn't function correctly!" That's one interpretation, the other is that when a car starts to smoke, you pull over and fix it, you don't keep going till it explodes, though I recognize the explosion makes for better TV. What you're seeing is the ordinary back room realigning of interests and powers, but this time trying desperately to hide from a voyeuristic media that caters to a demographic, i.e. you, that believes that never more than three at a time colorful but poorly understood #issues will eventually get us to Mars. "We shouldn't go to Mars." You got your wish. Off topic, speaking of Mars, here's an interesting thought: if things proceed as per y=mx+b, then the entire human race of the future interstellar diaspora will all be Chinese. Huh. What do you know, Star Trek was way off.
Americans, by which I mean a populace propagandized to the Left or Right or Middle, cynically believe that "wanting to get re-elected" or arrogance or ideology is what's to blame, as if 500+ career Machiavellians are too stupid to know what an underemployed theater grad knows. "They should just do the right thing!" Who will let them? You?
The shut down was the inevitable consequence of a government not permitted to compromise, smothered by the oppressive gaze of a kamikaze media that will kill itself and your country just to get a headline today. I'm starting to wonder if the reason it is always pretty white girls who get kidnapped is that the media is the one kidnapping them. And you blamed Bear Stearns for being too focused on short term profits? CNN's time horizon is your next micturition. The media demands partisanship, conflict, opposing sides, but despite having 24 hours to fill will never, ever explain the interplay between complex issues, preferring to feature them in segments while hyping them to a crisis. Imagine trying to have sex always on camera, and always with a goat, and always with some know-it-all screaming at you, "get hard now! NOW! 8 seconds left! NOW! What's wrong with you?!" Jesus, can I take a minute and do this privately? "Transparency!"
If Senator X "makes a concession" the relevant media will proclaim him a loser and a coward, they don't want representatives, they want cage fighters. There's no reward for compromise and there's no safe place to attempt it, either. This is 100% your fault, "I can't believe how stupid these people are!" It's great how you can't find employment but have time to micromanage the U.S. Senate. #outrage
If you want to know what political career disaster looks like, have an infinitely leggy ex-sorority girl in flesh toned Manolos sitting behind a glass table in perfect lighting announce to 50% of America that you were beat by an old woman from California or an old man from Ohio. "Ha ha, what a cuckold! Back to you, Kent." You blame Congress? They are the ones who "don't get it"? When a representative democracy gets crippled by what amounts to a 3x3 magic square, it's not that they can't figure out the solution, the solution is easy, the answer is 15 and the five is a gimme, we just need someone to dare allow himself to be filmed putting the 1 on the left or the right or the center so we can finish the other 13 numbers and go bomb Syria. "Wait, what? I don't understand." Yes, that's my point exactly.
III.
I'm not saying the shutdown isn't a real problem, only that if the news came out only in weekly format, this particular shutdown wouldn't have happened. Or, said differently, if there was a government shut down at a time when the news came out only weekly, it would mean we were getting a new flag.
All of what is now being subverted by the media has been detailed in The Process Of Government, you should read it. But you won't, it has too many characters, and this is accurate no matter how you define characters. Come on, at least read Chapter XX, it's online. Jesus, here. "Umm, It's pretty boring." I know, I know, you want to know how the news relates to you, and boy oh boy do I have the news network for you.
"But that book was written in 1908. Based on what I've seen on Downton Abbey, things were a lot different then."
Well, yes, obviously, there had just been a massive leap forward in technology and industrialization, a booming economy fueling a wealth gap, temporarily course corrected by a financial panic "precipitated" by the failure of two overspeculating brokerage houses. There were also, simultaneously, great advances in progressive causes like worker's rights and food quality, all on the background of decreasing importance of religion among educated whites in favor of science. Not physics or chemistry, but evolution. Tabloids were incomprehensibly popular, partisan media the norm. A loosening of conventional morality manifested as bored promiscuity, female bisexuality, and a flood of new porn the likes of which never existed before.
"That does sound different. And awesome. What did their Millennial kids inherit, what did they experience over their adult lives, say 1929-1945?"
I totally don't know, Boardwalk Empire only goes up to 1924 and Mad Men starts 1960.
IV.
The problem with blaming the shutdown on Congressional partisans is that the partisans on either side know exactly what they want. When there are specific things you want, compromise is usually possible.
The public in the middle, however, don't understand politics, only emotions given to them by TV, and so their beliefs are cobbled together in real time, improvised, as they get "more information." One trending topic at a time, each vacuum sealed to prevent cross contamination. They don't look at things historically, culturally, humanistically, or even selfishly, there exists no system for interpreting "the facts." Compromise becomes impossible, as a simple example, when a "moderate" "thinks" there should be more restrictions on guns, they want gun owners to give up something they want very much-- in exchange for nothing. "But it's the right thing to do!" And the yelling starts, in HD.
Worse, they proudly announce their lack of ideology by branding themselves as Independents-- capital I, a thing, a demo. He willingly lessens his independence to become part of a group.
The "independent" demo actually has all the textbook characteristics of a group most susceptible to propaganda, more correctly "pre-propaganda", and by textbook I mean literally Propaganda.
They consider themselves leaderless. They can have representatives, they can have "evangelists" but they have to believe that their conclusions are all their own, through individual reflection and objective consideration. Interestingly, and on purpose, they believe their brains can handle such an analysis, any analysis. This isn't arrogance. They are told, by universities and the media, that their mind is prepared to do this heavy lifting as long as they are given just the right facts, filtered from the "noise." "Where can we get the right facts, in a world of liars?" Good question, maybe the news?
Commonly, independents have a single personal issue, say gun rights or abortion, but no personal experience with other issues, and lacking any subjective starting point, they therefore believe that ONLY objectivity will give them the truth. The less life experience they have the better; the less they've seen of the world, the fewer people they've argued with (in person, where it is real and has real consequences like punches), the less frequently their water balloon worldview is tested by people with pins, the more they will cling to the premise that "facts" are what's important. In this way the one personal issue serves as a reference point which the propaganda exploits: "hey, gun advocates, did you know you like low corporate taxes?" I do? "Yes, because the people you hate are for raising them." Consequently, raising corporate taxes is felt like an attack on the Second Amendment. "Liberals! Taking away our rights!"
But sometimes the complexity of issues is just overwhelming, once in a while reality creeps in, and issues are discovered to be massively complicated, and anyway he has no power to do anything.
No doubt this sounds depressing, he's going to start drinking heavily, or become a cynic, or go the Hemingway. So the media=propaganda fosters his regression towards a much desired solution: total alienation. The media explains how things relate to him, and as long as he understands what's going on, he feels empowered. He is given an ideology without even knowing it. Now he doesn't actually have to do anything, indeed, it's way the hell better if he does nothing. All that's required is support, and through his support not only will "the right things" happen but he'll share in the credit.
You'll counter that there are right leaning and left leaning independents, isn't there a difference? but this misses the point: propaganda doesn't try to get you to believe something, but to do something, and in this case it is to do nothing-- it doesn't matter what you choose to believe, as long as your outrage is done from inside your house.
This is the whole gimmick of media, not polar but triangular, right, left, middle, mobilizing an army of assonauts to feel strongly enough about something that they don't do anything.
I already knew that "independent" was a group looking for representation, what I was surprised by is how fast "independent" became a mainstream brand demo. Here is page 2, and 3, of Time Magazine:
The first and most immediate observation is that Al Jazeera assumes its American target demo is stupid, very stupid, because here we have what is most certainly a college graduate who considers herself in need of unbiased, objective, independent news-- yet she is still reading Time Magazine, as her main source of in depth news. Rana Foroohar balanced by Fareed Zakaria, two wrongs can make a right, and "it's somewhere in the middle." She has decided that the problem with her understanding of the world is that she just needs better intel. Yes, she will say intel, it sounds more objective.
In order for the Time reader to have formed the quoted thought two other thoughts had to have occurred already, which in itself is astonishing, here they are: 1. She's figured out that all American news is biased, she's sick of the partisanship, after all, it doesn't brand identify her. 2. She thinks that more objectivity is to be found at Al-Jazeera America.
Why would she think this? Because she's stupid? Actually, yes: the culture you know least about has all the answers, which is also why the Guinness ad hypermale in pre-season Special Olympics has chosen to tattoo gigantic Chinese characters on his arm to explain his ennui to himself. "It's a chinese proverb, 'That what doesn't kill me make me stronger.'" I hope to God a bus tries to make you stronger. Off topic, as a sociological metric, you can track a chinese person's first level of alienation from his culture by his branding himself with English-word tattoos; but you will know that all the chinese has been media powerwashed out of him when the he starts getting Chinese character tattoos. "It's because I'm Chinese," he'd explain, to which you would not dare reply, "yeah, I kinda figured." To which he will then not reply, "I mean, I know I'm genetically Chinese, but I don't really feel Chinese, but this signals that I'm part of a symbolic China more authentic than the actual China of my parents which I feel no real connection to, yet I know I'm supposed to feel the connection, it's not like I can go around pretending I grew up on Waltzing Matilda." To which you will not add, "It's not entirely your fault, you didn't live through a war like your parents and grandparents did, and anyway modern China resembles the U.S. far more than it does symbolic China. Technically, you're alienated from your parents alienation, but neither are you connected to Americana either, the white girls/boys seem out of reach, there's a frivolity you can't really empathize with, jobs other than Law, Medicine, Science are unreal, and you feel like you're always looking at everything from an outside that itself has no firm location." And he'll blink, confused, "truth be told, my only real association to chinese culture is my parents screaming at me that I'm not as good as 'real' Chinese. What can be done?" I don't have an answer for you, the good news is that when you finally find the answer that works for you, your kids will be too old to care.
Al-Jazeera America is trying to call itself "objective", but right in the ad is the brand reveal: she doesn't want objectivity, she wants subjectivity explained to her, she wants to know how the news relates to her. She wants to know: how can I, an organ donor in Sector 3, be part of the global community now that my husband is boring and my kids prefer their individual LCD screens? The media wants her to have an answer, after all, do you know how many Nielsen ratings that family generates, how individualized is the data? It's not the quality of the news at AJA she likes, but how watching it makes her feel smart, unique. She's not going to watch Fox, MSNBC and AJA, right? Only one of those, but AJA brands her as out of the mainstream, unique, open to other opinions. "I like to get my information from different sources." I assume that includes twitter, 140 characters and an appeal to authority and you're good to go at the Starbucks.
V.
To be clear, I'm not at all worried Al Jazeera is going to secretly convert this woman into a jihadist or spread misinformation and disinformation. I have no doubt Al Jazeera will be as objective as CNN, after all they took Soledad O'Brien from them to signal that very point.
So when I say AJA is (pre-)propaganda, I don't mean it won't be accurate, I mean that it's purpose is to prepare its demo for a certain way of life. Of course everything I've said applies to any American media-- except that Al Jazeera offers something else the American networks don't or can't. If you want to know what Al Jazeera is really offering, take a look at its aspirational target demo:
Not pictured is a white guy in a suit, because he already has media that's for him, and it's probably Fox, and the above four people hate it. That's powerful branding in America: in opposition to what you hate.
Women and minorities may not seem like an aspirational demo, but it is-- not for actual women and minorities necessarily, but for people suffering from tremendous ennui who want to be part of a struggle, something bigger than themselves.
They feel, without fully comprehending this to be true, that the only reason the American media is so partisan and loud and angry and urgent is because nothing really important is happening. Yes, there's a countdown clock on CNN for Debt Ceiling Armageddon and I guess Kanye West is headed for the asylum but it's all boy who cried wolf blitzer at this point. She heard, like you heard, that the NSA is monitoring us, and you know what? Meh. Though it was interesting when it was on The Good Wife. This isn't to say things are going well, it is to say they are degrading boringly. Like the above woman's marriage.
This is what Al Jazeera promises her, not objectivity, but a connection to history. Our big crisis is... whether or we aren't going to pay our short term debts. You think either of the four people above can get hyped about that? But over in the middle east history is happening, racial equality, women's lib, the right to get an education, riots, ideological clashes-- all that stuff is happening over there. Women are being stoned to death for seeing a penis, gay men, too, if you assume that at some point in some future these things will no longer be true, then you are saying that historical changes are afoot as the old ways are replaced, and by ways I mean men. The #OWS demo wants to see powerful men humbled before the t-shirted, tweeting masses, it allows them the fantasy that it could some day happen here, which it won't because the propaganda worked.
Propaganda doesn't succeed because it is manipulative, it works because people WANT it, NEED it, it gives their life a direction and meaning and guards against change.
Fans of AJA will probably attack me for being biased, but this accusation is silly. The whole point here is that the target demo for AJA is not smart, and I know this because no one smart would watch TV news. If you are watching TV news, then you're not smart, this isn't me saying this, this is TV news predicting this: no one smart would ever ask another person, let alone the news, to explain to them how the news relates to them. TV news thinks you're as stupid as Time Magazine.
If anything, Al-Jazeera isn't the "Islamification" of the west, it is the westernization of the middle east. Al Jazeera reports in English, they have western values, and, most importantly, accept ads-- western style ads, i.e aspirational, not representational. The neocons couldn't have planned this better, someone should check to see if they didn't. Two months of Al Jazeera and this woman will turn to her then deceased husband in a moment of big picture clarity and say, "you know, they're not so different from us, they want the same things we want." Yes. Why do you think that is? Evolution?
The news for Americans, especially Independents, lacks meaning, direction, ideology-- and they miss it, just like economically, they've been left behind. Now the news is artificial drama, just local crime stories blown up nationally, a natural disaster, the occasional Youtube video-- where's the Change, where are the upheavals, where are the riot police? We don't have political riots here, we have high end sit ins near the Broadway Starbucks, and occasionally 20 motorcycles will attack a minivan. "Is 'motorcycle' code?" That's where we are right now, this is what the media has trained you for, detecting racism or hypocrisy or some other character flaw in the speaker as a proxy for the complexities of the issues so you don't have to think. It is under these conditions that you expect John Boehner to "compromise" on something you don't at all understand, and scream for his beheading if he doesn't, all to the thrill of the media. "See! TLP is a right wing zealot!" See, you're stupid. And boy oh boy do I have the news network for you.
Digg | 
del.icio.us | 
StumbleUpon | 
Reddit | 
Yahoo! | 
My favourites
October 10, 2013 7:28 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Propaganda is ego-syntonic. Note taken.
What else?
Score: -10 (70 votes cast)
October 10, 2013 7:55 PM | Posted by : | Reply
The media wants me to do nothing? Boy, that's a relief. They could've just asked! Nothing is my favorite thing to do. Trying to care about people I've never met and the decisions they'll make with or without me is going to be so much more fun now that it's just a hobby. Maybe now I can concentrate on my work.
Score: 73 (77 votes cast)
October 10, 2013 8:01 PM | Posted by : | Reply
People never watch news for NEWS -- it's about feeling. It's about pretending for a time that it actually matters that they're informed because if it doesn't matter, then neither do they. It makes them feel empowered. Nothing could be worse for a News Consumer than the feeling that History could possibly happen without their input. But, really that's how it's been forever. 90% of the people watch the news -- how many of them could name their Congress-critter? How many of them have ever called them, how many have ever written them? So why do they believe that Congress has anything to do with them? Why worry about Syria, what, you have Obama on speed-dial? So what does it matter that you know that Assad is an Alawite? What does it matter that you think WMDs are bad? You are voter number 299,999,997, you don't really matter.
I think that's ultimately why people need to watch and read news. To debate it. It's about the pretence that you matter, or that if people would just do what you say, that everything would be better. But that's rediculous. Obama has a middle east advisor that speaks Arabic and knows the difference between a Sunni and a Shiite. He's got economic advisors with PHDs in Economics. You're a peasent who works in a cubical -- you don't matter. And that's scary.
Score: 92 (104 votes cast)
October 10, 2013 8:08 PM | Posted by : | Reply
What a fantastically written piece. However, while I think the analysis on media is spot on, I am not so sure about the political analysis.
Yes -- certainly a part of what forced the government to shutdown is the gamification of political coverage. And while the media elites like Times executive editor Jill Abramson roll out with quotes like, “I worry that politics is covered almost like sports at a relentless who’s winning and who’s losing kind of way,” (politi.co/1fR4TWz) she doesn't recognise that her own paper is helping to fuel this type of behaviour.
However, when it comes to the actual politics, I wonder if you are right that without the glare of the media spotlight we would have averted this shutdown. What we are observing on the right (and I will say that I am politically biased against them) is something that hasn't been witnessed in American politics since possibly before the Civil War. Those Republicans in the House who identify themselves as belonging to the Tea Party, a great majority of them, don't seem to be willing or interested in governance at all.
This is what Ezra Klein wrote this today:Republicans don’t want to raise taxes. They want to get the spending cuts they support in return for nothing. And that’s what the shutdown/debt-ceiling fight is about now. The Republicans believe that instead of trading taxes for entitlement cuts they can trade reopening the government and raising the debt ceiling for entitlement cuts. Since they actually support reopening the government and raising the debt ceiling that means they’re not trading anything at all.
There are also reports out that many Republicans in the House don't believe that breaching the debt ceiling would be much of an issue at all. This is not media hyperbole, these are beliefs that are held which are not based in reality.
And finally, just as an aside, I found the paragraph on Chinese tattoos to be very well written. Especially this sentence,Technically, you're alienated from your parents alienation, but neither are you connected to Americana either, the white girls/boys seem out of reach, there's a frivolity you can't really empathize with, jobs other than Law, Medicine, Science are unreal, and you feel like you're always looking at everything from an outside that itself has no firm location.
As a first generation Taiwanese person in the US, I feel this sense of alienation quite a lot.
Score: 38 (96 votes cast)
October 10, 2013 8:08 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Not to sound like an idiot, but please... MOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR
Score: 5 (43 votes cast)
October 10, 2013 8:33 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Haha. Looking at American politics from the outside it is so fun to read the blogs were "Democrats" and "Republicans" get it on with each other as if wasn't theater.
Only in America, country of professional wrestling...
Oh, btw: Has TLP ever done a piece on WWE and the like? Right now it feels to me this scene captures the heart of America better than even Walmart an Portland.
Score: 5 (45 votes cast)
October 10, 2013 8:44 PM | Posted by : | Reply
"The Process of Government" is interesting. Thanks for the link.
Score: 9 (17 votes cast)
October 10, 2013 9:56 PM | Posted by : | Reply
David Sedaris said it well:
"I went to a store on the Upper West Side. This store is like a Museum of Natural History where everything is for sale: every taxidermic or skeletal animal that roams the earth is represented in this shop and, because of that, it is popular. I went with my brother last weekend. Near the cash register was a bowl of glass eyes and a sign reading ‘DO NOT HOLD THESE GLASS EYES UP AGAINST YOUR OWN EYES: THE ROUGH STEMS CAN CAUSE INJURY.’
I talked to the fellow behind the counter and he said, ‘it’s the same thing every time. First they hold up the eyes and then they go for the horns. I’m sick of it.’
It frightened me that, until I saw the sign, my first impulse was to hold those eyes up to my own. I thought it might be a laugh riot.
All of us take pride and pleasure in the fact that we are unique, but I’m afraid when all is said and done the police are right: it all comes down to fingerprints."
Score: 34 (42 votes cast)
October 10, 2013 10:21 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
are you waiting to be told what to think? :) hee hee hee.
Score: -3 (17 votes cast)
October 10, 2013 10:21 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Another TLP post that reveals how dumb you are without offering anyway of becoming smart. Yes, many people have no knowledge of the complex issues that Congress is struggling with. Should they become experts in every fleeting issue that comes before Congress? And if they can't, then how should should they vote for a member of Congress?
TLP's mission is to get you to see how inadequate you are in hopes that you'll try and change on your own. However, it sucks that a guy (girl?) as smart as TLP is not offering any help.
Score: 15 (97 votes cast)
October 10, 2013 10:28 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Most news are simplified ugly versions of reality. Reality is complex and multi-layered. When I watch the news, I see that only domestic issues get a little bit more focus, while international news are straight propaganda, a twisted reality, oversimplified for a not-so-intellegent, attention-lacking consumers...
The shut down is a farce. look into the stockmarket; investors don't take it seriously at all
Score: 5 (13 votes cast)
October 10, 2013 10:47 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I am having trouble understanding what it means to feel alienated "from your parent's alienation." Do you interpret this statement as meaning that the hypothetical Chinese young person feels estranged from their parents' sense of not belonging? For example, the Chinese young person thinks "I don't really get why my parent's feel so out of place here. What's so different about China that makes them feel like such outsiders?"
Am I wrong?
Score: 9 (15 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 2:20 AM | Posted by : | Reply
I'm so happy that you came back to us. We were so alone.
Score: 16 (30 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 3:16 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Getting cable's been the worst thing to happen to my mother in the past 10 years. She gets home and turns on CNN/MSNBC and gets stressed out over things that don't matter. She now hates the GOP and Fox News because Chris Matthews told her to hate the GOP and Fox News. Everyday she's panicking about the Debt Ceiling. SHE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THE DEBT CEILING IS!!!!
If I had my way voting would be restricted. I used to resent the existence of the Electoral College. Now I understand why it exists.
Personally I like the shut-down. The House is passing bills funding parts of the government based on their importance, and letting meaningless stuff go unfunded. How is this bad?
Score: 28 (52 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 8:37 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Why do you think TLP teases and challenges his readers to read more in so many of his posts? Did you read The Process of Government? That's how you get smarter. Read things worth reading and then think about what you read.
Score: 55 (57 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 9:33 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Completely agree that it sucks that TLP is not offering any help. If I had a reader base as willing to change as his, this world would literally look completely different in a couple of years.
Score: -32 (54 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 9:37 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
stop begging for more and start creating.
Score: 18 (30 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 9:57 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
So you're argument is that you aren't being affected by propaganda, because the republicans really ARE crazy and evil, and you know that because Ezra Klein told you.
OK then.
Score: 44 (52 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 10:35 AM | Posted by : | Reply
That a first world nation (mostly), the government can be shut down (mostly), by disagreement (mostly) over a law that is already passed and in effect (mostly) is more Han faintly ridiculous. Whether you support healthcare, or don't, or think it's irrelevant -- this is ridiculous.
In other first world nations, there is double dissolution or vote of no confidence or similar, where if the govt decided to hold the country hostage, the govt would be replaced.
I was living in Austria a few years ago when a coalition of 2 parties fell apart, and they were deadlocked. Guess what happened? They got fired and there was a special election. This happened in Canada a few years ago as well. It works much better when everybody is risking something.
When in the course of normal events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds that connect them with another, etc, etc.
Score: 19 (31 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 10:37 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
"The process of government" won't help me with current events. I actually have news sources that I think are helpful, but I would like to hear Alone's thoughts on sources that he believes are worth it since he spends a lot of time reading and criticizing various news sources. I don't think I've ever heard him say anything nice about a news source from this century.
Score: -18 (34 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 10:54 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
What makes you think you need help with current events?
Score: 10 (12 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 11:04 AM | Posted by : | Reply
I reported comment number two for no reason. My touchscreen (and my big hands) are to blame.
Score: 0 (8 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 11:25 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Anybody else wondering why this post is dated September 25th?
Score: 20 (24 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 11:29 AM | Posted by : | Reply
The media doesn't want us to stay inside and watch TV. It doesn't care who we are or what we want except to try to grab our eyeballs. It doesn't want anything but to give us what we already want and to take advantage of the disjunct between what we want and what we think we want (aspirational advertising).
We believe propaganda is a tool used to try to convince us of something we don't believe; that's wrong, that's why we're so susceptible to it. Propaganda is a tool used to convince us that what we already believe is right, which is what TLP says that "stupid people" want most of all - to believe that they're capable of thinking the right thing and living the right way.
Questioning authority doesn't mean questioning the media presentations of public figures; it means questioning yourself. Because...YABLT...BY...
Score: 24 (24 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 11:48 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
So you're argument is that you aren't being affected by propaganda, because the republicans really ARE crazy and evil, and you know that because Ezra Klein told you.
Thanks for not actually reading what I said. The Klein quote wasn't used to show that Republicans are crazy and evil, it was used to summarise their position and their lack of willingness to compromise as being disingenuous. I could just as easily have pointed to a hundred different direct quotes from various members of Congress saying essentially what Klein wrote.
And if you reread the original comment, no where does it say the media is not having a corrosive effect on politics but it is simply enhancing what is already a broken situation.
Score: -15 (37 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 11:58 AM | Posted by : | Reply
I thought I tasted some Jaques Ellul in your analysis and was glad to see when his book on Propaganda was directly referenced. I have some objections to making this about stupidity though, as if succumbing to propaganda and the media was a personal failing of some kind. It isn't, people are behaving exactly as they are conditioned. More than that, being smart is no guarantee that you'll somehow see past ideology. I think you get at this too, although maybe you do so a little less directly.
Your analysis of why people turn to AJA is spot on though. Very few people can be comfortable with accepting that their ideas are not their own. It's much easier to tell them that their opinions matter while simultaneously molding them into a mass produced demographic. Adorno talked a lot about "pseudo-individuality" and its importance in late capitalism and I think that applies here as well. I guess citing him outs me as leftist, but I work pretty hard to accept the role ideology plays in my daily life.
Score: 29 (31 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 12:35 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
The House is passing bills funding parts of the government based on their POPULARITY and POLITICAL IMPACT on the opposition, NOT importance.
Fer instance - data on the economy isn't being collected - but if you're shutting down chunks of the government that you don't like, there's certainly no reason to collect data that might show that you're doing harm now is there?
Score: 1 (15 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 12:37 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
"What makes you think you need help with current events?"
Well, according to Alone, all TV news is for stupid people. And in other posts he criticized most of the popular print media. I'm just wondering what he thinks is worth reading from this century.
Score: 12 (16 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 1:06 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
You're misunderstanding my question, so I'll ask again:
What makes YOU think you need help on current events?
Things aren't "worth reading" in some vacuum. Things have specific worths to specific people based on their situations (as they perceive them).
A trucker needs to know about weather and traffic. A farmer needs weather and crop prices. Who are you, that you need to have a total grasp on current events? Or rather, who do you think you are?
Score: 41 (43 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 1:47 PM | Posted by : | Reply
My whole "The Last Psychiatrist" experience has been a lie...This blog should be called "The Last Chuck Palahniuk". It's not Nietzsche and it's not Foucalt you derive from, it's Chuck Palahniuk. Nothing wrong with that per se, but everything you say and analyze, he has already said.
Score: -4 (34 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 2:10 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
"Who are you, that you need to have a total grasp on current events? Or rather, who do you think you are?"
I'm a US citizen. I have a responsibility to be somewhat informed before I vote, or when I talk to others about how I think they should vote.
I would also like to be informed for small talk purposes around the office. I know this may not require accurate information, but I don't want to contribute to spreading any false/bias news reports. This is again because I'm a US citizen who would like to improve, or at least reduce the damage I cause to this country.
Score: 5 (35 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 2:21 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I recently made the comparison of today's culture to the roaring 20s/Gatsby/stock market crash era. But I think America today has a lot in common with the Weimar Republic too.
Score: 0 (12 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 2:24 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
"The Klein quote wasn't used to show that Republicans are crazy and evil, it was used to summarise their position and their lack of willingness to compromise as being disingenuous"
So you are saying (through Ezra Klien)that the Republicans are in a win win?
I think Ezra assumes too much in his quote. Saying that "Republicans support raising the debt ceiling" is not true... because Fox news told me it wasn't.
Also, his quote boils down to, "Republicans are using what leverage they have to get what they want".... so ya know... politics.
Score: 18 (18 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 3:06 PM | Posted by : | Reply
TLP: everybody is stupid except me.
Score: -1 (47 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 3:15 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Perhaps the answer is less democracy and less "awareness" rather than more of it.
Score: 7 (15 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 4:16 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I, for one, feel like reading TLP has helped me. In this sense it's just one influence among many, of course (mustn't let our host get a swelled head!), but its many examples of various practices of self-deception were useful in identifying the same ones in myself. Once you identify a thought that you didn't choose to think, it's on you and nobody else to decide what to replace it with (even if it's the same one), notwithstanding the tragedy that many others never get even that far.
Score: 16 (18 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 5:17 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
"Perhaps the answer is less democracy and less "awareness" rather than more of it."
I don't know what you mean by "awareness" (awareness of what?).
As for less democracy, are you saying I shouldn't vote? That would be irresponsible. Everyone else is making a minimal effort to be informed and vote for the sake of running this country. I think I should make an effort as well. How else do you think the public should run this country effectively?
And sometimes it would be good to know current events because if the government is going to shutdown, it would be a good thing to know if you are working for the federal government. Sometimes something could happen that you don't know about, but it might affect you. I would also like have an accurate source of news that could save me from other news reports. Like a source that could tell me if the threat of a government default is real or just political posturing.
Score: -8 (14 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 7:38 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Well, voting just invests you in the system. By any statistics you look at, even in a fair election (i.e a not a gerrymandered district) you're one of a million, and the chances that your vote is going to change the outcome is thus one in a million. So my question is what you expect to get from voting. If you're voting because you want a change or a say, you're more than likely wasting your time.
As far as being informed and deciding on policy ... be informed all you want. Just don't delude yourself on how much influence you have over any policy out there. The lobbyists have already bought both parties, your vote is lost in a sea of other votes many of whom decided their candidate based on watching the Colbert Report while drunk. You vote but you don't get to decide.
I think at this point the vote is largely symbolic participation. Most congressional districts are not in serious contention, most people in federal office have been doing nothing but politics since they were 16, and most of them are in the back pockets of whatever lobby will eventually hire them. You aren't changing things, but voting keeps you from revolting. If the same decisions were made without people voting, we would at least not be laboring under the delusion that we're responsible for the mess or had a duty to clean it up.
Score: 33 (39 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 9:40 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I know I don't have a lot of influence through voting, but voting does hold politicians to a certain standard. At the very least, it makes them afraid of public opinion polls. And even though the people who answer the phone for those polls are me and the drunks who watch Steven Colbert, we can at least keep some certifiably insane politicians out of office.
And that will make America better than the countries who can't keep the certified psychopaths out of office. That's enough for me to vote in national elections.
Local elections are a different story. Last year, a democrat in my district lost a special election for a state senate seat by 16 votes. His defeat did not depend on his policies, but on how many people he could not convince to give a fuck about an election in the middle of May. Think about the 16 democrats that stayed home that day because they had no power to decide anything.
I can't help but think that if I had better news sources, that I could influence enough people to also consider those sources, and maybe raise the standard for politicians.
Here is the URL to the story:
Score: 0 (12 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 11:42 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
"TLP's mission is to get you to see how inadequate you are in hopes that you'll try and change on your own. However, it sucks that a guy (girl?) as smart as TLP is not offering any help."
Amazingly on purpose, it is your expectation of "help" from an anonymous blogger that is the reason you can't be helped. As always, the problem is you.
Score: 46 (50 votes cast)
October 11, 2013 11:46 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
"I would also like have an accurate source of news that could save me from other news reports."
This is a joke, right?
The whole point of freedom of speech is that intelligent human beings don't need to be saved from the opinions of others.
If you want to know what's really going on in the world, journalism is useful, but it will only take you so far. You need to be able to recognize what the truth looks like in a particular area of human activity, and to read the work of people whose job it is to try and figure out that truth. That's why TLP directed you to a seminal PoliSci text. That book tells you what truth in politics looks like, and explains why the truth has to look like that. Start with that, develop a general model of how politics works, read a bunch of history to see if your model stands up to real events. After 10 years or so, you'll find that the most banal political hack on Fox or MSNBC can tell you a huge amount about what's really going on.
Even better, you'll find you have ideas about how to effect political change (hint: regular voting doesn't do much).
If that's more work than you can imagine doing, the media does offer you the alternative of simply watching different news shows until you find a talking head who looks like someone you would like to have as your friend. As TLP points out, it is a very emotionally fulfilling option. While you run the risk of people occasionally noticing that you don't know what you're talking about, in the US, at least, it's a pretty minimal risk.
Score: 32 (32 votes cast)
October 12, 2013 12:01 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Re Less Democracy
This is exactly what the original Constitution called for. No direct election of Senators. No separate ballots for President and Vice-President. And voting eligibility determined by the States.
Pretty smart, those Founding Fathers.
Score: 16 (20 votes cast)
October 12, 2013 4:04 AM | Posted by : | Reply
For what it's worth getting informed about your politicians is easier now than ever before. I'm pretty sure there's a wiki out there that shows how they've voted on previous bills, and I know for a fact every item that's put to the floor is listed online so you can see what's coming up. It's all right there, all you have to do is look it up. Also finding your congressman is very easy, there's tools online to look that up by just typing in your address. You can even get a phone number to call their office and let them know what you think they should vote on upcoming issues.
If you're in a relevant business to something that your congressman can affect, making friends with other businessmen and setting up some advocacy stuff would be wise.
This is a boring as shit list of actions involved in actually making change, they are 100% disconnected from what the TV will tell you to think.
To alex: you don't want to do these things. You want news-porn, or some other form of junk food. That right there is your problem. You also already know this and don't want to change. If you did you'd stop commenting here. In fact, there's your first step towards real change: stop talking to strangers on the internet. We are not your friends.
Score: 9 (21 votes cast)
October 12, 2013 4:49 AM | Posted by : | Reply
In the world of TLP, is there any way to not be stupid?
Score: 8 (12 votes cast)
October 12, 2013 9:46 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I think people are being unfair. From what I gather, Alex wants to improve his mind without having his eyes bled by a dry pol sci textbook. That textbook is borderline unreadable and I have a Politics degree.
If my read is correct Alex, you could do worse than pick up a John le Carre novel. le Carre is a very unique writer. I suspect his motives have less to do with selling than conveying esoteric truth to the masses via (brilliant) fiction. His stories are real, even when they're not. If you want to understand how the world works, how people think, what motivates them to act or fail to act; if you want to learn secrets about human nature that are not widely known (how we blindly exploit those closest to us, in particular ourselves), read John le Carre.
Read The Spy Who Came In From the Cold (le Carre's first). If you like it, read A Perfect Spy. You'll learn more about the world from those two (hugely enjoyable) works of contemporary fiction than you will from two dozen widely accepted literary classics (most of which are just vehicles for drilling sentimental propaganda and creepy, exploitable values into children).
Score: 0 (18 votes cast)
October 12, 2013 11:09 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
"To alex: you don't want to do these things. You want news-porn, or some other form of junk food. That right there is your problem. You also already know this and don't want to change. If you did you'd stop commenting here. In fact, there's your first step towards real change: stop talking to strangers on the internet. We are not your friends."
Strangers on the internet are a good source of information. I asked how I could improve my understanding of current events if most news sources are biased, and I got a decent answer from dd's comment.
To Jonny: I'm going to attempt to read The Process Of Government, now that I understand why TPL mentioned it instead of something more recent.
And I'll probably finish reading "The Spy Who Came In From the Cold" while I avoid reading The Process of Government.
Score: 8 (12 votes cast)
October 12, 2013 11:25 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I think people are being unfair. From what I gather, Alex wants to improve his mind without having his eyes bled by a dry pol sci textbook. That textbook is borderline unreadable and I have a Politics degree.
"If my read is correct Alex, you could do worse than pick up a John le Carre novel. le Carre is a very unique writer. I suspect his motives have less to do with selling than conveying esoteric truth to the masses via (brilliant) fiction. His stories are real, even when they're not. If you want to understand how the world works, how people think, what motivates them to act or fail to act; if you want to learn secrets about human nature that are not widely known (how we blindly exploit those closest to us, in particular ourselves), read John le Carre.
Translation: "Alex doesn't have to do the hard work of learning how politics works. I didn't, and I have a Politics degree. He just needs to find better friends than the news readers. A novelist like John Le Carre is much more trustworthy than a news reader. You can trust me Alex, because I'm not mean to you like these other commenters."
It is impossible to gain any knowledge as long as you are looking for a trustworthy person rather than the conditions that will make a piece of information true.
Score: 15 (23 votes cast)
October 12, 2013 12:22 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Offers no help? Maybe not: "I am nervous about recommending "the Classics" because it sounds contrived and pretentious, but anything that has withstood the test of time and is not something that was created to be consumed by current narcissist adults is as good a place to start as any.
Do the opposite of what the narcissists did. They wanted to know enough to fake it. They read just enough to use the book to build an identity, so they read about books, but not the actual books.
If nothing else, reading will keep you out of trouble: every moment reading those books is a moment not doing something your current adults created for themselves that you're stuck with by default."
Score: 20 (22 votes cast)
October 12, 2013 3:58 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I'm the anon who wrote that TLP offers no help. Advising one's readers to fill their mind with prestigious propaganda(that withstood the test of time for a reason) hardly counts as help.
Score: 1 (17 votes cast)
October 12, 2013 4:57 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I wonder if some of the fake conversations used during these texts are actually derived from real conversations during your practise of psychiatry? If so, then perhaps a bit of basic psychiatry training may be beneficial for those who want to elucidate their thoughts and feelings?
Score: -2 (4 votes cast)
October 12, 2013 5:02 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
You've completely missed the point but I hope you don't force your children to suffer just so they can learn.
We live in a world where everyone hates pursuing their own best interests. They weren't born to hate learning, working, taking care of themselves, etc. We're made to hate acting in our own best interests by those who imagine children need to be forced to do the Right thing or they'd never look after themselves. It's the other way around.
I detected an resistance to reading the textbook that had but one explanation (since confirmed): Reading that textbook is no fun.
And you would say what Alone said: "Umm, It's pretty boring." I know, I know, you want to know how the news relates to you, and boy oh boy do I have the news network for you.
Alone said it. I don't think he'd keep pushing it. When someone doesn't want to do something, to protect them from associating the activity with a negative conditioned response, you have to forget about it (temporarily). Time for another tack.
And there is no logic that says learning must be a chore. There's a pretty strong argument that says learning must be relatable or it will be futile. If perceived as a chore, the student is instantly damaged by associating Learning with Suffering.
You cannot screw around with respondent conditioning. Force children to do things they don't want to do and you risk breaking their minds for life. There are a billion or two humans who don't realise they only hate acting in their own best interests because someone forced them to. Their best interests have been associated with grossly unpleasant stimuli. Guys and school. Girls and work.
I know a guy who didn't eat his greens for 27 years.
__________
It is impossible to gain any knowledge when you're no longer learning for yourself. John le Carre has keys for broken minds.
"Love is whatever you can still betray. Betrayal can only happen if you love."
- le carre
Score: 25 (33 votes cast)
October 12, 2013 10:55 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
It's always funny to see these people who are all "the damn Republicans are gonna wreck this country because they won't raise the debt ceiling" and ask them why they think the solution to a maxed-out credit card is to ask VISA for a higher limit.
Score: 2 (22 votes cast)
October 12, 2013 10:56 PM | Posted by : | Reply
"Propaganda doesn't succeed because it is manipulative, it works because people WANT it, NEED it, it gives their life a direction and meaning and guards against change."
Yeah, I read The True Believer too. Pretty on-the-money.
Score: 1 (5 votes cast)
October 13, 2013 6:25 AM | Posted by : | Reply
I see a lot of people commenting who are trying to prove they're smarter than Alone. This isn't going to happen unless you are Alone, or, more importantly, if you're really alone -- but you aren't willing and that's when the pirates know you're full of shit.
Score: 0 (14 votes cast)
October 13, 2013 9:06 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Oh good grief. Media is entertainment. It exists to make a living for the folks who sell it. Papers, magazines, broadcast exist to feed people. They do that by finding a market and selling to it.
Score: -1 (5 votes cast)
October 13, 2013 9:32 AM | Posted by : | Reply
I read this article and hated it.
Then I read it again and understood.
This comment could be applied to nearly every article on this blog.
Score: 8 (8 votes cast)
October 13, 2013 1:47 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I know Alone hyped The process of government but I'm reading the introduction to Propaganda and huh...
You might want to give it a chance.
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
October 13, 2013 3:37 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Will America ever wake from her dream of life as a Benetton ad?
Score: 8 (8 votes cast)
October 13, 2013 5:27 PM | Posted by : | Reply
TLP is a guy. He lives in New Jersey. His middle initial is [withheld]. And he's very handsome.
Score: 3 (7 votes cast)
October 13, 2013 5:37 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Ok if you really think you can keep a Psychopath out of office, I want you to do some serious research on your congressional district.
When was the last time the district changed parties without a redistricting? If your district is like the vast majority of them, I'd be fairly safe in putting a thousand dollars down on "before 1960". Given that most congressional districts are not in serious contention, polls aren't very meaningful to Congress -- they're running in districts so gerrymandered that they'll win by 5% if they don't even bother to campaign.
Which lobbies have given to each of the candidates running in the last election? How much did they give? I'd be willing to put another thousand on many of the same names showing up on both sides, Goldman Sachs and the like. I'd also be willing to bet that they got more from 1 lobby group than from any citizens who live in that district.
I'm going to make another thousand dollars with a third bet. I'm going to bet that out of 535 members of Congress, you can't find more than 3 that are out of what would be considered blue-collar work. Plumbers, Drywall Hangers, carpenters, bricklayers, retail, etc. Most of them are doctors, lawyers, or community organizers, not blue collar work.
So what are the odds that you can stop a psychopath when your vote can't elect the other party until the next redistricting (if then), cannot match the contributions of Goldman Sachs, and cannot elect even a token member of the working class?
That's the con here, and I think it's the Long Con
Quick test for a con: what questions does it not occur to you to ask? While you were memorizing the language and the pacing of the scam, you didn't ask yourself, why didn't Mantegna take that guy's money at the end? Why did he let him off the hook? "He was just doing it as an example." Oh, like when a guy says he'll put in just the tip, "I want to see if it fits"? It's not like the psychiatrist doesn't know he's a thief-- that's why they were there in the first place. So he purposely didn't steal the money to make the psychiatrist feel at ease, feel closer to him. To earn her confidence by first giving her his. She's the mark. The aborted short con is part of an unseen long con.
They give you the ability to vote to con you into trusting them. You feel like you can trust them BECAUSE YOU VOTED. They gave you a little mouse voice (their confidence), so you trust them. You trust that they'll do what you elected them to do, what you've been told they will do. Then when they spy on you and tell you it's for your own good, you won't riot. When they tell you that the IRS just sorta happened to audit the entire Tea Party, you'll buy it. When they tell you that you need to strip down to your skivvies to board a plane, you'll believe them.
That's the beauty of the vote. Not that the peasants have a voice, but that since they believe that they have a voice, they won't revolt no matter how stupid the government gets. because the peasants think they chose the government and spend hours arguing with other peasants about which policies are good or bad, and spend hours trying to decide which candidate is right for the country, they'll never revolt, they'll never really disobey, and they'll go along until the next election.
TL;DR -- we're essentially an oligarchy. The trappings of democracy are more about making the peasants and serfs comfortable with the decisions of the oligarchy, not with letting the lumpin-prole have a vote.
Score: 33 (39 votes cast)
October 13, 2013 6:44 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
"When was the last time the district changed parties without a redistricting?"
You're assuming that my district has always voted democratic because the candidates were bought by lobbyists? Maybe. But that doesn't mean that lobbyist don't take voters into account when choosing the candidates. For example, they know not to put in a candidate who supports killing homosexuals. The guys running elections in Uganda apparently did not get that memo.
In other words, voters do not have to vote out psychopaths because the threat of voting them out keeps the psychopaths off the ballot.
Our country is not perfect, but it elects better politicians than countries who have rigged elections. Can you give me an example of a country where people don't vote and they elect better politicians than we do here?
Score: -6 (16 votes cast)
October 13, 2013 8:04 PM | Posted by : | Reply
If you, like me, felt good about yourself because you weren't drinking guinness while reading the opening paragraph, this is a reminder: You are a narcissist.
Score: 14 (16 votes cast)
October 14, 2013 8:55 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Sorry fraula. Poor choice of words. I was thinking about people who vote in fraudulent elections and "elect" politicians.
Since Dovahkiin was saying that voting doesn't matter in America, I was trying to point out that we have better politicians than in countries where people don't vote, or vote in fraudulent elections.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
October 14, 2013 11:29 AM | Posted by : | Reply
"Local elections are a different story. Last year, a democrat in my district lost a special election for a state senate seat by 16 votes. His defeat did not depend on his policies, but on how many people he could not convince to give a fuck about an election in the middle of May. Think about the 16 democrats that stayed home that day because they had no power to decide anything."
You're assuming you could have kept everything else static. Maybe a more engaged electorate wouldn't have sent 17 (not 16) more Democrats to the polls, but rather 200 more Democrats and 500 more Republicans.
Score: 1 (5 votes cast)
October 14, 2013 12:50 PM | Posted by : | Reply
"Not pictured is a white guy in a suit, because he already has media that's for him, and it's probably Fox, and the above four people hate it."
So why is the white guy in a suit ghettoized? Why does he need this protection? Why is the "media that's for him" different from that of males possessing a different skin tone or people with a vagina? Are they walling him out or is he walling himself in?
Score: -6 (6 votes cast)
October 14, 2013 4:15 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I'm suggesting that at least at the federal level, that the people running for office have long since been vetted and approved by the party -- and the party is controlled by special interests. In other words, your ability to get to the point of being a credible candidate for a federal office is directly related to your ability to get patronage from well connected people. By the time the peasants get to vote, the party has, as directed by big donors, removed any potential threat to the agenda of the big donors in question.
As the districts are gerrymandered into not being really being in contention, once the party in control of your district has chosen their guy, it's pretty much a done deal.
I'll agree that you still have some control over local government, but that's probably all you get. Interestingly enough, most people don't even bother with local elections -- the turnout for local elections is under 20%.
Score: 4 (6 votes cast)
October 14, 2013 5:07 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I agree with you. However, I'm arguing that the people who choose the candidates for the party - special interests, big donors, the Illuminati, etc. - all take into consideration who the people will vote for.
Score: -4 (4 votes cast)
October 14, 2013 8:17 PM | Posted by : | Reply
This post reminded me of concepts from "The True Believer" by Eric Hoffer, which we read senior year in high school (this was several years after 9/11). Interested parties can check it out.
Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
October 14, 2013 9:31 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
"Why does he need this protection?"
Why does *anyone* "need protection"?
Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
October 14, 2013 11:43 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I'm a rather big fan of Paul Kagame from Rwanda. And Hassan Nasrallah of Hezbollah is smarter than any ten of our congressmen.
Voting is not incredibly relevant to the quality of leaders chosen for office. History has seen plenty of intelligent and ineffective leaders who were born into office or seized it by force, and plenty of corrupt and stupid ones who won the national popularity contest.
Score: 7 (9 votes cast)
October 15, 2013 12:01 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I drank guiness before it was uncool.
Score: 13 (13 votes cast)
October 15, 2013 12:47 AM | Posted by : | Reply
AlJ is for,people feel superior to those who watch Fox and spent jr year abroad.
Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
October 15, 2013 5:00 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
You are a narcisstic Euro-Fuckhead, are you not? Or perhaps a Canadian or Aussie or from some other unimportant British diaspora nation.
Ohhh wait, German, right? Guten tag. You already ceded your liberty to Brussels along with the Mark. You Euros watch America the way Americans watch Steve Wilkos: to stand outside, point an ironic finger, and laugh at the gullible brutality of the contrived dynamic. Your political system is more fucked and less real, almost assuredly, and not a hell of a lot more polite. Maybe you should worry about kicking out the Turks, holding onto your culture, getting rid of your kowtowing and floor-kissing over the Holocaust, and generally getting the hands of broke Eurozoners out of your industrious pockets. Oh, and make more metal, we enjoy that over here in North America, where all decisions are made. Also, it would be cool to have another Heidegger, or a Beethoven or Wagner, or fuck, a Jaspers, Wittgenstein, Goethe, Rilke, Holderlin, Brecht, or any representative of your now dusty greatness, really.
Cheers.
Score: -11 (33 votes cast)
October 15, 2013 12:38 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
They need protection from other points of view.
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
October 15, 2013 12:39 PM | Posted by : | Reply
How do you know that it won't help? If you don't know what alone knows (your premise) but you wont read what alone reads and recommends you read. How do you know you're not getting help from someone you believe can help you understand more if you won't put in the work? Seems to me you want an explanation, not understanding. Somebody to do your thinking for you.
I used to run into this problem all the time when I was heading a team of tech support staff. They would come and ask for my advice, I would make a recommendation and some of them would actually come back looking for more suggestions even though they would not have tried my previous instructions!
Why ask for help if you're not going to take it?
Score: 0 (6 votes cast)
October 15, 2013 1:41 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
actually I think he lives in Pennsylvania. Apparently also a talented artist.
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
October 15, 2013 2:22 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
TLP is a shrink. It's not his job to help you. It's his job to help you help yourself. He does this by communicating perceptions, and by prescriptions if your wetware requires adjustment. Yes, he sees things, and he tells them to you. It's up to you to do something with it, or not. If you choose to ignore his observations, you will not change (with change hopefully being for the better, not the worse), and that'll be $250 please.
Score: 0 (16 votes cast)
October 15, 2013 2:38 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Since he works in NJ, I assumed he lives there. Mea culpa.
Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
October 15, 2013 4:57 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Was checking out MSNBC, my barometer for American ideology, and wouldn'tcha know
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/53277240#intro
The "American Political Center" is now an official demo with identifying characteristics and beliefs. Are these the same "Independents" that Alone says are most susceptible to propaganda?
Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
October 15, 2013 8:09 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
If you don't know what alone knows (your premise) but you wont read what alone reads and recommends you read.
When I say Alone doesn't help, what I actually mean is that Alone offers YOU no help. You've got my premise backwards, but you are right that I have no darn clue what Alone knows. Which these days I'm beginning to suspect is little, although vastly more than you. Hence those "Alone is God" comments y'all love to post.
How do you know that it won't help?
Because I already read the 'Classics' in my free time without anyone having to recommend them to me?
How do you know you're not getting help from someone you believe can help you understand more if you won't put in the work? Seems to me you want an explanation, not understanding. Somebody to do your thinking for you.
And the work involved is to spend your time reading fiction? I am not stupid enough to expect any understanding from someone who doesn't seem to have any. All I demanded was that (s)he share what little they know with their desperate "narcissistic" reader base.
Score: -4 (12 votes cast)
October 16, 2013 5:50 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
helping you help yourself
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
October 16, 2013 6:18 AM | Posted by : | Reply
For all those claiming that Alone names the disease but never the cure, you are not doing this right.
The solution is always the problem redoubled. If narcissism ails you (it does) than narcissism done right will get you out.
Even if Alone knew the exact (there is none) answer (how could TLP, for you?) Alone still could not give it to you since you would resent Alone for knowing something you didn't. You would tear TLP down just as we tear down the binary choices shoved in front of us by all media. As this article seems to suggest, thinking ourselves unique in doing so.
The other choice would be to follow TLP like a guru. The mysterious 'other' with all the insights. Which many here do. Waiting (and doing nothing in the meantime) for Alone's next post.
You must choose for yourself. I know, what if your wrong? Twitter might mock you. Facebook might unfriend you. Instagram might unfollow you. Your ennui might evaporate. Oh to God you had that problem.
Read some of the archives. Then read them again and you will hear over and over...
"The only way to win is not to play."
"...it's the secret to a meaningful life: picking an existence that is of value to more than just yourself, even if that existence defies the logic of reality-- your biology, your environment, and, of course, everyone else. And once you have chosen who you want to be, once you have defined the parameters of this life, you force it to be true, as real as any gene or social factor. And know that once you have invested your life in this identity, this existence-- all or nothing, even in the face of the doubt and terror that accompanies your "rational" self--- it will be impossible to fail."
Score: 21 (23 votes cast)
October 16, 2013 7:01 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Score: -8 (14 votes cast)
October 16, 2013 8:13 AM | Posted by : | Reply
My answer here and in other situations is to try to opt out of the system as possible.
Once you figure out that the political system is oligarchical and the voting and campaigns and the like are meant to advertise the system, there's no point in participation. It's like all other products, participation is endorsement, and endorsement of the system means that you're not going to change it. Voting is a stamp of approval.
The solution to changing the way a company does business is to not buy their stuff. The solution to digital sharecropping is to both stop producing free content for such sites and not consuming from those sites. When you buy from companies that (as an example) uses the fans of the product to make designs for their bottles or make adverts without pay (just narcissistic recognition) you endorse that.
Score: 4 (8 votes cast)
October 16, 2013 8:55 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Completely agree that it sucks that TLP is not offering any help. If I had a reader base as willing to change as his, this world would literally look completely different in a couple of years.
OMG - Really? Just a suggestion: take responsibility for your own choices and stop waiting form someone else to spoon feed you "answers" that you find palatable. Or, in other words, grow the fuck up.
Score: 3 (17 votes cast)
October 16, 2013 1:21 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
"For all those claiming that Alone names the disease but never the cure, you are not doing this right."
I've read most of the articles on this site. Here is my understanding of what Alone thinks everyone should do:
1. Choose an existence that is of value to more than just yourself. People can define you, but you are free, at any moment, to redefine yourself. The choice is yours, so choose.
2. Learn how to want. Don't want how other people tell you that you should want.
3. Do not create an identity based on how other people will see you. Create based on the choices you make. Instead of thinking "I want to be a soccer player, so I have to make the soccer team", think "I want to be a soccer player, so I need to play soccer". Making the team is a brand. Playing soccer is what makes you a soccer player.
4. If you spent your life in pursuit of an unrealistic identity - i.e. you're a narcissist, age 40 - then it's too late. Settle for whatever you have and minimize damage. At this point, curing narcissism isn't for you, it's for everyone else.
The problem is with all those people who fail to achieve their identity. The soccer player who loses one foot and can no longer be a soccer player. What do you think he will think if he reads your quote from Alone - that you can pick an existence that defies biology?
Alone's advice makes sense when someone chooses an identity so incredibly out of touch with reality. The Times reader who thinks they can influence health care reform because they read the Times is one example.
But his advice breaks down when the situation is not clear cut. What if a soccer player wants to play soccer, but can't find a soccer field? Can he ask for help then, or should he play off a wall? Should he be satisfied with the wall?
Soccer fields are easy to find you say. The Soccer player isn't trying. What about the guy who wants to influence health care policy and is reading The Times. Lets say he's 16 years-old, so there is still time. Is it wrong to tell him what he has to do to become influential in health care policy? Do you think Alone doesn't know what to tell this kid? I've read his posts on health care policy. He knows. And if he doesn't, then he knows better than most people.
However, all the kid learns from reading Alone's article is that you shouldn't read the Times. So the kid starts reading the New Yorker. Problem solved?
If you want to be good at X, why are you asking Alone for help? Why not someone you know in real life? Because not everyone has access to smart people. That means they spend their time browsing the internet looking for a way around this roadblock, and sometimes they will ask an anonymous blogger a question or two.
Score: 13 (21 votes cast)
October 16, 2013 1:28 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
OMG - Really?
OMG - Really?
OMG - Really?
OMG - Really?
OMG - Really?
Score: -5 (7 votes cast)
October 16, 2013 4:18 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Thanks for the further clarification Alex. I appreciated the well written comment.
I would still assert that Alone's emphasis on the 'how', instead of the 'what' when choosing an identity is of greater importance than the identity itself.
In a Kierkegaardian sense, the benefits of even failing at a life lived in that subjective manner would far exceed a life of 'success' via any other.
The 15 year old Jack Andraka isn't watching the news. He's making it, in fact he's reading relevant books/journals in class while pretending to read the systems nonsense.
You might try emailing Alone. I haven't seen TLP in the comment section (well, at least not as TLP/Alone) in years.
Score: 4 (8 votes cast)
October 16, 2013 4:35 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Yeah, a blog with maybe a few thousand readers, tops, is going to change the world. Narcissistic, much?
Instead of thinking "I want to be a soccer player, so I have to make the soccer team", think "I want to be a soccer player, so I need to play soccer". Making the team is a brand. Playing soccer is what makes you a soccer player.
The ultimate goal here is still to "be" something, ie, a fake identity. If you like soccer, play soccer. If you want to get better at soccer, work hard at it. Wanting to "be" something ("a soccer player") instead of do something ("play soccer"), that's the branding.
Fuck identity, period.
Score: 0 (16 votes cast)
October 16, 2013 9:45 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
The best advice I got about narcissism didn't come from Alone, it came from Paul Graham.
How do you avoid copying the wrong things? Copy only what you genuinely like. That would have saved me in all three cases. I didn't enjoy the short stories we had to read in English classes; I didn't learn anything from philosophy papers; I didn't use expert systems myself. I believed these things were good because they were admired.
It can be hard to separate the things you like from the things you're impressed with. One trick is to ignore presentation. Whenever I see a painting impressively hung in a museum, I ask myself: how much would I pay for this if I found it at a garage sale, dirty and frameless, and with no idea who painted it? If you walk around a museum trying this experiment, you'll find you get some truly startling results. Don't ignore this data point just because it's an outlier.
Another way to figure out what you like is to look at what you enjoy as guilty pleasures. Many things people like, especially if they're young and ambitious, they like largely for the feeling of virtue in liking them. 99% of people reading Ulysses are thinking "I'm reading Ulysses" as they do it. A guilty pleasure is at least a pure one. What do you read when you don't feel up to being virtuous? What kind of book do you read and feel sad that there's only half of it left, instead of being impressed that you're half way through? That's what you really like.
The more you feel virtuous for liking something or doing it, the less likely it is that the behavior came from you. If you're reading news because it impresses you and you "ought to know what is going on" it's not you. If you're playing soccer because soccer is impressive and European and not at all like boorish American Football, go play American Football instead. If you wouldn't buy something if it had no label, you don't like it, you like the label. Simple concept -- what do you do or what would you do if no one would ever know about it.
http://www.paulgraham.com/copy.html
Score: 16 (18 votes cast)
October 17, 2013 2:51 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I interpreted it as, the young Chinese person cannot truly empathize with his parents' sense of alienation, and is thus, alienated from his parents to a certain extent.
The experience of an American born Chinese vs an immigrant Chinese is fairly different after all.
The American-born knows of China only through the eyes of the American media and whatever cultural values that his parents brought along with them. So the "China" they know isn't quite like the real China - as its dependent on the media and the parents. Being influenced by American media, the young Chinese are more white than Mainland Chinese, but with their parents' influence, they are not completely white. This neither white nor Asian background alienates them from both their parents and the Americans.
On the other hand, the immigrant Chinese has experienced life in "real China". As such, they are less susceptible to the image of China that American media projects. They know the difference between "real China" and "American-branded China". This makes them different and hence alienates them from born and bred Americans (including their children).
Score: 1 (7 votes cast)
October 17, 2013 11:02 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
That isn't bad advice, but it's both naïve and arrogant to assume that what you really like is "pure" and that you don't have anything to learn.
Many if not all of us have tried something because it's supposed to be great. We don't quite understand it, but we press on because of the reputation and perhaps also because of how we think we're seen using it. Consider this the bridge phase. Some people give up and deny that the bridge leads anywhere, but some people make it across with something gained. You might say "even if they gained something, their motivations weren't pure and maybe even pretentious." Well, the problem with the notion of pure motivations is that they don't exist. Sure, your guilty pleasures might be what you prefer, but didn't you prefer lullabies before someone made you listen to something else? It's self-deceiving to assume your taste and character are ever finished (that you have finished learning) or that what you really like doesn't come from a combination of influences outside of your control. I know it doesn't scream complete autonomy, but maybe centuries of generations passing on the classics says something about their value. Wouldn't it be narcissistic to assume that the comfort of your guilty pleasures overrides this value?
Score: 0 (8 votes cast)
October 17, 2013 11:32 AM | Posted by : | Reply
"but AJA brands her as out of the mainstream, unique, open to other opinions."
You forgot 'terrorist-sycophant' and 'hipster.'
Score: -2 (6 votes cast)
October 17, 2013 12:47 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I find it annoying that you continue to attack people who identify themselves as opposed to things, rather than in support of them, without being clear about what it is you support. You seem not to like narcissists. You seem not to like people who find appeal in aspirational advertisement. And I guess you don't like the advertisers who make them, either. But what is it you support? The over-arching theme of this blog has been "You are this way. Stop being this way." Okay, but what way shall I be now?
Like you? What's the like?
Score: -1 (11 votes cast)
October 17, 2013 1:24 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Consistent parenting is one thing that gets mentioned over and over and over again. That's one of my big and useful takeaways from alone.
Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
October 17, 2013 3:31 PM | Posted by : | Reply
You're getting closer all the time. I mean that in a good way. Keep following the stirrings of your soul.
Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
October 17, 2013 5:18 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I don't consider the method perfect, I consider it a starting point. Getting past narcissism isn't an event, it's a process, and in order to start the process, it's necessary to begin somewhere. It seems to me that Paul Graham is right, and that the place to start is by stripping away the things that you're doing to be impressive.
Shakespeare may in fact be worth the effort. I think it might be, but I also think that you can't appreciate Shakespeare for Shakespeare as long as the whole time you're reading Shakespeare that you're impressed with yourself and thinking how good you are for reading through shakespeare. His original audience didn't experience the plays that way, they stood on their own and were enjoyable without the aura of Great English Playwright hanging over the whole thing. He might not have been as popular as Michael Bey, but he was a popular producer.
When you can read shakespeare without being impressed that you are reading shakespeare, you might get something out of it. Same with music -- as long as you're impressed by the notion that you're listening to classic music, you won't be able to appreciate it for what it really is.
Score: 6 (8 votes cast)
October 17, 2013 10:59 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Anonymous finance blogger, the cunning realist, has been comparing this time to the decline of the Weimar republic for the last decade. He loves to recommend reading "When Money Dies"
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
October 17, 2013 11:37 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I read this blog because Self-Aware Narcissist, as a brand, has marginal utility over Clueless Narcissist.
Score: 18 (18 votes cast)
October 18, 2013 1:15 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I find it annoying that you continue to attack...without being clear about what it is you support.
But what is it you support?
What way shall I be now?
Like you?
But Alone doesn't want to control you? You may be conflating him with your mother. He seems to want us to stop identifying with the ideals and values used to exploit and manipulate. He can't tell you who you are. To thine own Self be true.
Your Self was eroded by shame, terror and sleazy milking of empathy intended to make you feel like a burden, an embarrassment, an imposition. Lies to convince, violence to persuade. Force and coercion to teach you to behave. You were behaving as your coding dictated; selfish, happy, inconsiderate of needy creeps. That was the problem. You were no good like that. No one could use you.
Your mother went to work on you with the pious certainty of a Toddler that Knows Best how everyone must suffer to please her.
self-worth
rebellious streak
independence
individuality
stubborn disobedience
resistance
self-reliance
agency
you
Our mothers didn't want us brilliant or happy. They needed dependent misery so they steamrolled their will over ours, violently driving through the cache of our (once brilliant) minds. Broken and no match for a bully who Knows Best, we surrender when we're sick of being Right. We adopt the tyrant's values. Like livestock, children are broken-in and tamed. To replace the Self they destroyed, we're given new ideals, new values, new feelings, new rules. The greatest of these evils is love.
1 Corinthians 13 (NKJV)
4 Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy;
7 bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
8 Love never fails.
13 And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.
Human: "But love blinds."
Whore: "No greater love...sigh."
Human: "You want children to die for you?"
They're demons and they know exactly what they do. They are not confused. Stockholm Syndrome is capture-bonding; an evil as old as (known) time.
Christian values will reserve you a plot in a pretty, uniform line of conformity at Arlington (where good BOYS who loved their mothers are laid to rest after dying to impress; they're thanked for their sacrifice - "Thank you!" - gratitude is expressed for the full measure of their devotion to lies. It's the least we can do.
The most we can do is be true to ourselves. I'll be me. You will do whatever, but no one will give a fuck one way or another so you might as well be you. The whores can go fuck themselves.
Score: 0 (16 votes cast)
October 18, 2013 5:59 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
@jonny:
This entirely self-serving attitude is precisely what Alone is warning us against:
"Instead of trying to stop playing a role-- again, a move whose aim is your happiness-- try playing a different role whose aim is someone else's happiness."
@Anonymous:
"That isn't bad advice, but it's both naïve and arrogant to assume that what you really like is "pure" and that you don't have anything to learn."
True. I think the mistake many make here is underestimating the apathy of the narcissist. Hard to become that altruistic person Alone wants you to be if it turns out the thing you genuinely want to do is watch more TV.
Just because someone here got "saved" by his enjoyment of uplifting hobbies doesn't mean it will work for everyone.
Score: 1 (7 votes cast)
October 18, 2013 7:59 AM | Posted by : | Reply
True. I think the mistake many make here is underestimating the apathy of the narcissist. Hard to become that altruistic person Alone wants you to be if it turns out the thing you genuinely want to do is watch more TV.
But charity done to be SEEN is worse than no charity at all. If you're doing the charity for you, you don't care about the people involved. You don't care if it's what they want or need, you don't care if it works, you don't care if the "charity" is putting locals out of business.
(http://www.cracked.com/article_19899_5-popular-forms-charity-that-arent-helping.html)
Charity that isn't for the other person tends to be worse than nothing. Clothing donations kill off the businesses in the area who can't compete with free castoffs from your closet. Wearing those pink ribbons means that other diseases that don't have a phat NFL contract kill because we're too busy loving the boobies to worry about the pancreas.
At least when you're not trying to impress, you aren't causing bigger problems, and you aren't trying to pretend you understand "important" stuff you don't really understand. You may be a selfish boar, but that's at least not actively causing a problem. At least when I listen to Lil Wayne I'm not undercutting third world business, or encouraging businesses to pretend to care about boobs to project a corporate image. It's neutral. Not good, not bad, but more to the point, it's not fake.
Score: 3 (5 votes cast)
October 18, 2013 9:32 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Well, the problem is that Alone's main schtick is that you have to live for something bigger than yourself, something that brings value to others.
Otherwise you're a Terrible Person(tm) who's Dooming Himself and His Whole Family to be Miserable while Contributing to the Collapse of Civilization.
So there's that.
Score: 5 (9 votes cast)
October 18, 2013 3:00 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Hi
Is there any way I can contact 'Alone' to ask him some questions. They won't be personal I just want his perspective on something. If you read this can you email me at: [email protected]
Thanks
Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
October 18, 2013 4:12 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
This entirely self-serving attitude is precisely what Alone is warning us against:"Instead of trying to stop playing a role-- again, a move whose aim is your happiness-- try playing a different role whose aim is someone else's happiness."
There is no reason to live life except for happiness. Alone can appear to be giving contradictory advice because he's giving advice to many people at once. What works for some won't work for others. The above advice is for people who are confused about how to have fun without hurting anyone. Alone is advising they try a different motive because the motive they imagine is 'selfish' isn't very selfish at all. So Alone is advising they role play 'altruism' and see if they can't stop hurting those they care about.
Altruism isn't real. Their Self has been annihilated and trying to not play a role isn't working for them. Alone is advising to try an 'altruistic' role and see if they can't mitigate the suffering they've been creating. If they succeed, others will stop hurting them as they're no longer inflicting suffering. They'll still be driven by self-interest but they won't be trapped by their corrupt understanding of selfishness.
"If you truly loved yourself, you could never hurt another." (the Buddha)
Selfishness is good. Natural. Humane. Noble. But selfishness isn't what the world's imagines. This isn't my opinion, the world is insanely confused about pursuit of individual best interests and it is a logical proof that you cannot selfishly defeat your Self. Selfish suicide?
Selfishness is the uncompromising, unforgiving, obsessive pursuit of the best interests of your individual Self.
We can all agree on this, surely?
The world defines selfishness as the equivalent of antisocial (Google search "selfish definition" i.imgur.com/0mYhJLk.png), a recipe for generating reflected contempt. But you cannot create suffering for happiness later. There is no path to happiness. Happiness is the path to happiness.
Take advantage of others = take advantage of Humanity = take advantage of yourself. You cannot cheat yourself and imagine you are being selfish. You cannot reduce the value of those on whom you're reliant upon for value and tell yourself you're being selfish. When you reduce others, you reduce yourself. When you build others up, you're selfishly investing in value. You cannot ignore how you're making others feel and imagine you're being selfish, they will make your life miserable and you will need a yacht.
I am very selfish. I only care about myself. For that reason, I do not cheat myself. I want everyone to have motive to make me happy rather than make me suffer. Though it's somewhat esoteric, I would die to take the species 1 / 1,000,000,000th of the way back to truth.
Selfish optimality.
Score: 0 (14 votes cast)
October 18, 2013 4:55 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
That may be Alone's schtick, but it ain't mine. Mine is to essentially dial back from all the "impressive" and figure out what really under there. Once you know what you are, being that 99% of humans will have fairly similar needs and wants, you can learn first to listen to the others and then to help them as they wish to be helped.
to nutshell the thing here are the steps I'm proposing
1. Separate yourself from the need to impress. Figure out what makes you tick rather than what impresses you. As long as you're trying to impress, you aren't even hearing yourself. You aren't real to you. If you can't even hear your own heart, you'll never really hear anybody else's.
2. Once you know who you are, try to extend the circle and figure out who your closest associates are. Not just when they're around you, but even (or especially) when they aren't. You cannot have empathy for people who you can't imagine what they're doing when they aren't around you. Nor can you have empathy for someone who you can't imagine having a whole day not thinking some thought related to you.
3. once you understand yourself and your close buddies, family whatever, then you learn to help them the way they actually want to be helped. The solution that works for you does not work for everyone. But until you figure out how to listen to what people really want so you can help them how they want to be helped rather than in a way that seems impressive to outsiders.
That's my plan anyway.
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
October 19, 2013 3:48 AM | Posted by : | Reply
News should just be that - news. No personal opinion, no making-up of stories to try to grab eyeballs. News should let the viewers and readers decide on their own terms. Current news telling style is designed to lead public to think into one way. This is called brainwashing.
Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
October 19, 2013 3:35 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Don't worry, Greg. Nothing is that old in politics, except the hacksaw you're using.
I heard somebody say they "lost their house because of the shutdown." We've reached a point where the need to project one's sense of victimization onto a political party has become the only thing that politics is about anymore. A mere repeat of the Civil War wouldn't help.
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
October 19, 2013 6:07 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I think it should be about truth, but the problem is that if you made the news issues-free, people would probably freak out. It would be made patently obvious how little power they actually have.
Objective news on Syria -- Islamists and Rebels are fighting a Secularist ruler. One of them (and we don't know which) used chemical weapons on people who may or may not have been civilians. We may or may not be going to war over this. Obama kinda sorta wants to go to war, but he's afraid to look bad, so he's going to congress. Then Putin comes along with a plan.
When it's put that way, without the two-minutes hate on Bashar, and without the need for the proles to debate, then a muddled situation looks muddled and you don't get to pontificate about what we "obviously must do" or why Obama is right/wrong to do it.
Score: 2 (4 votes cast)
October 19, 2013 9:49 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
You cannot have empathy for people who you can't imagine what they're doing when they aren't around you.
This is very true. Your plan is solid but I suspect you'll face some very difficult dilemmas once you understand yourself and realise that much of our suffering is sourced from our incapacity to protect ourselves from emotional associations (family, friends, romantic interests, acquaintances).
"It's you, it's all you, it's always been you" - often because we've failed to cut the emotional ties to toxic leeches who exist to create suffering and cannot be helped.
_____________
People are so broken. Their mothers' corrupted 'values' are hardwired into their minds, combinations of evil constructs fused with positive values. Most humans cannot think, all they do is feel emotive triggers.
Yahweh Shibboleth (God) of the Matriarchal religions is probably the most evil protagonist in all of literature but the vermin have "God is good" seared into their (now unserviceable) minds. Billions of broken humans instinctively associate the Devil with negative emotive values but not one of them can make an argument for why the Devil is bad.
goo.gl/3xsAM4 (Foreign Policy | Vatican: Leaks are the work of the Devil)
"The Devil is bad because God is good."
Why is God good? Their mothers said so. This is how most people process 'logic'.
Evil reversed the logic to illogical. Girls are slut-shamed for feeling like human girls. Everything is around back to front. Deceit is nice. Truth is rude. Victims of abuse love their abusers. Humane kindness is ridiculed. If you don't play degrading games with girls, most will lose interest because they conflate "decent" with "pathetic".
WAR IS PEACE.
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY.
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.
"Selfishness is bad, selfless sacrifice is good."
Sacrifice is good because their mothers said so. Mothers want slaves to suffer to please them. How dare they please themselves and fail to consider her needs? "Shame on you. Where are your clothes? You dirty, perverted boy. How could you embarrass me like that? You're just selfish. All you ever think about is yourself."
The broken children suffer to please their mothers, enduring unthinkable degradation and pain (even death) to please her. If you ask them why, they'll explain, "My mother has done so much for me. It's my turn to take care of her. It's the least I can do."
True love.
John 15:13 (KJV)
"Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."
Score: -3 (11 votes cast)
October 20, 2013 4:50 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Who gives a fuck about TV? A student of history knows we have seen similar patterns before; great changes are indeed afoot. The Fed has simply bought some time for a few trillion.
Coming to your neighborhood soon;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtTrztvFEDM
Among other things...
Score: 0 (4 votes cast)
October 20, 2013 6:33 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Love this idea, in theory. But how do you lose that sense of self-appreciation when you're reading a "Great Work"?
How can you have a pure experience of the art of Shakespeare, without all that cultural baggage that turns it into a hurdle, an achievement, a notch on the bedpost?
It's not possible. When you read "Henry VIII pt 2", you're gonna feel good about yourself. And that's okay.
Your mission, if you want to overcome narcissism, is not to let that dumb pride be at the foreground of your experience. Dig deeper! Sink your teeth into the poetry and find a way to engage it.
A narcissist reads Nietzsche at the coffee shop. He gets through half of his pristine, fetishized edition of "Zarathustra", and then puts it back his shelf and feels like a champion.
Someone better ends up with a dog-eared mess, notes scribbled in the margins, and 1000 new, intriguing, authentic thoughts.
Score: 0 (6 votes cast)
October 20, 2013 6:35 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Oh and I mentioned "Henry VIII part 2" because it is, by far, Shakespeare's most existing play.
Score: 1 (7 votes cast)
October 20, 2013 6:58 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
>But how do you lose that sense of self-appreciation when you're reading a "Great Work"
It's just a question of what do you value; do you value the experience and the wisdom more than the self-appreciation? Question of honesty, integrity, courage, curiosity, etc.
I read Tharathustra at home alone. I've picked up a lot of books; what doesn't hold my attention I discard no matter what it is - ~resonance.
---
What the fuck that all had to do with my initial post I have no idea.
Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
October 20, 2013 4:16 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
A narcissist reads Nietzsche at the coffee shop. He gets through half of his pristine, fetishized edition of "Zarathustra", and then puts it back his shelf and feels like a champion.
Someone better ends up with a dog-eared mess, notes scribbled in the margins, and 1000 new, intriguing, authentic thoughts.
Is that what someone better would do?
Narcissists care a great deal about the images others value. Someone who isn't a narcissist won't care what someone better does or doesn't do. They're not trying to create an identity or image to present to the world. They're not seeking the approval of anybody. They're not looking to impress or concerned how they appear to be. They just want to be.
Caring about what others think is insane because everyone is batshit. You're all wearing clothes (false image hiding your true Self) and no one is talking about it. In The Emperor's New Clothes, when the Emperor hears the child's cry, he suspects the truth but he proceeds with the parade, refusing to accept reality. That seems very narcissistic. Is that NPD? Is there any real value to these labels? At times, their utility seems limited to projection. Why can't this entire discussion be simplified into those who value Truth (Reality) v those who value Lies (Appearances)? To be or not to be...real.
How can you value lies and not be a narcissist? False image. Not your true Self.
nb. The mythical Narcissus wasn't in love with a false image. He was in love with a true image of Self. It was Liriope and Echo who had NPD. They loved Narcissus. They couldn't love themselves.
Score: 2 (10 votes cast)
October 20, 2013 6:19 PM | Posted by : | Reply
theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-people-japan-stopped-having-sex
The number of single people has reached a record high. A survey in 2011 found that 61% of unmarried men and 49% of women aged 18-34 were not in any kind of romantic relationship, a rise of almost 10% from five years earlier. Another study found that a third of people under 30 had never dated at all.
A survey earlier this year by the Japan Family Planning Association (JFPA) found that 45% of women aged 16-24 "were not interested in or despised sexual contact". More than a quarter of men felt the same way.
I wonder if this is something that would interest Alone. I think this is slut-shaming at work here. 45% say they're not into sex. So it must be true?
Japan's Institute of Population and Social Security reports an astonishing 90% of young women believe that staying single is "preferable to what they imagine marriage to be like".
I think they're too busy being disinterested in sex.
"Both men and women say to me they don't see the point of love. They don't believe it can lead anywhere," says Aoyama. "Relationships have become too hard."
People no longer value being blinded into emotional slavery but in a world of appearances, no one really knows what they value. They're uncertain and need to wait for everyone else to tell them what they like and how they feel. It's no longer the appearance of value that we value but the appearance of being valued. We value what others value, we like what others like. We just don't like the consequences of failing to conform. We no longer care about what makes us feel good, we're just terrified of being made to feel bad. We'll endure anything as long as no one is mean to us.
The End result is virtual acceptance (Facebook friends) prized over real life experience (too much effort for minimal reward, miserable haters pouncing on every contribution with automatic disapproval). No one cares if the virtual acceptance is real, people only care that it appears to be. A virtual Polite Society.
How did everyone get so bullied and sensitive, needing endless external validation?
Aoyama's first task with most of her clients is encouraging them "to stop apologising for their own physical existence".
Score: 7 (13 votes cast)
October 20, 2013 6:19 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
If it was that simple, what is the point of this blog?
Score: -1 (5 votes cast)
October 20, 2013 8:28 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Appearances aren't necessarily lies. They are not necessarily opposed to the truth. Reflection (appearance) is a secondary property of the thing itself. Only when reflection becomes valued first and foremost are there problems.
As long as one values the primary first, then all is well. Everything in its right place.
Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
October 21, 2013 11:42 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I asked the question. You're answering my question with a question I cannot be expected to answer without speculation.
Speculating, knowing how much naughty Toddlers love lying, I presume telling them to stop lying won't do the trick.
Shall we give it a try?
Everyone must stop lying. Aside from your mothers, no one values your lies but you. They merely appear to.
That was easy enough. Now we wait for word-of-mouth to spread around the globe much like the armies of broken boys driven by emotional agony, confused suffering, greedy leaching and blood-thirsty desire for sex. Except in reverse, of course. There'd be no Rape of Nanking in a world of truth.
The International Military Tribunal for the Far East estimated that 20,000 women were raped, including infants and the elderly. The women were often killed immediately after being raped, often through explicit mutilation or by stabbing a bayonet, long stick of bamboo, or other objects into the vagina. Young children were not exempt from these atrocities, and were cut open to allow Japanese soldiers to rape them.
There are also accounts of Japanese troops forcing families to commit acts of incest. Sons were forced to rape their mothers, fathers were forced to rape daughters.
You're probably won't be able to realise the truth of this, but like all other atrocities in 5000 years of broken demons killing their betters (who didn't prepare for killing their own species), this was the fault of shrewd Toddler mothers who want sons to suffer to please them and want daughters to be uncompetitive.
But Toddlers love their lies. Humans only know what they know and mothers you know..."by their fruits ye shall know them."
According to one Japanese journalist embedded with Imperial forces at the time, "The reason that the [10th Army] is advancing to Nanking quite rapidly is due to the tacit consent among the officers and men that they could loot and rape as they wish."
This species is rotten. Mothers are raping children's minds.
Score: 1 (13 votes cast)
October 21, 2013 12:24 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
They just want to be.
Surely, this is the wrong verb.
They just want to do.
Wanting "to be" is still an inward flow of attention and is probably completely useless. A single person experiences himself entirely subjectively, in a way no one else does, so that the specific tricks that will get him to think that he's this person or that person will only work on him, only work on someone with his own perception.
He does something knowing that he's not really doing it for the right reasons, so he tentatively lets other know that this is what he's been doing it, checking to see if they're buying it, to make it real.
But why should one person strive "to be" instead of "do" is most unclear to me. Does he not think he can do anything? Does he have a vague sense that it's not enough? Did his parent never accept his failure? I mean like actively denying the failure thereby teaching the kid that it was so terrible it couldn't even be recognized.
It would work something like this. Two assumptions are made by the parent:
-My kid is to weak for failure
-My kid can be tricked into believing that this wasn't a failure. The kid now knows his parents think he's stupid, but they will never admit this. The kid is left with a vague sense of ambient hypocrisy.
And then they've teached him:
-Even if you think you've screwed up, it's not up to you to judge. Some other entity will do it. So he tentatively lets other know...
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
October 21, 2013 1:42 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I don't know why, but every time this jonny fellow hijacks one of these threads to vent about his mom, I picture him as Shattner in that Twilight Zone episode about the gremlin on the wing.
Score: 7 (11 votes cast)
October 21, 2013 4:10 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
The point is that it's literally impossible to engage in the experience of Henry the VIII as it was really written as long as you're impressed by the fact that you're reading it. As long as you think you're a good and virtuous person because you're reading Shakespeare, you don't let your ego out of the way. As long as you're thinking that you should be impressed and that this is supposed to be the greatest play ever, you won't enjoy the play because you won't get into the characters, you won't get into the plot, you won't get into the jokes. You'll be too busy basking in the glow of CLASSIC LITERATURE to get lost in the story. Which means you'll never really *like* Shakespeare.
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
October 21, 2013 4:21 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I usually enjoy your analysis a great deal. This felt a bit like a beatdown of a strawman.
Score: -1 (5 votes cast)
October 21, 2013 7:52 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Hey, you should post a recommended reading list sometime!
Some of us are still suckers for dry, academic prose, and a good bibliography is a godsend.
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
October 21, 2013 7:54 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
>The point is that it's literally impossible to engage in the experience of Henry the VIII as it was really written as long as you're impressed by the fact that you're reading it.
Well, that's just wrong. Again, it is simply a matter of which type of person is reading the work. If the person is more concerned with aesthetic value, truth, wisdom, impression, engagement, etc. than appearance, than it is possible.
I read Ulysses even tho I knew it was ranked #1 by the modern library. I think it's a brilliant book. I don't agree with Rolling Stone that "Like a Rolling Stone" was the best song of all time, or that "I Can't Get No Satisfaction" by the Rolling Stones was #2. If anything that was just thinly veiled advertising.
That aside, I don't agree that #3 best song (presumably #1) - Imagine by Lennon - was legit either.
The list should have been Most Popular Songs of the baby boomers. My generation comes in at #9 with Smells like Teen Spirit, but that's not even Nirvana's best song, and there are arguably better since.
Anyway, the point is conflation and one's susceptibility to it or not.
Score: -3 (3 votes cast)
October 21, 2013 7:54 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Sartor Resartus - Thomas Carlyle
You're welcome.
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
October 21, 2013 10:19 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I think some of you are overstating how much "pride" goes into reading something like Shakespeare. Meaning that, sure, you might feel proud of yourself reading your first play outside of class but how long do you think that feeling lasts? People riding on pride alone don't finish the play. They fill-up on pride and their subconscious does the rest of the work (ie - they get distracted and do something else).
But for regular readers, there is an actual piece of work to get through. These people likely got over this "pride" years ago and actually have an interest in reading the play. They don't even register that Shakespeare is seen as impressive because at this point in their reading, it is no longer impressive to them. They're more impressed with surrealists from Prague or letters from Bataille. And not even "impressed" but "hey maybe this is somebody I can relate to."
You guys are sticking to the superficial layer of those first reputation-based reads. Many people move past that. Reading classics isn't THAT uncommon. Another lesson from the narcissist toolbox: Not everybody is as much of a liar as you are. Some people read the book.
Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
October 21, 2013 11:24 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Most of these comments are becoming weirder and weirder to me.
Each time a new hermeneut of Alone's prose trying to reveal what the "Oracle" said or unsaid, while pointing out the "cure" for narcisism, interpreted directly from this "system of thought" that Alone allegedly created.
I'm not peremptorily saying that maybe this is not the case, but, from what I'm reading (and it's been some time that I've read the comments last time), perhaps some people are taking all this texts from beyond what it is, I don't know.
In a way, all the Alone's anonymity and his very, very oblique prose accounts for this... in a kind of ruthless way, I would add.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
October 22, 2013 2:38 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I'll take pity on you and say it: if you need it explained to you then you are just like the people asking how the news relates to them.
If you can't figure it out on your own, no amount of explaining will ever do the job for you.
Score: 0 (6 votes cast)
October 22, 2013 4:01 AM | Posted by : | Reply
To the above Anon:
I kind of found their constant "This is what Alone is trying to say" thing funny after a while. It reminds me of when people try to figure out what Socrates meant when he said something, or what some passage from the bible was supposed to be interpreted as. Maybe that's the brand Alone's aspiring to.
Score: 0 (10 votes cast)
October 22, 2013 7:28 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
If you see Buddha on the road, kill him. Forget who said that. But I think that's about as true as I can find. If you're following a guru, you're not following your heart or mind.
Score: -2 (4 votes cast)
October 22, 2013 8:01 AM | Posted by : | Reply
You're a genius. Your remind me of a rambling jewish psychiatrist. You're jewish, right?
Score: 0 (6 votes cast)
October 22, 2013 11:55 AM | Posted by : | Reply
So YOU are okay then. This is all for my benefit? Got a blog I can follow?
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
October 22, 2013 1:16 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Not Jewish. His face, his surname, and his pitilessness, all are vaguely Hellenic.
Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
October 22, 2013 4:25 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I agree, I think Megyn Kelly is hot too.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
October 22, 2013 8:52 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Holloway: It's so much worse than I thought
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
October 23, 2013 2:21 AM | Posted by : | Reply
The most terrifying and upsetting part is that the television news is now a medium for people who argue -- passionately -- that fewer checks and balances in government is a good, proper, and necessary thing. You know, now.... not eight years ago when there was a social security plan they didn't agree with... but definitely NOW.
It is stunning to me... actually stunning... how many people can't grasp that both houses are doing the job they are actually supposed to be doing. The one that turns over more frequently challenging something that cost the party in power the chamber 6 months after passage. The one that turns over less frequently trying to maintain it.
Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
October 23, 2013 9:07 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
For me the terrifying part of TV news is that news shows and Sports Center report their stories in almost the same way. And they debate the issues the same way as well. I view most of the Face the Nation and other "Political Shows" as the same type of thing as Sports Center for the people who like to argue politics. We analyze the plays the same way, who's up, who's down, what can they do to win the next round. A scandal is more or less reported like an error at second base.
The difference is that politics goes around pretending that the guy in the bleacher seats with a beer in his hand gets to decide the starting lineup. At least the Cards aren't bullshitting me into thinking that I get to decide whether to bunt or swing away, they just hand me a rally towel and tell me to wear red.
Score: 11 (11 votes cast)
October 23, 2013 4:17 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
It's text. All text requires interpretation. Counting yourself out as the one who chooses not to discuss what you interpret is nothing more than peacocking. "It's funny the way they discuss the meaning as if it were the Bible or Socrates." Whatever helps you feel more distant from the idea that somebody else's writing is getting more attention than yours.
The truth is that we find Alone's main thesis (that society runs on a specialized form of narcissism*) intriguing and occasionally like to flesh it out in discussion. I do think some of us have interpretations that are distinct from Alone's, as well. Nothing wrong with some friendly discussion on topics we find interesting.
*specialized, meaning not the conventionally accepted DSM definition. See Alone's "A Generational Pathology" for more details.
Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
October 24, 2013 4:44 AM | Posted by : | Reply
So if you're an ideologue who does write manifestos, you're not a narcissist?
I'm a national socialist, not even joking.
Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
October 24, 2013 7:02 PM | Posted by : | Reply
The Process Of Government has been a really good book recommendation so far, thank you. Good luck with the porn book.
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
October 24, 2013 10:20 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I'm the anon that caused the reply that you replied.
I was thinking something close to part of what you said.
"All texts require interpratation." I take that as completely true.
But, in a way, I think that, sometimes, this utterly oblique way of Alone's writing says less than it is really saying.
I see some part of the language that he uses is dispensable, to be more directly myself, like some kind of simple tricks that he's matering over the years, that, objectively speaking, could be taken away without harm - they're unnecessary.
Beside that, so many of his words seem to be of particular importance, that I think that this obscurity - and I'm not sure of this, these are just my honest opinion - hinders more than helps. Maybe a more direct discourse would cause better results, considering, of course, that his writings pursue to cause some impact in people's lives.
It's not a critique so much of the content, it's more about the form in itself - that, in a way, sometimes interferes whith the aparent content.
I think the intricacies he makes tends to hinders the very content of his message - whatever that message could be, because, as more and more that I read him, the least I know about the intricacies of the message themselves.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
October 24, 2013 10:42 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
As a post scriptum:
Coincidentally, this is what I'm reading now:
http://partialobjects.com/2013/08/game-of-thrones-a-bad-show-disguised-as-a-good-one-part-1/
Score: -3 (3 votes cast)
October 25, 2013 12:17 PM | Posted by : | Reply
eh this post was okay. i feel like the author has been dumb downed. you were much better a couple years ago. now you are just barely hit or miss, most of the time miss or miss. You just don't blow me away anymore. It used to be sentence after sentence blown away and I would stop and say, who the fck is this guy? I can't believe I'm the only person I know reading this guy. maybe you have been surrounding yourself with dumber people. Or reading too much Conde Nast. I don't know. This post was insulting. commentary on media corporations, boring.
lmao on the chinese tatto. lmao on the historical knowledge gap between 1929 and 1960/hbo shows.
why are you diluting your brand by working on your side projects. this brand was strong and worthy a couple years ago. you put a lot of work into these posts for years then you just dropped it. its like you sold it off to a private equity firm and they have killed it. why did you do that? reminds me of the Frye brand. They made quality leather boots in the usa from 1850 until 2003 when they sold off to holding company. the quality has not been the same. now you cant count on that product to be worth $350 and boots to last you 10 years. they used to be a lifetime product company. fck that. the last of the unplucked gems. now they are dead. and so are you. i can't make leather boots, i want someone to do it for me that I can rely on. I don't mind paying for the service. I want to pay for boots that last ten years bitch. thats what I liked about capitalism. It could deliver. but capitalism is dead. no one wants to make good boots anymore and charge a fair price while employing legal people.
They want to make crappy boots and charge an unfair price while lowballing their white collar employee and completely exploiting their blue collar/illegal worker employee. Do you know whats wrong with capitalism? The fcking customer.
The customer accepts the dumb down diluted crap product ecosystem because the customer can't compete anymore. Closing in on 100% of the customer base is a bona fide slave, not a customer. They are all independents who won't take a stand.
The customer has no personal capital to create their own company to offer a superior competing product. they dont have that money. its tied up in student loan debt or credit card debt or house debt or medical insurance or this tax and that fcking tax. and they cant go to their parents or rich uncle for cash...because rich uncles aren't rich anymore and parents are in debt. even if the uncle had money, its not worth as much as it was in fucking 1975. $50,000 is not enough Uncle, sorry. You are one generous bastard, but I need more! So fck capitalism. it thinks its depending on this crowdfunding rule proposed by fill in the blanks (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/23/us-sec-crowdfunding-idUSBRE99M03O20131023). but none of the independents even know the JOBS Act exists. or why it sucks. fck you. Write about that.
I don't beleive in tattoo my skin, but I will consider chinese characters for "I just want the ability to buy a quality product in the marketplace and not be ripped off and if I am ripped off I want the ability to compete against you bitch." This does not make me a bad person. Just because I want superior leather boots to make my life a little more comfortable. Everyone on the planet wants that if they were honest with themselves. So fck all you people trying to make me feel bad because I like being comfortable and living in a nice house and driving a beautiful car. And because I want to compete fairly if I don't have these things. And I want you to have that ability, too. fck you.
That said, I understand why the author dilute. Because it doesn't matter. No individual pay you to read your work, just random anonymous ad network corporation. Link me to the post where you explain how to set up blog system like this. I will pay for the information.
Perhaps it would be different if people paid you for your writing because then you would have to deliver...you know what: 你他妈的. Seriously. All you people reading this: excellence is the point of life. Delivering quality, giving the best you can in what you do. in your work, in love, in lust, in parenting, in being a citizen, in everything you fcking do. That is the point of life. Don't forget it or you will be forever unhappy. Make sure you are paid fairly for your services though and look after the destination of your taxed income or you will be forever unhappy. Thank you, good day.
Score: -1 (7 votes cast)
October 25, 2013 1:07 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I just read on here that you are working on a book. if this is true, i understand now why you write posts here that are nowhere near as good as your 2006-2010 posts. why not just stop posting though? its not worth the dilution. No one wants watered down drink. Only if they are drunk will they appreciate watered down drink. Just because most people are drunks or pre diabetic doesn't mean you have to serve them something tasteless. That's how everything degrades. You will degrade, too. Don't think you are immune to drunk culture. You end up paying through higher medical insurance premiums and taxes on sodas and becoming just plain dumber. LMAO.
Are you being paid by legit 20th century publisher/media conglomeration for your writing of this book? Or just self publish? LMAO if this is a con.
Score: -8 (8 votes cast)
October 25, 2013 3:53 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Seen the Russell Brand video? Nice, Alone, this post was just on time.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
October 25, 2013 6:11 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Which older posts of his do you recommend?
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
October 25, 2013 7:00 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Your blog is good TLP, that is indisputable. I have read almost every post. But there is something it is missing that doesn't make it great -- humor. Yes, humor. Not the kind of sharp, biting humor that boasts an intellectual checkmate or jab, but the kind that reclines in a rocking chair on a sunny afternoon, letting out a hearty belly laugh, proclaiming "Alas, we are only human."
Score: 0 (10 votes cast)
October 25, 2013 9:52 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Anonymous, I am drunk right now, so I;m too lazy to look back into the archives, but I will do that when I am less drunk next week. This person who writes this blog is brilliant and my previous comment was too harsh (I have been told a couple times in life by different people that I am harsh hearted, thus it must be true). I read this post before I read the ad post. The ad post was good, though too much use of the word cunt. It makes one cringe especially if one is a woman. There is a bit of bitterness toward women detected I don't know why this author ever had trouble with womens. his intellect is enough to make ugly man sexy, so if he is homely, it should not matter in attracting good looking intelligent woman. I know because I am a woman even though i have gone by the name guido actor. LMAO. Extraordinary people are attractive no matter physical appearance. if i was not drunk I could give you an example.
Still though the work from 2006 - 2010 is like Mike Jordan 1989-1997. minus the time off for minor league baseball.
there are so many great posts. I even liked reading the esoteric stuff on psych drugs and I am not in the medical/pharmicist/need to understand chemistry of drugs in order to receive a paycheck career fields. i must go and pass out now. good day.
Score: 0 (4 votes cast)
October 27, 2013 1:48 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Surely, this is the wrong verb.I'm not sure what is done is as important as whether one exists in a state of being. Perhaps you're answering a different question?They just want to do.
To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them?"
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin?
Who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all."
Shakespeare was talking about death being stigmatised but I'm not certain he was aware that it had been. He's speculating about why so few take the easy option out of the cauldron of suffering but I reckon he got it wrong. Humans don't fear death, they fear shame.
The typical human wave tactic was for Basijis (often very lightly armed and unsupported by artillery or air power) to march forward in straight rows. While casualties were high, the tactic often worked.Seemingly fearless but they only appeared to be. Humans die bravely when they're terrified of remaining alive. You know you're on a slave plantation when suicide is stigmatised but martyrdom is idealised. You can't free slaves from slavery when they cannot free themselves. It isn't fear of death that prevents long-suffering slaves from making their quietus. They're too frightened to live their own life.“They come toward our positions in huge hordes with their fists swinging,” an Iraqi officer complained in the summer of 1982. “You can shoot down the first wave and then the second. But at some point the corpses are piling up in front of you, and all you want to do is scream and throw away your weapon. Those are human beings, after all.”
By the end of the war between 700,000-800,000 Basij volunteers were sent to the front.
They can't choose not to be when they've never chosen to be.
Score: 1 (11 votes cast)
October 27, 2013 1:56 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
If you see Buddha on the road, kill him...If you're following a guru, you're not following your heart or mind.
The irony. The Buddha drilled the importance of Self.
"No one saves us but ourselves. No one can and no one may. We alone must walk the path."
- the Buddha
Score: 1 (11 votes cast)
October 27, 2013 11:55 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Alone is Paul Graham. Everything makes sense now.
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
October 27, 2013 1:43 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
How do you know that?
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
October 27, 2013 1:44 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Again: how do you know that?
I'm a bit tired of this: "It doesn't matter how he is"
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
October 27, 2013 2:23 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Nevermind, I've already found it.
Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
October 27, 2013 2:29 PM | Posted by : | Reply
It didn't change much really.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
October 27, 2013 4:57 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Actually I know that Alone is really Ken Burns. Don't be surprised. And, yes, this information does change everything: he will be angry that I have revealed this and our partnership will dissolve.
I'm ready for that, Ken, okay? I deserve more recognition as the one who oversees the army of unpaid interns that perform the research for our projects while you toil away on this website. I can't do it anymore.
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
October 27, 2013 5:31 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Did you have to write job recommendation letters for all those interns? That must have been time consuming.
I really enjoyed the limited release series you did on the assasination of Park Chung-hee. Is it true that Ken Burns last name is actually Fire, but he changed it at age 28 because he thought people would think it was a fake name?
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
October 27, 2013 6:06 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
You are an idiot. Ken's last name is Naaktgeboren. You can understand why he changed it. And Ward wasn't involved in The KCIA: Park Chung-hee and the Battle for Korealand. That was Burns' pre-Liebling phase when he was obssessed with everything 1953, his birth year, also the year the Korean War ended.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
October 27, 2013 6:26 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
If Alone really is Ken Burns, that would make sense because isn't Naaktgeboren German? and Alone is really into German with that saying on the masthead of the blog. also the fact that burns is a narcissist obviously. someone being obsessed with their birth year and everything that happens in the year they came onto the planet, that's just sick. I am swept over with a feeling now of accomplishment in the way you are if you've ever won the board game Clue. This has made my weekend braggart worthy. I have many work appointments tomorrow, hopefully I can get this small triumph into the how was your weekend conversations.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
October 27, 2013 6:55 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Naaktgeboren is Dutch, nice try. I understand the feeling of thinking you need to have a "braggart worthy" weekend sentiment to share. When I was a young man, I felt that feeling. Most of the time I could be a braggart with no trouble at all. But when I had nothing particularly braggart worthy to share, I turned to sharing one-liners.
For instance if small talk ebbed, I would say something like this: A cabbie said to me once "Always bang a left when you come to a fork in the road, don't even think about it. Bang left." And then I would ask the people I was with, sincerely, "What do you all think he meant by that?"
I found this was a good way to make conversation; people responded enthusiastically to my one-liners. Minutes of conversation could be generated this way. At which point, I would sit back and take the opportunity to stare at the most beautiful woman in the group and think of things I could say to her to get her to go on a date with me.
I tried to make the one liners as oddball as possible, but in a non-offensive, bland type of way. I trust you are swept over with a feeling of gratitude for this strategy I have now shared with you. Good luck.
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
October 28, 2013 5:49 AM | Posted by : | Reply
This has got to be the very best thing you have ever written. Marvelous.
Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
October 28, 2013 5:56 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Hi. Saw Fifth Estate and thought of you because there's a part init of Assange's childhood in Australia in a "community" where he is hungry, forced to do things, unable to get away etc. I think his was connected to Scientology as his early disclosures for wikileaks were on That Church!
BTW this is the most brilliant of all TLP postings yet.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
October 28, 2013 12:05 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I don't know how else to contact Alone, so I'll just leave this here:
Would you please write an article about NPR? A TLP analysis of the station, its slant, radio personalities, target demographic, branding, and psychology would be fascinating to read. You've hinted at your position on the station before, but a more substantial commentary would be appreciated. Please upvote this if you agree.
Score: 2 (6 votes cast)
October 28, 2013 12:05 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I don't know how else to contact Alone, so I'll just leave this here:
Would you please write an article about NPR? A TLP analysis of the station, its slant, radio personalities, target demographic, branding, and psychology would be fascinating to read. You've hinted at your position on the station before, but a more substantial commentary would be appreciated. Please upvote this if you agree.
Score: 3 (9 votes cast)
October 28, 2013 2:04 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I hear a lot of people say all too often that you really can't have much influence on politics, legislation, or elected officials. This is absolutely wrong.
The great dearth of people participating leaves room for your voice to be heard. Sure you may not have as much influence as someone representing the AARP with tons of cash, but you have influence. Call your State Rep, Commissioner, County Council member and ask to have a meeting. If you don't know who they are then it's because you don't pay attention. Think about how many other people don't know who they are. When we're talking about voting people say it's one in a million, no it's not. There are plenty of elections and elected officials having impact in your everyday life that are brought into office by a very low amount of votes. Don't be surprised if your mayor or city councilor got in with less than 10% of the vote. Don't think they affect your life? Why do you think the city two hours away got the Chrysler plant and your getting your third Walmart.
Also, go run for office. You'd be amazed at how many people it really takes to run a community. The barrier's to entry are pretty low precisely because no one thinks it matters.
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
October 29, 2013 8:43 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
The barrier to entry is low because most people dont want to do it, not because they dont think it matters. people have lives. having to be responsible and accountable for more than your own life and family does not appeal to most.
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
October 29, 2013 10:07 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Thought you guys may enjoy the read.
Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
October 29, 2013 10:14 AM | Posted by : | Reply
http://www.stratfor.com/video/about-stratfor-intelligence-vs-journalism
Here's another one....
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
October 29, 2013 10:32 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
can we agree on "and"? the barriers to entry are low because most people don't care AND they have lives. Maybe their lives make them not care.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
October 29, 2013 10:36 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Thanks for sharing. This is great. I spent a whole year at graduate school studying news narratives narcissistically thinking I was the only one who saw these patterns. Eventually I turned to something more pedestrian (electoral motivation), but I love this stuff.
Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
October 29, 2013 10:37 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I'm Steve Inskeep and I'm Renee Montagne. omg shut the f up!
for reals, today Innkeeper said at the end of a top of the hour news recap "and its winona ryders birthday today...she turns...42." his voice almost as if he was like "take that generation x'ers, you are getting fcking old, too." ease up, steve, people don't need to be reminded that gen x is over the hill. do gen xers really want to know they are over 40. i thot that was a dick move.
whatever, i'd rather not be taxed to fund (partially or whatever) this or voice of america. why do i have to be taxed to listen to them when i can listen to bloomberg for free or whatever else the fck is on the radio paid by advertising. stop taxing me for this. give me infrastructure for high speed cheap fare train. it is unfair citizens be made to help pay for state news service in this way, tricked into thinking "programming made possible thanks to donations from listeners like you or local businesses" and "this is not state news service, no we are funded by you." first i pay through tax, then you want me to donate locally. Tax and tax, no and no. Y'all could survive as a private bizness obviously.
Why not just be a bizness and then con me? why try to con me and the rest of the citizens into this "we are not state news, we are made possible by you" and "non profit news is trustworthy, for profit untrustworthy." non profit good, for profit bad. non profit good, for profit bad. dont be for profit, you are bad. you are a bad person, you have money (please be catholic then you will feel even more guilty). you must give. give it to us! more taxes please. don't try for profit, no. bad. go back to Europe. thank you have a nice day.
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
October 29, 2013 5:30 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Local politics is a different animal. I've said so upthread. It's the only place where the people have any control at all. But, at the same time, the subject of the piece is FEDERAL government, Congress, Obama and the shutdown. At that level, I don't have a voice. I don't get a say on Obamacare, Syria, government shutdowns, NSA spying, or Common Core. I don't get to decide if there will be immigration reform, or whether there will be new EPA regs, or whether incandescent light bulbs are going to be legal. I don't get to decide on taxes either.
I have a voice in local zoning (to a degree, but you'd be surprised how much money can go to reseating a zoning board so that a large chain store can move in), I have a voice in my local school board, at least to the degree that such things are not dictated by Federal powers (common core and the like). Sure, there's some power there.
As for the news junkies (again part of the piece we're talking about) -- I defy you to find any of these self-described "informed citizens" who know the names of the people on the local school board or the local zoning board. Find me the news junky who has ever attended such a meeting, be it the school board or the zoning board or the county board of aldermen.
Score: 1 (5 votes cast)
November 2, 2013 1:51 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Speaking of junkies, did anyone hear that Lew Reid died? OMG RIP LEW! I've been a huge fan of the Velvet Underground ever since I saw the movie So I Married an Axe Murderer, where there song "There She Goes Again" was prominently featured. And man, how about Nico Case? She went on to do grate things. What a ginger dickthrob. Well at least now Lew is probably jambing up in Rockin Roll Heaven with his best friend Frank Zappa in the light of Christ's love. As my favorite VU song goes, "I know it's only Rockin Roll, but I like it like it yes I do" and as for you, Mark David Hinckley, you may have killed Lew Reid, but Rockin Roll has grown stronger than you can ever imagine.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
November 3, 2013 8:17 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Why wait for Anon?
I can tell you exactly who the demo for NPR is. Narcissists. It's all about the pretense of the thing. You have to get your news from high-brow sources, because you're too sophisiticated for MSNBC or FOX or evening news. You like to pretend to be independent and so rather than listen to a pundit tell you exactly what you think, you listen to a boring newsreader telling you what you already think. And of course getting the news from BBC is so much more sophisticated than NBC or ABC. Everything sounds better when delivered with a British accent.
You have to consume high-brow art as well, no party music or anything like that. Instead of a soft ball interview with a rap star, you listen to a soft ball interview with a poet. And unlike the rap fans, chances are that you've never even heard of this poet, let alone read anything he wrote. But if feels so virtuous to be listening to talk about poetry.
I suppose if I was to give a one line answer to the question of NPR, it would be Pseudointellectual Narcissists.
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
November 4, 2013 6:58 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Although you are most probably right in your assessment (I can even admit to feeling a strange sense of self-righteousness based on listening to BBC over CNN), I have two problems. The first is that you don't make allowances for one who simply wants to choose better news sources. There is a difference between consuming The Economist, NPR or Al-Jazeera just so you can regurgitate and listening to it because, it strives to be better. I get the idea that it's propaganda, that's important, but that doesn't in of itself remove it from being more truthful. Even if it's a little bit of a load of crap, it's still way easier to find the gem from these sources, solely because they have their pretentious branding to maintain. I could list examples if you need them. This makes them try a little bit harder, and in the end it makes it better news.
Secondly, and I think this is one of those comments that is obvious but bears repeating, don't let calling someone a narcissist or calling something narcissistic become a default posture where you end up casting negative judgment on everyone but yourself. That's, well, narcissistic.
Score: 0 (4 votes cast)
November 4, 2013 6:40 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I sympathize. I ran a campaign for city council where we lost by 8 votes. We were the only challenger that even got close.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
November 4, 2013 8:19 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
My feeling is all propaganda is propaganda. Getting your news from only one source or only one type of source is the problem. Even if the source is one that tries to be better (and as a side note, how can you check to see if the source is actually better?) it doesn't help to consume a slightly higher form of propaganda if you aren't balancing the viewpoint of the source with other sources.
The BBC is biased toward the mainstream views of Brits (which is to the left of most Americans). It's a different viewpoint, but even then it has to be balanced by other viewpoints. Not just left and right, but from the POV of the people who are involed. The left has some things to say about Syria, so does the right. But just as importantly, the parties involved have viewpoints. What does the Rebel camp want? What does the Syrian Military want? What do the Muslims want? What do the Muslims want? What do the Christians want?
Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
November 5, 2013 1:12 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
The media doesn't reflect mainstream opinion. Mainstream opinion reflects the media. It's one of the primary influences on those who fail to act in their own best interests but someone's gotta build the pyramids, fight the wars and buy the luxury consumable products that Toddler whores need to be happy.
It's not like girls can just have sex all day. Guys wouldn't respect them if they weren't whores. Everyone knows that.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
November 5, 2013 6:45 AM | Posted by : | Reply
"The shut down was the inevitable consequence of a government not permitted to compromise, smothered by the oppressive gaze of a kamikaze media that will kill itself and your country just to get a headline today."
Reminds me of Jimmy Kimmel.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-11-04/monday-humor-forget-jimmy-kimmel-meet-undying-chinese
Now the Chinese government has propaganda showing how Americans want to "Kill all the Chinese." Hilarious!
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
November 5, 2013 2:48 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Well for starters you could read the god damn book he linked when he explicitly told you that you were too stupid to read it.
http://www.archive.org/stream/processofgovernm00bentuoft#page/446/mode/2up
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
November 5, 2013 5:03 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
It's kind of a feedback loop. Media has to give people what they want to see, but after a while, they want to see what the media wants to show them.
Score: 1 (5 votes cast)
November 5, 2013 5:23 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Yes but it's not quite chicken v egg. One is first. By the time the slaves are telling the entertainment media what they want, the entertainment media has told them who they are and what they like.
Apparently, everyone likes being blinded by a state-sponsored mental illness with no purpose or function. Love has an illusory, addictive, feel-good buzz. It's straight out of the Dark Ages. Great for slaves and slave warriors. Go figure.
I'm sure it's all a coincidence...
Score: 0 (4 votes cast)
November 6, 2013 12:06 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Relatively new here and am very weak with the vernacular. Can anyone help dumb this down?
"When a representative democracy gets crippled by what amounts to a 3x3 magic square, it's not that they can't figure out the solution, the solution is easy, the answer is 15 and the five is a gimme, we just need someone to dare allow himself to be filmed putting the 1 on the left or the right or the center so we can finish the other 13 numbers and go bomb Syria. "Wait, what? I don't understand." Yes, that's my point exactly."
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
November 6, 2013 3:03 AM | Posted by : | Reply
For starters go look up a 3x3 magic square. For seconders here:
"When the American government as designed (by its people, whether they accept this or not) can't solve a simple problem, it's not because they're incompetent, the solution is easy if they'd only compromise, but in a world of representatives elected to defend their partisan agendas to the death, initiating compromise is political suicide and no-one dares be caught falling on the grenade (because the media will tear them to pieces for 'betraying their ideals', though the further compromising of others once the ball gets rolling is a-ok)." It's easy to miss because outside observers have no stakes and no pressure and no idea of the dynamics of the people you do, something you already understand implicitly if you've ever found yourself yelling at NFL on FOX.
The bombing Syria bit is a joke about getting things done, but all the same, look where two years of abstinence got us.
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
November 6, 2013 7:38 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Love isn't out of the Dark Age, in the Dark Age, marriage was a business contract. Romance came in the renaissance.
As to compromise, I keep going back to the Croatoan idea (https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2013/01/no_self-respecting_woman_would.html). I think that the reason that politics has turned into a horse race or a shouting match is that Congress and government is not making decisions that matter. If there was a gain to be made -- a real gain, not a theatrical gain -- no one would be worried about the news media portraying them as "not living up to their ideals", because they'd actually get something for their efforts. They could compromise on far larger issues for far larger stakes in the past, and with far less savory characters. FDR could divy up Europe with Stalin but the Tea Party House can't compromise with Obama on a single law?
Now, if you assume that the people in Congress know that they lack real power, but still had to appear to have power I think the lack of compromise in that instance makes a lot of sense. If you have no power but have to look powerful, you'd have to cause crises on a semi-regular basis. You'd have to be unable to compromise, because if there's a compromise then they don't get headlines and then nobody knows that they did anything. Now if they had the power to change things, to make jobs come back, to fix the tax code, or any number of other things, than you could feel the weight of congress without having to hear about it on the news. If you can't change the world, change the news.
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
November 7, 2013 3:01 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I'm not always right but I cannot stand being corrected by people who cannot actually be stupid enough to be merely confused.
You're wrong about something so provably ridiculous, your ignorance simply has to be malicious. Over 5000 years ago, demonic whores who wanted slaves reversed natural love imagining they were being oh-so-shrewd. Since then, 106,000,000,000 humans have suffered lives of torturous misery as the victims of whore lies.
This isn't my freaking opinion. These whores wrote their dark secrets into myths on parchments and and manuscripts which have since been cobbled together to serve as the HOLY Books of the matriarchal religions of child slavery.
openbible.info/topics/love_is
Love is included in the Ten Commandments, the foundation for all 'modern' law. But of the 700 verses in the King James Version of the Holy Bible that mention love, the most telling is:
John 15:13 (KJV)
13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
Love blinds.
Love conquers all.
The Blind conquered All.
There was never any reason to fight.
Score: 1 (7 votes cast)
November 7, 2013 3:02 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I'm not always right but I cannot stand being corrected by people who cannot actually be stupid enough to be merely confused.
You're wrong about something so provably ridiculous, your ignorance simply has to be malicious. Over 5000 years ago, demonic whores who wanted slaves reversed natural love imagining they were being oh-so-shrewd. Since then, 106,000,000,000 humans have suffered lives of torturous misery as the victims of whore lies.
This isn't my freaking opinion. These whores wrote their dark secrets into myths on parchments and and manuscripts which have since been cobbled together to serve as the HOLY Books of the matriarchal religions of child slavery.
openbible.info/topics/love_is
Love is included in the Ten Commandments, the foundation for all 'modern' law. But of the 700 verses in the King James Version of the Holy Bible that mention love, the most telling is:
John 15:13 (KJV)
13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
Love blinds.
Love conquers all.
The Blind conquered All.
There was never any reason to fight.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
November 7, 2013 7:40 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Have you not met our local misogynist before? It's all the fault of the Whores, don't you know?
Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
November 8, 2013 10:09 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
come again?
Are you stupid or do you think it's cute to pretend to be illiterate?
Anonymous:Love isn't out of the Dark Age, in the Dark Age, marriage was a business contract. Romance came in the renaissance.
Jonny: Love is included in the Ten Commandments, the foundation for all 'modern' law. But of the 700 verses in the King James Version of the Holy Bible that mention love, the most telling is:John 15:13 (KJV)
13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.Love blinds.
There was never any reason to fight.
Love conquers all.
The Blind conquered All.
Do you dispute that love is included in the Ten Commandments?
Do you dispute that the Ten Commandments are the foundation of all modern law?
Do you dispute that there are 700 verses about love in the authoritarian version of the Bible?
Do you dispute that John 15:13 is about exploitation?
Do you dispute that love is used for exploitation?
Do you dispute that love blinds?
Do you dispute that love conquers all?
Do you dispute that warriors blinded by love conquered all?
Do you dispute my assertion that humans never needed to fight humans?
Are you stupid or do you think it's a cute trick to pretend to be illiterate?
I abhor stupidity. I abhor the Toddler insanity that imagines it's cute to pretend to be illiterate.
Score: 0 (4 votes cast)
November 8, 2013 10:18 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Have you not met our local misogynist before? It's all the fault of the Whores, don't you know?
It is all the fault of whores. Human women are not supposed to leverage sex into suffering. Human mothers are not supposed to lie to children or exploit them. Humans are not supposed to need to blind other humans with emotional corruption.
In one species only will you find mothers wanting their young to love them. No other animal species has mothers needing others to love them. There is nothing natural about needing love unless you are a defenceless newborn. The infantalisation of this wretched species has been completed.
misogyny is the hatred of women for being women. It is not the hatred of 'women' who hate women for being women.
Those 'women' are called misogynists. In the West, they slut-shame their young. In the Arab world, motivated by the same horrifying hatred of competition, they practice Female Genital Mutilation. There are 140 million women and girls with mutilated genitals but there's something even more horrifying.
What's even more horrifying is these demons blame FGM on men.
Score: -1 (5 votes cast)
November 8, 2013 10:28 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Have you not met our local misogynist before? It's all the fault of the Whores, don't you know?
He's just a troll. Don't feed him.
Score: 2 (8 votes cast)
November 8, 2013 11:00 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Okay, johnny seriously. People not being able to understand what you're talking about has nothing to do with "illiteracy". Nor, for that matter, is it related to them being "Toddlers" or "Whores", two other words that you love to toss around.
The reason nobody knows what you're talking about is that you've invented a jargon completely unique to yourself, and while using that jargon you make incomplete and poorly thought out arguments. You seem to think that all of us here on this website are captive to your every post and can therefore understand your meaning based on context or other information without you having to actually communicate clearly or concisely.
But, and this needs to be said, this is not your blog. We do not come here to read "johnny's posts". We come here to read Alone's posts, and then join the comments to discuss Alone's posts. None of us have the necessary background in "johnny's posts" to understand what you're talking about, and I feel confident in saying that none of us really want to either.
Get yourself a blog and put this stuff there. Stop trying to capitalize on the audience another person has developed. And take responsibility for your own shortcomings. If nobody reading your posts can understand them then the problem is you, not them. There is no magical type of illiteracy that renders a person able to read and understand several hundred pages of philosophical, scientific, and statistical discussion by a blogger, but renders them unable to read and understand the comments of a single angry commenter.
Score: 2 (4 votes cast)
November 8, 2013 12:10 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Johnny,
You have a truly unique take on your religion, you can't expect everyone to just immediately understand what you are saying when you snap at them.
I'm going to try to do something here that maybe you haven't heard before, so bare with me. Now, I'm not going to be so presumptuous to assume that I know your situation or where you are in your life but it strikes me that what you are doing here with these posts is ineffective at best, and harmful to yourself and others at worst. I'm narcissistic (or caring) enough to try to reach you. You seem to be coming from a place of extreme negativity, although quoting sections of the Bible relating to love. Being this negative about others, anonymous others, does no one any real good. First, you can't make yourself happy by being negative. What you feel when you write this is a momentary burst of ego. It's addictive to cast others down--in your own world it puts you up. But it's ultimately illusory.
Does any of this resonate with you? As you become more and more negative, people will begin to shun you. They may have already. This kind of behavior does not bring any form of happiness, self-awareness or success to your own person. Your ego gets fed, which is temporary. After some time, as people begin to shun, mock or altogether ignore you (probably the worst thing a person can do to another) you'll quit attracting successful people, mature or balanced people and start attracting people with similar forms of negativity. You may turn to drugs, alcohol or extreme cult-like behavior. Your new friends will tell you that these other people don't matter, because together you can all wallow in misery together. As you fall deeper into the rabbit-hole, you will begin constructing ever more layers that prove to yourself how awful the rest of the world is. As you become more and more alone in the world, you will become more embittered and one sided--only seeing yourself as valid and everyone else as cruel. The world will stop reaching out to you, even in those rare moments when you try to reach out, because it has given up on you.
If any of this resonates with you I suggest that you talk with an adult you can trust. Explore what sort of pleasure you get from randomly insulting people, people you don't know, on someone else's blog. Perhaps explore what you are trying to accomplish. When was the last time your mind was changed, over the internet, by someone insulting you? Even though I am confused about your message, is this the best way to get it across? Explore your message. It was something about women using sex to destroy civilization? -- you should explore that as well. When is the last time you have been in love? Did you act like this towards them? Were you violent in words? Or worse?
If you are offended by this, I apologize. I am not trying to embarrass you on this blog, I assume that will be an ancillary affect. For that I apologize. If my professional guess as to your motivations is not too far off the mark, perhaps something of this will make its way through. I have yet to meet anyone who acts like you are acting, who isn't coming from a really dark place and isn't secretly miserable. Follow your motivations to their logical conclusion and you'll most likely see how ineffective your actions are. Perhaps this is a big joke, or a sociology study about negative online comments--that would actually make more sense to me.
If I am wrong about this, then you are probably well-adjusted and simply passionate, and won't really take any offense, because you'll understand how I drew this conclusion. But I advise that you talk with someone.
Either way, you'll probably be blocked soon. Take your commenting down a notch with the fiery rhetoric. You can write me if you like.
Sincerely,
Michael
[email protected]
Score: 1 (7 votes cast)
November 8, 2013 1:24 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
People not being able to understand what you're talking about has nothing to do with "illiteracy". Nor, for that matter, is it related to them being "Toddlers" or "Whores"
What an idiotic, nonsensical lie. I write in Her Majesty's Finest and if you cannot understand, it's because you don't value truth. That has the effect of making everything jumbled inside your tiny little minds (which were broken by whore lies).
If you don't know what a whore is, that's because you're a moronic son of one. Lately, I've noticed whores trying to conflate the label "slut" (normal, human girl) with "whore" (abnormal, worthless sub-beastly excuse for a human female who is intent on creating suffering as she peddles her body into preferential treatment via extortion).
But, and this needs to be said, this is not your blog. We do not come here to read "johnny's posts". We come here to read Alone's posts, and then join the comments to discuss Alone's posts.
I speak truth that you cannot refute. I have every right to do so. If you have a problem with truth, you should counter it on your own blog rather than taking up the Comments section here forcing me to respond to your inane aversion to logic and evidence.
If nobody reading your posts can understand them then the problem is you, not them.
My comments are written in a code called truth. Stop valuing lies and everything will become clear to your broken little minds. And stop being your whore mother's little Toddler, who imagines they speak for everyone.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
November 8, 2013 1:53 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Johnny,
Please read the above post I sent to you. I'm worried.
Sincerely,
Michael
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
November 8, 2013 2:04 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
You seem to be coming from a place of extreme negativity, although quoting sections of the Bible relating to love. Being this negative about others, anonymous others, does no one any real good. First, you can't make yourself happy by being negative.
You're being insulting because I made an innocuous and truthful statement about love which was corrected by an idiotic and brazen lie about love being invented in the Middle Ages. I corrected this demented lie using evidence that cannot be refuted. But rather than accept the fact that I completely correct, you vermin just have to keep fighting reality.
Stop worrying about how I feel and take umbrage with the fact that you have been shown to be incorrect and yet you persist in attempting to shoot the messenger.
Being this negative about others, anonymous others, does no one any real good. First, you can't make yourself happy by being negative.
What you perceive as negative is a product of your corrupted perception. If you cannot understand something this basic, you are no position to be trying to reach anyone but yourself. Truth is not negative. Only the broken victims of whores imagine it could be.
When was the last time your mind was changed, over the internet, by someone insulting you? Even though I am confused about your message, is this the best way to get it across?
I'm an inept writer but then I have the capacity to convey information so that anyone who has the intent to be communicated with can - and always will - understand the message without confusion. I don't get insulted. You are being insulting. There is a difference. You insult yourself. My mind is changed only by truth, logic, evidence, sense.
Your minds are never changed but you are influenced by emotive appeals to corrupted values you hold dear. There's no communicating with you vermin until you fix your broken minds.
I have yet to meet anyone who acts like you are acting, who isn't coming from a really dark place and isn't secretly miserable.
I live in a world of evil so vile, the demons wipe out entire peaceful civilizations whilst blaming it on the peaceful savages defending their homes. The demons are raping the minds of their children with lies and corrupted emotional values and constructs intended to make children exploitable whilst they tell themselves their evil malice is for the children's sake. Everyone is lying to everyone they meet but to themselves they lie in ways that warrant their instant termination. They rewrite history in real time. They're amoral. They're pure sociopaths. Their malice is for the sake of their victims. Every evil, demonic act they're guilty of they rationalise away as being necessary for their victims' sake.
I live in a world of insanity so insane, the species is gameplay extinct, probably before the century is out. I'm not the only one speaking this obvious truth. But you vermin don't care because you breed children for exploitation and all your rhetoric is for show. Everyone is raping their own and betraying everyone they Confidence trick into trusting or loving or believing in them.
If I am wrong about this, then you are probably well-adjusted and simply passionate, and won't really take any offense, because you'll understand how I drew this conclusion.
I don't take offence by those who degrade and insult themselves. But I do not credit your offensive motives for attempting to help me when I am not the one who needs to lie. Keep your malicious compassion to yourself. Your feelings are worthless. You need to fix yourself. I understand everyone perfectly. You're the one who is illiterate.
Embrace truth or silence yourself. All of this is needless. All of my responses are in response to lies from imbeciles. Stop lying and I won't respond.
Score: -3 (5 votes cast)
November 8, 2013 2:58 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
How readily you resort to insults and attacks when someone actually looks directly at you. I was going to respond in depth to the insults and slurs and attacks, but the more I think about it the more I realise you haven't actually said anything.
You've accused me of not understanding because I don't value truth, but this is a lie. I simply don't value the string of unrelated opinions you attempt to dress up as impartial observations. Nor do I lend any credence to the frankly bizarre strings of logic you attempt to present using your own specialized jargon and bible quotes. Love in the ten commandments? As it is written, yes, as we know it commonly, no. The ten commandments being the basis of all modern law? A weak understanding of history, geography, and culture I'm afraid, the answer is no johnny. Love conquers all? Hardly. Love blinds? Rarely.
Whether you're trying to lie to me or to yourself is meaningless.
I will thank you for expanding on what you think "whore" means, but it really does nothing to help your argument considering how little your definition keeps in common with "Her Majesty's" definition.
You have the right to speak the truth johnny, but not to recenter the comments of this entire blog on yourself. It would help your position if you found some truth to speak, as well.
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
November 8, 2013 5:17 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I'm kind of stunned that people are having trouble following jonny. If you refuse to read something because it doesn't pander to you, why are you reading at all? It's clearly not for the sake of self-education. When you refuse to read something because it's "poorly written" or "confusing", what are you getting in exchange for your ignorance?
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
November 8, 2013 7:48 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Love in the ten commandments? As it is written, yes, as we know it commonly, no.
Once again, you're imposing your incomprehension on everyone. You're wrong. And you don't speak for anyone except yourself. Jealousy. Hate = Revenge / punishment. Love = Mercy / reward.
Exodus 20:5-6 (KJV)
5 ...I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
0/1
_________
The ten commandments being the basis of all modern law? A weak understanding of history, geography, and culture I'm afraid, the answer is no johnny.
basis
noun
1. the underlying support or foundation for an idea, argument, or process.
Which laws predated the Ten Commandments?
In an address before the Attorney General's Conference, President Harry S. Truman clearly described the foundation for America's laws: "The fundamental basis of this Nation's law was given to Moses on the Mount."A marble frieze on the south wall of the Supreme Court features Moses with the two tablets of the Decalogue.
A statue of Moses holding the Ten Commandments is featured in the rotunda of the Library of Congress.
The Ten Commandments are symbolized in the floor of the National Archives Building in Washington , D.C.
The Judiciary Act of 1789 and current law require Supreme Court justices and lower court judges to swear..."So help me God."
0/2
__________
Love conquers all? Hardly.
digitaljournal.com/article/336187
A new study has found that the British have invaded almost 90 percent of the countries of the world, more than any other country in history. An analysis of the history of about 200 countries found that only 22 countries have escaped British aggression.
The country that comes closest to Britain in the number of countries invaded is France. Ironically, France is also the country Britain has invaded the highest number of times.
All the European empires that invaded and conquered large tracts of the globe were Christian. All war requires selfless love. War is not a selfish pursuit. Dying for King, God and Country is really just a euphemism for dying for those you love.
John 15:13 (KJV)
13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
Love conquers all.
0/3
___________
Love blinds? Rarely.
You're an imbecile.
Google "love blinds" and you'll getAbout 43,200,000 results (0.23 seconds)
0/4
_____________
I'm not going to respond to you anymore.
Score: 4 (8 votes cast)
November 8, 2013 9:08 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I'm confused. Hope there are others out there who is not. One thing is clear though, that life alone tend to feel pointless. I wonder how I managed to get into this situation of sadness, disintegration and isolation. Did someone fool me or is it all me?
Reward waiting for correct answer.
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
November 8, 2013 11:05 PM | Posted by : | Reply
In Freudian terms, the only force in your life right now is your superego. What it really means is that you're completely sealed off from the ability to feel anything or to engage with anything in a manner that does not generate anxiety. Every action you take is not motivated by anything except an attempt to conform to an action that you feel you are supposed to take - most cruelly of all, of course, being the social mandate "Enjoy your life!"
It's cruel and punishing - you're constantly exerting energy just to conform to norms, destroying yourself with anxiety every time you make the slightest misstep, and never feeling like you've done anything right, ever. Nothing counts, nothing works, and the anxiety just doesn't go away. You're missing something - that sensation that we're supposed to be following and that actually keeps us happy, calm, and strong. THAT FEELING that makes humans human and not failed automata following social rules.
I only re-discovered that feeling (after a childhood where I was taught not to follow it, and thus repressed it) back in my life after taking multiple extremely heavy doses of hallucinogens over the course of a few years. It's hard to communicate to most people because they've had their human instinct to feel and act on their own feelings cut out of them piece by piece over the course of their lives.
There's something more beautiful than our bland and grey liberal "decency", and that's the active expansion of your consciousness. You expand your consciousness by actually acting on your true beliefs and saying what you really believe and seeing what happens. And you keep doing that and your behavior will evolve naturally and your mind will expand. You won't need to create narratives for yourself or whatever stupid insight-oriented crap we make up these days. You'll just exist and change, and because you're acting according to your Self you won't even hate people anymore - you're no longer HOLDING BACK, so you won't have any reason to judge people for stupid crap.
I'm still figuring some of this out. But your depression is a sign that what's been fundamentally motivating your actions hasn't been working, and that you don't believe in these motivations. I really wish you the best.
Score: 3 (5 votes cast)
November 8, 2013 11:06 PM | Posted by : | Reply
This directed towards Dust, not jonny (just to clarify to those reading, not that either of those individuals would have misunderstood)
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
November 9, 2013 5:00 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Really a great post .Thanks for posting such useful information.
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
November 9, 2013 10:14 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
That's a brilliant comment sublate, and I was there for a few months. But are you certain Dust (and I would put myself in the depressed category as well) are incorrect to feel the way we feel?
There is evil in this world so dark and vile...at first, I tried to understand them. This was a mistake, in hindsight, when dealing with evil that just wants to devour and consume and rape. There is no good, just people lying to themselves as they stupidly make everything worse.
I was unable to remain in that place you speak of. How do you reconcile the present state of the species with your positivity? We're staring down the barrel of nuclear annihilation with seemingly no way out, as mothers breed suffering to exploit after youths manufacturing suffering to exploit. Everyone is lying, preying on each other, burning their friends, molesting children, denying it. What's the point?
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
November 9, 2013 2:57 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I can't in full confidence reply - I was drawn to your comments originally because you struck me as someone more developed than I, but if you've been where I am and have moved past that place, I can't speak as if I know where you are right now.
From what I've experienced, to exist in harmony with one's Self is its own reward - so to ask what the point is strikes me as a devaluation of one's own experience. IE, if you are asking for a reward for your actions outside of their own doing, you may be looking outside of your Self in order to assign them value.
Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
November 10, 2013 4:39 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Also -
A feeling is never incorrect. A feeling exists. This is perhaps the most painful aspect of the castigating faux-progressive blogosphere, to castigate impulses rather than actions. Of course the interpretation of that feeling, the relationship that you draw between that feeling and your external reality, might be incorrect, but the feeling itself simply is.
So when you ask if you're incorrect to feel depressed, it would be like asking if your feeling of hunger is incorrect. The ONLY real things are feelings, and what we share as humans is a space where we have the potential to interact with one another's consciousnesses through that space.
In my experience, depression comes about when I'm not pursuing what I perceive to be beautiful/sublime, or when I'm acting in a manner that ignores my perceptions/subordinates them to some external authority. This is why what TLP classifies as narcissism is so psychologically agonizing - by pursuing forms of action that you have been taught to believe will bring satisfaction, you're divorcing yourself from your actual impulses. You feel powerless in your life, because you are - you've handed the keys over to someone else's idea of what you should be doing. Thus, the need to be recognized, for someone else to give your actions meaning because they do not actually hold meaning to your own Self. (You in this case being a hypothetical individual in this state.)
If you're asking - is your depression inevitable? I can't answer that for certain, as I can never really know what happens in another consciousness. But it's out of sync with my own experience.
Score: -1 (5 votes cast)
November 10, 2013 7:43 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Just on the "feelings are never incorrect:"
"I feel betrayed", when you weren't betrayed, would be an example of where a feeling is incorrect. In this case, you can add "like I'm" between "feel" and "betrayed".
So "I feel depressed" becomes "I feel like I'm depressed". There might be a little bit of wiggle room there. Depressed itself carries a connotation of "extreme" sadness, and it can be difficult to say if you're just "sad" or "depressed". If it is bad, though, certainly try and get help. This isn't to dissuade anyone who is legitimately depressed, just commenting that feelings can be incorrect at times.
Score: 2 (4 votes cast)
November 10, 2013 10:10 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
A feeling is a narrative, not of essential reality. It would be correct to say that a "feeling" is NEVER correct, unless its correctness aligns to reality. Simply feeling it means nothing.
Reality does not give a single fuck what your narrative is. It simply exists. Trying to idolatize emotion as a sanctuary from the harshness of existence is futile and stupid.
Score: 2 (4 votes cast)
November 10, 2013 11:17 PM | Posted by : | Reply
lol ) this pretty much summarizes our entire political system: "We don't have political riots here, we have high end sit ins near the Broadway Starbucks".. very true
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
November 11, 2013 9:35 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
You are born. Your existence begins. You feel things and receive sensations, physical and emotional. You give them meaning. You make relationships between things.
That's it - that's what being alive is. I don't know why you're worried about whether existence is "harsh" or whether it cares - if there is "existence" and it feels a certain way it's certainly outside of my experience so it doesn't really affect me.
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
November 11, 2013 1:25 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
From what I've experienced, to exist in harmony with one's Self is its own reward - so to ask what the point is strikes me as a devaluation of one's own experience.
Yes. I've regressed.
I might just be too damaged. Lately, the sheer horror has seemed overwhelming. I'm finding it increasingly hard to tolerate the endless imposition one is forced to endure just to function inside the boundaries of their Polite Society without creating a scene or being imprisoned, killed or worse. It's outrageous that evil holds such a dominant position with most people so confused over basic values, they don't know good from evil and I'm not sure all that many of them could care less one way or the other. But it's the forced tolerance of those who are obsessed with controlling / suppressing / denying reality that's been doing my head in. They demand to be treated with cordiality as they rape their young with lies in broad daylight. They deny reality not because it's unpleasant or traumatic but because it's not.
Truth is liberating so of course it's going to be a deal-breaker on every plantation powered by the pain of private shame. Freedom terrifies slaves for the very reason it should be exhilarating but those who shroud emancipation with trauma, terror and stigma for a reason are never going to look kindly on those who would reverse years or decades of their hard work by freeing the victims of their private abuse. That anyone is unhappy at all should itself be proof that mothers are incompetent at best. But at worst...
Mothers invest years of their life in destroying their own for the sake of control. They'd not hesitate to kill anyone who fucks with their life's work. You have to hold back.
You'll just exist and change, and because you're acting according to your Self you won't even hate people anymore - you're no longer HOLDING BACK, so you won't have any reason to judge people for stupid crap.
I was there but if I kept pushing truth, I'd be dead. Or worse. Maybe that's where I started regressing. But unadulterated truth is suicide in a world which has been meticulously structured to manufacture the needless suffering desired by those who perceive profit in reducing humans as low as they can go (at rock bottom, there is love).
Mothers are pimping children out all over the world, exploiting them with retarded lies but humans only know what they've been told and shown. The betrayal of mothers is just...
youtu.be/s_auDCvkzXI
She and her 15 year old sister are willingly choosing to be churned through the illicit (read: unregulated) sex industry and by the end of their careers, if all goes to plan (presuming they don't die [or worse] in the near future, their odds of survival increase each year), they'll have serviced over 10,000 customers each. And they'll have nothing to show for it because they are highly motivated machines, driven by an obsessive, desperate need to suffer to please the demon who has been tormenting them for their entire lives precisely for that reason. There are 1.1 million of these girls in Bangkok, all reduced with the template of shame and they all sound the same. They're all desperate to please those who make them suffer.
A million girls in love with their abusive mothers. Or is it a billion?
This is their mother / owner / pimp. The girls' suffering is a means to this grandiose end.
i.imgur.com/1pDrncx.png
Empathy gets in the way of a human but these demons feel nothing. She fucks and eats and sleeps. And she does not like work. They destroyed the world for this reason. She's completely representative of the last 5000 years' worth of mothers. This is why they destroyed paradise and reduced a deity species to slavery. They just wanted to get on Easy Street.
"For the woman, the man is a means: the end is always the child."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
Nietzsche could be a real moron, at times. If the man is a means, the child will be a means as well. The end will always be the disposable human disposing of humans. They'll breed until The End. They've bred The End. I guess I don't know why I'm supposed to pretend there's a point.
To be...or not to be?
To be is a bit of a bitch, so.... I really want to rant about FGM here but this is already too long so it's not to be.
Score: 1 (5 votes cast)
November 13, 2013 9:22 AM | Posted by : | Reply
How did this many children manage to be elected to the federal legislature?
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
November 13, 2013 11:16 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
The Process of Government: A Study of Social Pressure
Propaganda
Read.
Idiot.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
November 13, 2013 4:22 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Sek, are you a helpful person?
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
November 14, 2013 3:34 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Representative democracy.
They represent an electorate largely comprised of voting Toddlers.
Score: 0 (4 votes cast)
November 14, 2013 3:09 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
By appealing (either contrivedly or naturally) to the type of people who vote for them.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
November 14, 2013 4:03 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Of course TLP thinks it's about stupidity, because he's a narcissist. He, uniquely clear-eyed, sees the Truth that the mere stupids can't see, because they're stupidly stupid, and here's a misused comma, and here's another one, aren't you impressed with this highly stylized technique? Yes, because you're stupid, and if you're reading it, it's for you.
II.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
November 14, 2013 9:19 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I'm not liberal or conservative; I'm and independent, and practical. Thank you very much.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
November 14, 2013 9:40 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Then boy oh boy do I have the news network for you
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
November 15, 2013 1:21 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
You are repeating tlps words
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
November 15, 2013 1:49 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Nothing gets by you, eh sherlock?
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
November 15, 2013 1:50 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
You're welcome. I'm not sure why you're thanking me but you're welcome nonetheless
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
November 17, 2013 1:43 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
When TLP offers "advice", he nearly always asserts that there's no hope. You're irretrievably damaged, and utterly nothing apart from a toxic hazard to everyone around you. Your very existence is a malevolence. He stops just short of advocating suicide.
Score: 2 (6 votes cast)
November 17, 2013 1:57 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
You expand your consciousness by actually acting on your true beliefs and saying what you really believe and seeing what happens.
- Want to fuck?
- Get lost, creep.
No consciousness expansion here. Maybe the hallucinogenics are a better idea.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
November 18, 2013 6:55 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
You're really asserting TLP's point here. When he talks about the key problem in these articles, you read narcissism and think grandiosity, when the actual problem is an absolute rejection of any change to identity.
Your flawed identity as it stands, is irrevocably damaged if it stays that way. Does it feel like suicide? Maybe. But this shows the very extremes of pathological narcissism.
You're so unwilling to change your toxically hazard self, that you'd prefer death than a rejection of your identity.
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
November 19, 2013 2:49 PM | Posted by : | Reply
"The #OWS demo wants to see powerful men humbled before the t-shirted, tweeting masses, it allows them the fantasy that it could some day happen here, which it won't because the propaganda worked." WRONG!!!!!!!!! Look at this, Bitches http://andreacoatesoperationfun.blogspot.ca/
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
November 23, 2013 12:21 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Is TLP American? Maybe I'm getting my shrinks mixed up but I seem to remember, perhaps erroneously, he/she replying to comments using British English ("s" in place of "z", "ou" instead of "o" etc.). For some reason I thought he/she hailed from Australia... Anyway, carry on.
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
November 23, 2013 12:38 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Agree with TLP re. John LeCarre. I devoured his novels when I was in my early-teens, right after I'd finished reading all the James Bond books available at the local library.
Even then I intuitively recognized that Fleming's books are purely escapist fantasy whereas LeCarre's novels, in addition to being entertaining, offered some valuable insights about how our society operates.
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
November 23, 2013 6:49 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
For some reason I thought the poster known as "jonny" was TLP. Too many drugs and not enough sleep etc.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
November 23, 2013 6:57 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
And the "Token Insecure American On Internet Forum Having A Frothing-At-The-Mouth-Shit-Fit In Response To Perceived Slighting Of America By A Foreigner" award goes to...James!
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
November 25, 2013 4:10 AM | Posted by : | Reply
I like how you pick a clear and concise point and defend it in a logical and thought out manner. Not just crazy reactionary ranting from some wannabe critic. Great post, 5/5! Posted this to my Facebook wall to share with my friends, red pilling them about the shutdown and advertisements and I forget what your article was about.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
November 26, 2013 1:50 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Michael and others,
you may have missed few of scarce remarks jonny has made under previous tlp's posts about Children of God. I still refuse to imagine what kind of relations he might have endured with these people.
Do some research about it and you will see what "people" he hates, what "mothers" he curses, and what a title "whore" means.
He might be not explicit in his comments, but I'm quite sure he doesn't hate anonymous people, and I'm pretty sure he has all the reasons to hate what he hates.
That he assumes the whole world is the same as the sample he had a chance to observe, is fully understandable (we all make the same assumptions compliant with our "bubbles"). But instead of correcting his views, we may learn something about the "world" which is (luckily and thankfully) out of our reach, yet unfortunately, a reality for too many.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
November 27, 2013 2:04 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Oh come on. The AJA ads are meant to convince the actual target demographic, which is largely male and probably to some significant extent of Middle Eastern extraction that they aren't being quite as tribal as they are in being attracted to this new source of soothing shibboleth Muzak. Look! There are women, and Asians, and even black men -- although God knows where they found one who could actually read -- watching al-Jazeera. I'm a very cosmopolitan guy, really. They even thoughtfully supply us with some rationalization to go with our denial: hey, I want to get my news free of editorializing (like all these other multicolored liberated independents), ergo propter hoc I cannot be acting out of the merest primate tribal instinct.
Advertisment isn't always about persuasion of the marginally inclined, that is, finding positive reasons for indulging. Sometimes it's about giving permission to urges that make you feel ashamed otherwise. Like the ads for women at Christmas in which she buys herself some trinket after a long hard day shopping for the lucky hubbie and 1.6 children. You know what they're selling is cruft for women, and the purpose of the ad is to helpfully suggest rationalizations for her cupidity, in terms upon which they can rely the canonical canalized female to seize.
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
November 27, 2013 9:06 AM | Posted by : | Reply
That last line is rather poetic.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
November 27, 2013 11:54 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I don't really think we should need to research his background before reading his current posts, especially considering that they stand up on their own without doing so.
They might stand up substantially less sympathetically, and paint a picture of a person who has created an elaborate fantasy where he is a superhero wielding a staff of truth fighting against all the supervillian whore mothers and toddler whores of the world, but they do stand up.
Could this be based on the only part of the world/type of people that he has ever seen? Sure, but so is my and every other humans behavior, and yet still many of us manage to treat others with dignity and respect, even those who have experienced pain just like, far beyond, and totally alien to what jonny has experienced.
Maybe he is deserving of our empathy, maybe not. As it stands all I can see is a man filled with directionless rage and thirsty for acknowledgment, taking it out on everyone within earshot. And I can't really feel much for a person like that, I'm afraid.
Score: 3 (9 votes cast)
November 27, 2013 9:41 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I see your point, but is he really hurting anyone? I find his rants rather harmless.
I didn't mean to research his previous comments, but Children of God.
You say his comments stay up on their own, but I still think that whatever he talks about, he is still talking about Children of God. If you read his comments with this on mind, you will see there's no need to take them personally.
Also, by "But instead of correcting his views, we may learn something about the "world" which is (luckily and thankfully) out of our reach, yet unfortunately, a reality for too many." I didn't mean that we can learn about his pain... rather that we can see what communities like Children of God can do to people and what is happening behind the closed door. There are still many children going through hell...
You are right, he seems to be thirsty for acknowledgement, but I think this need of him would be best gratified the moment "also the rest of the world pays attention to ChoG, not just me" (that's what I see in his comments and I think that's how every victim of every injustice feels). And he feels powerless and helpless. All I see in his comments is: "There is a bunch of fucked up evil psychopaths insanely abusing children and the world doesn't give a fuck about it".
And as I said, I'm pretty sure his rage isn't directionless - it is directed on ChoG community, he is just powerless to do the justice with them. And there's really not much he can do, although there are few initiatives from other ChoG's victims who've managed to survive and escape.
No one is obliged to give him empathy and I understand you may feel disrespected by him. I would just say it's not a big deal... he is harmless... and I don't see a point in rebuking him (ChoG people sitting in jail, and he's on his way towards healing... until then, there might be some substitute ways, but...)
You may as well not to pay attention to him.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
November 27, 2013 10:37 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Although I agree that in real life (in personal relationships), he might be not that much harmless as he is on the Internet.
Which is a sad truth.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
November 27, 2013 10:44 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Ana, thanks for the insight. I was hoping to reach out in some way earlier. Maybe this online community could be the start of something positive in this situation, maybe not. Still, I think your assessment should give us pause when firing rhetorical bombs at anonymous stranger in the future, even when we may feel attacked at first.
Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
November 28, 2013 4:49 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
There's no help for dumb. You can't "get smart". Your IQ is either 125 or 75. Reading a few more books [e.g. trying to study your way to smart] won't change it, because if it's 75 you won't get the books, and if it's 125 you probably understand the books' conclusions already.
There's a reason why most of the people graduating with bachelor's degrees today are the dumb demographic that TV news is targeting. Average intelligence isn't smart enough to make good decisions - most people hover around average intelligence, and most people go to college. It can't be fixed. Well, it could be fixed, by requiring a minimum intelligence to vote, but then it'd be discrimination against stupid people, and if our country stands for anything, it stands for making sure stupid people have the right to make bad decisions for everyone else.
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
November 28, 2013 2:14 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Do some research about it and you will see what "people" he hates, what "mothers" he curses, and what a title "whore" means.
He might be not explicit in his comments, but I'm quite sure he doesn't hate anonymous people, and I'm pretty sure he has all the reasons to hate what he hates.
I hate malicious, inhumane demons that mutilate children. The question is, why don't you? I am not the problem. I have no need. The Problem is Toddlers mutilating children for their sake. When I make a detailed logical case to arrest their malice (defined as inflicting suffering), they respond with blanket denial.
"No."
That's their counter-argument. They cannot counter truth. They refuse to accept it. They exist in bubbles of delusion where truth is subjected to more controls than the state media in Nth Korea. I don't need your Christian Compassion. I don't need to suppress reality. The Problem is girls want to sell deceit but no one needs or wants to buy it. The whores just persist. Mothers encourage them. "Keep waiting for what you deserve." Their waiting has no value. Only they value their lies. Their victims appear to.
Toddler whores get deceived by the illusions created by their deceitful illusions. Recursion. Girls fabricate these ludicrous lies:
* professional cosmetic makeover (i.imgur.com/Q2EEk4Z.jpg),
* then they take 500 selfies and choose the best five,
* then they manipulate those five pics with an photo-enhancing app (i.imgur.com/bHY3QxJ.png).
Voila. The final product has no correlation to reality, but that's their false image going on Facebook to represent them. Women did to images what they've done to conversation and the human existence. Women trying to cheat destroyed everything. It's all as pointless as this brilliant post. No one values truth = worthless.
No value but the insanity has just begun. Women fall for the illusions generated by their fabricated illusions. Guys gush and selfless leeches worth less than worthless start thinking, "Yeah, you guys are right. I am super cute. I need to think positive. Ugh. Men are so pathetic. OMG. Desperate much? OK you guys need to leave me alone already. Have some self-respect."
Mother of fuck. They can remove the whore paint whenever they like. 95% of the guys they reject are out of their league. Men aren't blind. Broken women control 100% of the Supply. Any competition is murdered or shamed. "Go, and sin no more."
Girls adore Facebook as it lets them create an entire virtual life. They fall in love with their false image = Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Of course, they not-so-secretly hate themselves. I know how they feel. They'll never love themselves until they stop loving the false image. They must embrace reality or they'll be worthless for life. Until I stopped trying to make a good impression, I hated myself as well. In truth I discovered I had nothing to hide.
i.imgur.com/J0czV55.jpg
When I meet girls, I will not validate their lies. Fuck their batshit feelings. I tell them truth. Their malice wasted our time. I tell them why they're not valued (no value) and the demons start shooting the messenger. It's this Polite Society of lies. Every guy who isn't blind would be as disgusted as I am but they're too polite to be decent. They literally suffer to avoid hurting the girl's feelings, awkwardly feigning interest until they can escape. Other guys, broken by a valueless world, just shrug and adjust. They have polite sex before hating themselves. Guys are conditioned to be raped and suffer in silence. They never retaliate. Men can't protect themselves. Their hands are tied by conditioning.
I discovered the extent of the horror when a ladyboy with a death wish imagined I was going to let him rape me. As I'm staring at this girl's penis, the thought struck me that he wasn't frightened at all. He should have been afraid, but he wasn't. He's protected. Men don't retaliate. Ladyboys are raping thousands of men every weekend and no one is getting killed or even beaten. I asked him about guys' reactions. He said some aren't happy so they leave. But most just tell him to keep it out of their sight.
Men are out of their minds.
______________
(tbc...)
Score: 3 (7 votes cast)
November 28, 2013 3:38 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
(cont...)
Children are conditioned to value illusions rather than reality. Boys are conditioned to be raped without complaint. Sex enabled by cosmetic makeup is rape by fraud. These are your rules!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_deceptionRape by deception is a crime in which the perpetrator has the victim's sexual consent and compliance, but gains it through deception or fraudulent statements or actions. The act is known in Tennessee and California as rape by fraud.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deception
Deception serves to distort or omit the complete truth. Intent is critical with regard to deception. Intent differentiates between deception and an honest mistake. The five primary forms of deception are Lies, Equivocations, Concealments, Exaggerations, Understatements.
Whores know they're being malicious. Their intent is to rape and molest men. Concealing reality (deception) is the sole function of cosmetics. Girls are told by mothers (who need the guillotine) that men despise honest girls. "Too easy." Apparently, men love to suffer and will only value malicious whores preoccupied with inflicting suffering to inflate their sale price (playing hard to get).
As a result of mothers mutilating their daughters' minds, girls' default behaviour is antisocial. This is very important because when men retaliate or protect themselves, Toddler whores imagine they're the victims of unprovoked malice. Embittered, they subscribe to misandry and dial up their antisocial behaviour, seeking revenge on men who have done nothing wrong (other than refuse to value being raped). This bitch keyed my car for asking her to leave. A psychotic girl burned my buddy's house in Manila (place went up in flames, he lost his life's savings when the poker bankroll inside his safe went molten). His 'crime' was refusing to see her again. I can't imagine why. She seems lovely.
Don't dismiss these examples as outliers or unrepresentative of The Problem. This is the tip of the iceberg that includes every woman wearing makeup. Women refuse to contribute value because their minds have been mutilated by evil women who tell girls they're entitled to things they haven't earned. The love of men. The trust of children. The affection of johns. The respect of strangers. And when they don't get what they believe they deserve (after all, they've 'earned' it...by waiting), they become violent, hijacking vermin. When men no longer appear to value what no longer exists (temporary illusions of beauty), the leeches feel betrayed and refuse to let them leave. Cue domestic violence.
I'm not the one with the problem, you snivelling selfless wretches. I have been raped my entire life by putrid whores worth less than worthless, who left me gutted and broken, existentially terrified and blaming myself. They sucked the fun out of everything, absconded with 90% of the value generated by sex, then had the nerve to "feel unfulfilled" because I didn't represent their abusive value system. I have. I can. It's easy. But why?
i.imgur.com/kr3TmWQ.png
What is the value of a stalker?
What is your needy worth?
What is a leech's love good for?
Children cannot eat your whore paint.
_____________
prostitute (n.) - a woman who sells sex for money
Prostitution is morally neutral / ethically borderline. There is no intent to inflict suffering. Whilst prostitutes are seeking to exploit the perverse corruption in the marketplace for the commodity of sex (skewed by the power of the Matriarchy to control mothers who dictate values to children), transparency should ensure informed consent.
whore (n.) - a woman who sells sex for suffering
Whores value what has no value (virginity, purity, malice, dependency, exclusivity, fealty, loyalty, slavery, deceit, love etc). There are presently 140,000,000 females who had their genitals mutilated by their mothers, for their sake. 55,000,000,000 girls had their minds mutilated by their mothers, for their sake. It's a rolling purge of girls (who weren't broken) by broken women who break girls because they hate their betters for being better.
Guardian: Twitter's First Star
"They're trying to shame me," Oxford says, "and it's all from women. Men don't care. A lot of women are like: Oh she's not fat, oh she's cute, she's funny, I hate her."
Evil is so naughty. Just like sex! *teehee*
_____________
"...census figures from antiquity show boy/girl ratios as high as 400 boys to 100 girls."
- History of Child Abuse (Lloyd deMause)
The Journal of Psychohistory 25 (3) Winter 1998
Men had no motive to do that. That's FGM / slut-shaming evil.
Men must:
a) stop women from cannibalising children, or
b) put them down if they keep needing to mutilate, or
c) the species will go extinct.
If they were your children, I wouldn't care. But you have no Right to destroy my kids. Every child's interests are my interests and I have no interest in letting putrid whores mutilate them. You sons-of-bitches need to get your bitches in line because a Real Man doesn't let his whore mutilate children.
i.imgur.com/tZUGmgq.png
TLDR: Go fuck yourselves.
Score: 5 (9 votes cast)
November 28, 2013 5:55 PM | Posted by : | Reply
hey tlp,
please write a piece on 'modern' loneliness.
regards,
some dude
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
November 28, 2013 7:45 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
To my despair, I yet haven't found a way how to protect children even of my relatives - children that are in my radius. And I feel even more powerless when it comes to children out there in the world out of my reach.
I don't know how much you can do if children have evil parents. It's not easy to separate them. Nonetheless, it shouldn't be tolerated in society and just labeled as "misfortune" for the kids, imho.
Anyway, I think my (and your) efforts in this area will have the best shot if materialized somewhere else than in the comments on the Internet.
Regards
Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
November 28, 2013 9:41 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Sure, but it doesn't hurt to spend five minutes writing something nice, that tries to reach out, even if it's ineffective ultimately, who knows what attempts will work and not. Happy thanksgiving.
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
November 29, 2013 3:54 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Anyone reading this blog thinks they are analysing themselves. it is very funny to read the comments.
People are so desperate, I wish I could sell their IPs and adresses to GeoMarketing.
For those really wanting help from movies:
Algebra in Love - Damsells in distress
far more effective than this blog
Score: 0 (4 votes cast)
November 30, 2013 2:56 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Shut the fuck up.
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
November 30, 2013 5:42 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Doesn't mean much from one person, but as always jonny I value your truth!
I think there is some infinitesimally small percentage of our world that is worthy of your attention and that will not drive you to despair. I enjoy reading you, but I believe your Self would be more fulfilled occupying itself with the beautiful, sublime, and humorous rather than the terrifying. But where you devote your care is your choice.
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
December 1, 2013 5:43 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
And not just an infinitesimally small percentage at that. Even if nothing else, mathematics has all that truth and beauty, and do you know how vast it is? And the mathematical world is only one of the possible worlds to explore. Yes, it is far, far easier to label everything a group of people do as "evil" and leave it at that(and write line after line after line expressing the same sentiment), but the only thing it means is that you've taken the easy way out. Instead of trying to understand people, you have acted like a fucking coward.
And as for truth, he fails to recognize that his truth isn't necessarily others' truth. THERE IS NO OBJECTIVE TRUTH.
1)How is it not obvious to someone who "sees truth" that babies can't do logic? And that not bonding with their caregivers can only indicate severe dysfunction?
" By the time of our bipedal ancestor Homo ergaster, the human pelvis could no longer accommodate a well-developed infant’s skull. From this point onward, human infants have been born at a very early stage of brain development relative to other primates. The result is a much larger window of infant dependency that requires staggering amounts of parental and alloparental care.
It also means, because of neuroplasticity, that our brains are literally still wiring as we take in information from our environment — including the rich social environment. Our brains are slowly soft-wiring during our infancy, and our interaction with alloparents creates wider circles of affective bonding. Humans bond with several caregivers and are able to keep bonding indefinitely, even after we become independent."
[Source: http://www.aeonmagazine.com/living-together/how-families-and-feelings-built-human-culture]
to be continued when I fucking feel like it
Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
December 1, 2013 11:20 AM | Posted by : | Reply
My replies that go through disqus email to me don't get posted. I guess TLP isn't checking them in his email.
Now I have to do this all over again as I put a link in mine that got it into moderation.
I see you have been reading Malabou on brain plasticity. Read Baudrillard's The Intelligence of Evil which is short and beautifully written. You can find Herzog on evil on my blog URL in his The Jungle is obscene. When evil is everywhere it is invisible.Therefore, obscene.
In my review of The Counselor I am about to get there in part 2.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 1, 2013 11:22 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
In other words the subject is not evil. The object is evil. This is what Bolano is getting at in 2666 with the EVIL that is Cuidad Juarez Mexico.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 1, 2013 2:45 PM | Posted by : | Reply
do you know the norwegian tv show "brainwash" by Haral Eia?
it is on youtube and unmasks common science and media views.
search youtube for
brainwash race
brainwash violence
brainwash gender
brainwash parenting
brainwash Nature or nurture
brainwash gay straight
brainwash sex
people who love to get their mind twisted will enjoy it. it is subtitled but worth it if you are open minded.
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
December 2, 2013 9:24 AM | Posted by : | Reply
The people referenced in the AJA ads "need" to be "informed" about current events - not the way someone whose livelihood depends on certain current events (like truckers/farmers and weather) - but so they'll have something to chatter about and sound smart. It's more narcissism.
TLP is overstating the effect of media on politics - powerful people will do what they want, the all-seeing-eye just affects the theatrics they arrange while the real action happens elsewhere - but the idiocy and narcissism of the TV watching audience is very real. By the way, you can see exactly that kind of idiocy in people who discuss the latest headlines on reddit and other social media websites. Don't think the stupidity ends just because we're using new technology to feed our egos.
Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
December 2, 2013 11:12 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Is there any way to contact the author? Assuming no...
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 2, 2013 11:52 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
[email protected] or @thelastpsych via twitter.
whether or not he responds is an entirely different question.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 2, 2013 12:45 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
TLP is understating the effect of media on politics.You need to read Foucault. Carefully.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 2, 2013 11:07 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Foucault had nothing legitimate to say about the effect of media on politics, or anything else for that matter.
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
December 3, 2013 12:49 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Is that a fact.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 4, 2013 7:52 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Skip Foucault, go for Frank Herbert, Chuck Paniauk, and George Orwell. They're fiction writers, but they show how manipulated the world is. The Bene Geserit witches plotting exactly how to manipulate populations and start entire religions is pretty much a picture of how the powerful use the media to create opinion.
I think in all honesty, we live in the medieval world as described in the Dune series, where the powerful run everything, and they manipulate public opinion to make everyone believe that they are free.
Score: 1 (5 votes cast)
December 4, 2013 12:29 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I am very familiar with all your authors. They are wonderful and Dune was a favorite of mine since the 1960's. However the sequels were disappointing, very disappointing.
Foucault, Baudrillard, Virilio, Deleuze, Derrida,et al are in a totally different category with influence internationally and way beyond adolescent adoration.
Paniauc is of course exceptionally and accurate as is Orwell. But none of them have had the impact of Ayn Rand who anticipated Foucault and Baudrillard without knowing it. And you didn't mention DeLillo and Bolano who are far greater in their genius and influence. And never ever discount Lovecraft, Houellebecq and Joyce Carol Oates.
If you are going to play literary games with me, you are gonna lose.
Score: -4 (4 votes cast)
December 8, 2013 7:10 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
seymourblogger replying to Anon wrote:
"If you are going to play literary games with me, you are gonna lose."
If you are over the age of 18 and still take Ayn Rand seriously, you lose by default. Sorry.
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
December 8, 2013 8:08 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I suggest you read Zizek's essay on Rand in JARS then. He is a major intellectual philosopher of the present. Go argue with him and see if you come out alive. It is her fiction that is groundbreaking not her Objectivism which was monitored by the Brandens. If you are serious then read me here at my blog on Rand. If you just want to argue then go argue with Zizek.
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
December 8, 2013 8:10 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Sorry this is getting so screwed up. I do dislike the software TLP uses.
I suggest you read Zizek's essay on Rand in JARS then. He is a major intellectual philosopher of the present. Go argue with him and see if you come out alive. It is her fiction that is groundbreaking not her Objectivism which was monitored/engineered by the Brandens. If you are serious then read me at my blog URL above: If you just want to argue then go argue with Zizek.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 8, 2013 11:33 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Your response was hollow and redundant. You failed to address any of the valid points I raised. Your Christian Compassion, unsolicited and unwarranted, was rudely tendered at some length but when I solicit your warranted input on issues only evil women could have a motive to avoid, you want to kill the chat?
I want input from women for these issues:
140,000,000 females have genitals mutilated by their own mothers, aunts, grandmothers, etc. No comment?
106,000,000,000 children's minds mutilated by mothers' lies, shame, violence & emotional degradation. Emotional malware is being installed at the lowest level of a child's developing mind by console operators who abuse the privileged access rights / responsibilities granted to mothers by Mother Nature. The power of first access is clearly intended to ensure children have a solid base of truth they can build from but mothers fill minds with lies, exploitable values and self-defeating sentiments to make their slaves miserable, dependent and needy for life. No comment?
The rolling purge of girls by evil women (Female Emotional Mutilation). Prepubescent girls are conditioned to despise their future biological reality to set them up for slut-shaming. Women go to extreme lengths to prevent girls from revealing the truth. Lies about how Real Women feel desire, lies about sex, lies about men which make girls antisocial, misandrist, provoking, predatory, sociopathic, entitled, delusional, deceived, shamed, abused, reduced and judged to the point where they are forced to invent Personal Myths to cope. Women then ensure girls are 'protected' from making non-whore choices until they're 18. No comment?
Women's lies did to photos what they did to conversation and the human existence. Everything has been made redundant by women's demented, infantile, obsessive deceit. No comment?
Women are universally raping men with malicious illusions intended to side-step informed consent. Girls invest most of their time perfecting skill sets to bleed men dry. No comment?
The 'fairer' sex has been reduced to a grossly negative proposition for men and an unsustainable liability for Society. A meaningful relationship is not possible with those who want to deceive, abuse, leech. No comment?
Women have hijacked the biological mechanism which has protected the young of every mammal species for hundreds of thousands of years. Women stole cute to exploit the biological instincts triggered in men to care for and protect cute children, who - unlike women - are in need of that protection. Women want protection from retaliation. Women condition men to be pedophiles by associating cute with arousal. No comment?
Marriage is the infantile Solution to the Toddler bumhurt of women led to believe they had an entitlement to enslave men for life with temporary illusions. When men no longer appear to value what never had value and no longer exists, women bind them to their side with wedlock. Domestic violence ensues but humans have a Right to be free. No comment?
I don't know how much you can do if children have evil parents. It's not easy to separate them.
Yes, because selfless leeches use putrid love to latch onto the living with the intent of sucking the life out of them before disposing of the worthless carcass with Christian Compassion:
"It's not you. It's me."
I don't know that anyone can do anything but if you truly wanted to help rather than smear, start by telling the truth...to you.
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
December 9, 2013 1:28 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I know I shouldn't try to respond to you that I am doomed to failure.
"The rolling purge of girls by evil women-female genital mutilation."
Actually women in the western world are doing this to themselves at $2500 a pop. For some - not all - of the same reasons. To tighten themselves up, and look better. Yes sick but plastic surgeons have to eat and pay their mortgage you know. First tho is that women's sexuality is a terrifying thing to most males and well it should be. Once they are on that path to exploring all aspects of their sexuality they are voracious. Please don't ask me to go into detail about this but in certain places it is all embedded in the comment sections. The Somalian filmmaker Ousmane Sembene made a film about it in his last years (80 or so) and it details a mother who doesn't want to do this as she has suffered and doesn't want her daughter to suffer. Her daughter is furious at her because this means she is not eligible for marriage when she comes of age because men only want women who are cut. The women in the village try to snatch her (no pun intended)to take her and get it done and her mother has to confine herself to the house/hut and not let her daughter out of her sight and the daughter tries to get out of her site. You see the girls feel it is a rite of passage - and it is in that culture - and they won't be real women if they don't have it done. So it's not just the mother thing, it is embedded in the entire culture, and I am sure you know how very conservative rural cultures are.
"Women's lies did to photos what they did to conversation and the human existence."
I am not at all sure what this question means or is asking.
"Women are universally raping men with malicious illusions intended to side-step informed consent. Girls invest most of their time perfecting skill sets to bleed men dry. No comment?"
If women are doing this they are doing it with the complicity of men. I'm not saying this complicity is conscious or not, but it is complicity. It's true that most young men can be led around by their dick. Later on they should know better but both are equally involved in this. IMO.If women are creating artifice and illusions, and I agree with you that they are, if they don't men ignore them. If they do they are Jezebels. Catch 22.
"The 'fairer' sex has been reduced to a grossly negative proposition for men and an unsustainable liability for Society"
Most women are working partners. That used to be true that the wife/mother was supposed to be home taking care of the children.
Now the child too often wears a key around her neck or is smothered in after school activities and extra curricular social events she is expected to attend and her mother drives her around. This also is sick.IMO.
"Women have hijacked the biological mechanism which has protected the young of every mammal species for hundreds of thousands of years. Women stole cute to exploit the biological instincts triggered in men to care for and protect cute children, who - unlike women - are in need of that protection. Women want protection from retaliation. Women condition men to be pedophiles by associating cute with arousal. No comment?"
I have no argument with you on this one.
"Marriage is the infantile Solution to the Toddler bumhurt of women led to believe they had an entitlement to enslave men for life with temporary illusions. "
Yes but again men are complicit. If they don't then their social position may be endangered or they may have to come up with an alternative lifestyle that isn't what they want. Another Catch 22.
I have had the pleasure to know a few families that were not like this, but only a very few. Wherever I go I see what you see and I have learned to ignore it, be indifferent, stay away as much as possible. Supermarket shopping in the Ozarks was pure hell for me. I have never seen such socially accepted brutality towards children in my life. Not in the city ghettos even. Just hatred.The husbands and wives or partners hated each other and hated the children and didn't take care of them. But it is impossible almost to take care of children when you have never been taken care of yourself. The fruit never falls very far from the tree. I had a sister who tortured me for years about the way she treated my niece. At some point I began to see that my niece was complicit. She is 54 now and still complicit and a total mess. She was a darling toddler but my sister knew she could torture and torture me by ruining her child, and for years I was complicit in letting her do this to me. Just as has been done to you by your mother. At some point you have to choose to continue being tortured or just stop.
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
December 9, 2013 9:13 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Will you put a link or better directions to what you're talking about with a good critical essay on Ayn Rand? Rand's characters were one-dimensional and the movement of the story rather pedestrian when compared to great works of literature. It does have it's place in history, clearly, if only for the influence it had. But I'm curious to see how it would be taken seriously. I'd be really interested in reading that.
The Zizek I read is a Marxist who is not at all promoting Rand's work. If anything he is saying her work is so entirely one-dimensional that it turns on itself and ends up as a critique of capitalism. But I may not be reading what you're referring to.
(This is neither a sarcastic or mean-spirited post. I notice there's a lot of fighting on these long threads and really, I just want to know. My dismissal of Rand isn't meant to irritate or insult you, but only to let you know where I'm coming from.)
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
December 10, 2013 1:31 AM | Posted by : | Reply
^ Zizek has written a good deal about Rand but to my recollection none of it was positive save for his praising of her popularity (a model he imitates, incidentally--Zizek ain't the brightest bulb out there, either, folks, he's just among the loudest public intellectuals in circulation). Regardless his whole spiel is entirely antithetical to Rand's and if the two met in a room the one would likely spit on the other. He's an agglomeration of almost the entire tradition of continental philosophy dating back to Hegel and Rand thought of herself as precisely the opposite, save for the architects of laissez-faire. Interestingly, she tried to do what Marx tried to do (invent a new thesis which was not in the least tainted with ideologies or false notions of existence) and, while both failed, I'd sooner shake hands with Marx than Rand were they alive. At least one wasn't a drug addict.
I like the media analyses on this blog but some of the attempts to personally engage the reader are lacking to say the least. Media is now and likely always has been a method for reifying people into certain social groups so as to produce and reproduce comforting ideologies as civilization goes to hell in a handbasket. Hasn't this been said since the nineteenth century?
It is sad that people take what you've called "the glowing lie" (probably an unattributed quote, but I like it nevertheless) for the truth simply because they can't be bothered to crack a book. Sure, books are prone to falseness, but so are blogs...
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
December 10, 2013 1:37 AM | Posted by : | Reply
^ and what the fuck is that post about women about?
???
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
December 10, 2013 1:55 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Your comment is full of a mess of stuff I couldn't even begin to have the motivation to untangle in order to reply. Your judgments of Zizek and Rand are pretty immature and if you haven't read Zizek's Less Than Nothing, which I doubt you could get past the first few pages, then you have no idea how brilliant he is. You are probably put off by his non-linear style. When you read Zizek he is thinking on the printed page and you must think along with him. He is not telling you anything in an authoritative voice, but he is inviting you to think along with him.
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
December 10, 2013 3:19 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Her daughter is furious at her because this means she is not eligible for marriage when she comes of age because men only want women who are cut.
The truth is right in front of you. Eligible for marriage? Men who know so little about women, they're about to marry one, are going to defer to authority sources. Men only want women who are cut? This is ridiculous. When women claim they act to please men...Women will do nearly anything to please, except please.
She wants to be cut. Men 'want' cut brides. The selfless victims of a child-mutilating tribe are terrified of failing to conform.
sorayamire.org/the_book.asp "...a ritual of mutilation handed down from mother to daughter and protected by the word culture." (The Girl With Three Legs)
No human has ever been eligible for marriage but every leech that wants to be carried is demanding to be euthanised. Men don't want to marry. Women don't want to work. It's degrading to have to tell the world what children know, but women are all confused. If men had Self, they'd tell whores to go fuck themselves. So men need to be broken-in to enable leeches (mothers & wives) to saddle them. Boys are made to value the approval, pride and pleasure of those who cannot make anyone feel good because they sell sex. All a leech can do is make everyone feel bad, preying on empathy, playing the victim, poisoning children's minds.
All pain is contrived by leeches who need to manufacture Demand for the sex and comfort (illusory pain relief) they want to Supply.
"From the whore to the Pope, there is a mass of such scum."
- Karl Marx (on the service industry)
Anyone who shatters at a mean word has a mother that belongs in the ground. Men need to fight, women need to marry, boys need to impress, girls need to be mutilated, everyone needs to lie, violence is needed to teach, consumption needs resources, wars need to be fought, the species needs extinction and all need can be traced to the non-biological need for infantilization. Mothers who need love are a sulfuric Evil that wouldn't be tolerated in Hell.
Demons may not have much, but they have their pride.
_______
Score: 2 (6 votes cast)
December 10, 2013 5:33 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
"If you just want to argue then go argue with Zizek."
Tell you what...you bring Slavoj Žižek to the forum and I'll debate Ayn Rand with him. Deal?
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 10, 2013 3:39 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Thanks to this great man of spirit called Dr UNOKO which I don't know how to thank him for the good work he has Don for me and family which I want to share my testimony with to you all so I was married to Hassan and my name is Asia for six years now he left me with two kids with know reason which I don't know what to do.so one day i was in my friends place when I exposed my pain to her about my depression which I have be looking for who to help me out of it then my friend called me closer to her self telling me on how she got this great man of spirit who helped her found her way to get her husband back then I ask of his contact she quickly go and get her computer and gave me his Email ID and his number so,that is how I contacted him for a help. And now am so happy with my family and with a happy home if you are in such pain kindly Via Email [email protected] or call +2348103508204 have faith in him and he will help you
Asia
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
December 10, 2013 5:07 PM | Posted by : | Reply
"You are probably put off by his non-linear style."
A fanboy. You'd think philosophy wouldn't need that species of admirer.
Zizek begs you not to take him seriously.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
December 10, 2013 6:26 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
One is over at the last psychiatrist at reddit. See U there?
Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
December 11, 2013 1:47 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
If women are creating artifice and illusions, and I agree with you that they are, if they don't men ignore them. If they do they are Jezebels. Catch 22.
Whoa. Not getting the attention of preferred men is not a catch-22 that justifies rape. The men they prefer say No to their reality. There are plenty who will say Yes. They don't want those guys.
But even if all men ignored them, it still isn't catch-22. You're talking like a rapist. Those who do not value truth are incapable of logical thought. This is linked to the infantile corruption of minds that subscribe to the Matriarchal need for power (lies used to convince and force used to persuade). Led to believe they can cheat to win, they destroy the entire game. You can't tell them they're just shooting themselves in the foot. They think cheating is optimal gameplay so everything you say is sour grapes.
An offender attempting to suppress sexual thoughts of an inappropriate kind would generate greater subsequent numbers of intrusive thoughts of the kind sought to be suppressed... (Wegner, Schneider, Carter, & White, 1987).
Repression > Obsession. The unnatural perversion that is the product of mothers projecting their perverted shame at children.
This blog is exceptional. This doctor knows her shit.
thesexaddictedbrain.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/12/treating-sex-addiction-the-neuroscience-of-integrity.html
...sexual addiction begins in trauma and without intervention, ends in moral bankruptcy. In psychological parlance, it is an obsessive-compulsive need to medicate pain and anesthetize life. It is about shame and the absence of grace, or said another way, dis-grace. Life becomes all about themselves - meeting their needs and in the truest narcissistic sense of the word, finding and hoarding other people as objects, who will constantly and consistently sing their praise or at the very least, confirm their existence. They cannot be alone for any length of time, for they are only seemingly whole or worthwhile when in the presence of others. Their self-worth is solely derived from others, and their days are filled with shame, despair, despondency, and moral degradation. They are in a nutshell, leading a life devoid of integrity.
I spent a decade like that. So needy. It sounds like every girl I've ever met. Mothers are morally bankrupt because girls refuse to identify as victims. Tempted by the lure of men willing to treat them Right, the Toddler whores buy into their own lies and forget they're broken, delusional, deceitful, wretched and mutilated.
They tell themselves they're God's gift to men. They embrace their narcissism. They celebrate it. "You better treat me Right or watch someone else do it for you." They don't want equality. They want to be whores.
_______________
Mothers shame children and turn them into narcissists. The need to create a false image to hide the shame of our true Self begins with clothes. Forced to conceal what isn't shameful, we lie to avoid punishment for having fun. Girls use makeup to avoid judging for looking natural. We're conditioned to prize what makes us miserable (lies, violence, imposition > all evil is the product of early childhood trauma and our whore mothers' infernal lies). What is kept concealed can't be shown to be invalid. We deny the untenable reality which disgusted our trusted mirror and we pursue the false images that meet with our trusted mirrors' approval. It's a problem because our trusted mirrors are liars.
TREATMENT must include both discussion and direction on how to go about living a life of integrity. It will change your frontal lobe and your life.
Truth. It's a little difficult in a world that shoots the messenger.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
December 11, 2013 2:39 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
If women are creating artifice and illusions, and I agree with you that they are, if they don't men ignore them. If they do they are Jezebels. Catch 22.
From that one sentence of mine and your reply is this:
Whoa. Not getting the attention of preferred men is not a catch-22 that justifies rape.
So you take my sentence and jump to rape. Now that is your association. It is a very loose association. Extremely loose. YOur thinking is dangerous to yourself and would be to me were I anywhere near you. If I were, I would run. If I could.
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
December 11, 2013 7:06 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Creating artifice and illusions is rape. That women don't want to believe their lies are malicious doesn't mean their lies have value. It just means they are infantile rapists who don't value consent.
They value deceiving me. I don't value being deceived by women who know I will not give my consent if they are honest. They have no value. It's ridiculous that I have to explain to you why I have a problem with a world that lies to impress because they don't want to be impressive. They have no value. They're selling their needy.
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
December 11, 2013 11:45 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
And what about you? If they read what you say here, would they consider even speaking to you without the safety of a thousand kilometers, several walls and a large thick monitor between you and them?
Or are you always honest outside of the digital world? Do you walk up to a woman in a bar and explain to her in minute detail why she is a toddler-whore, her mother is a whore-whore, and that MAC greensmoke had better be completely natural skintone or its rape by deception?
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 11, 2013 4:19 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
"Creating artifice and illusions is rape"
No Jonny you are not going to get away with spinning the word "rape" into artifice and illusions.
This is projection to an excess. And I know you know the meaning of projection as a defense mechanism. You project "rape" into just about everything. That says far more about you than about whatever it is you are linking it to. It is clear that you have been "raped" in many different ways probably physically and certainly mentally by women and probably by men also. So now you are "raping" us in every different way you can. The whole thing is linguistic. I am reading you through Lacan.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 11, 2013 5:11 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I'm afraid you missed. I'm Phelt, he's Jon.
Unless you miss-referred to him and did mean me, but my comment was calling hypocrisy so I don't think that's the case.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 11, 2013 5:20 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I knew but I meant for both of you to read it. Jonny will get it.
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
December 11, 2013 5:38 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I suppose I understand, although I was really only interested in noting the hypocrisy. I'm aware that it is by no means a counterargument, but Jon would have to produce an argument in the first place for that to be an issue.
But being lectured on artifice and illusion by a person who maintains an online persona that would find the outside world unsurvivable? I just find it a little ironic. Who would take a lecture on lying seriously when it is given by a liar? And why would we ever trust their proposed solutions?
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
December 11, 2013 5:42 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Maybe you just haven't been around here long enough to get to know jonny. He made a lot of money - a lot - playing poker. Yes he knows how to lie better than those playing poker know how to lie. He had to learn that for survival.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 11, 2013 5:51 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I don't see your point.
My comment is simply directed toward the fact that Jon is just as guilty of the things he hates particular women for. He says to us:
"I don't value being deceived by women who know I will not give my consent if they are honest."
And I say to him:
"Would those women give consent to you if they knew who you are here?"
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 11, 2013 6:11 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Sorry U don't see my point. I'm not going to explain. I can't reinvent the wheel for you.
jonny will never attract the kind of woman he says he would be interested in because that kind of woman would never be interested in him. She would run as far from him as she could get. Can you imagine any woman listening to his rants on woman, whores, toddler whores etc unless he had something she wanted to get out of him. That would not be a natural healthy relationship she would be after would it?
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
December 11, 2013 6:31 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I didn't ask you to explain... Or reinvent the wheel... You do recall that you started talking to me on this one right, not the other way around?
And no, I really can't imagine a woman being willing to put up with his crap, which is also kind of funny. You say he learned to lie as a matter of survival, but it's going to kill him soon enough if he doesn't find another way.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 11, 2013 11:36 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
And what about you?
What about me? I have no need. So now that we have dismissed your infantile deflection, what's the status update on your need to Rest In Peace? You swallowed your whore mother's lies telling you how Real Women must degrade men and children so they respect your true worth, but your suffering is merely worth terminating.
i.imgur.com/19wuEca.png (infantile parents breed life to enslave)
If they read what you say here, would they consider even speaking to you...
Who could possibly care what malicious, infantile whores consider? I don't consider their inhumane existence of leaching to be valid. You thought I'd consider their malicious opinions, feelings and need for consideration to be worth a spit? I don't.
Do you walk up to a woman in a bar and explain to her in minute detail why she is a toddler-whore...
Why would I tell someone they are something that they are not? Why the hell would I walk up to a woman in a bar? I'm not one of your stupid johns. Why would I pursue whores who need men to act first so they can frame [doing what they want] as a favour?
This is how I interact with girls. More importantly, this is how girls interact with men and children. They think they're shrewd to try and force everyone they need into suffering to please them. They're selfless leeches screaming "ME ME ME". They are not selfish. It's insanely self-defeating, as this example shows:
i.imgur.com/p84zbGm.png (1/2)
i.imgur.com/nwHwMD1.png (2/2)
Just interacting with this world of antisocial needy is degrading. My entire life, everyone has screamed at me, wanting a piece of me. Making me feel bad when I couldn't. I like to help people. That was my tragedy. This is not a world that can be helped. They inflict suffering to make children think they need to be slaves to please leeches. When you please them? More and more suffering.
I speak to everyone with integrity and that requires offending many of them because this is a world of screaming evil and I will not validate their malice by pretending to ignore it. So if you have a problem with being called a whore, the solution isn't offence. The solution is to stop being a whore. Selling sex for emotional vulnerability is evil. Selling sex for money is neutral. You're not a prostitute or a hooker (who aren't motivated to inflict suffering).
You're an insufferable whore. You exist six feet above where your need for love should be. Where is the love? Who the hell cares?
Children cannot eat your whore sentiments. Where is the value?
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
December 11, 2013 11:54 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
No Jonny you are not going to get away with spinning the word "rape" into artifice and illusions.
Omg. Would you amoral lunatics stop imagining I'm inventing new rules and definitions simply because you're ignorant? These are your rules! Sex enabled by cosmetic makeup is Rape by fraud.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_deception
Rape by deception is a crime in which the perpetrator has the victim's sexual consent and compliance, but gains it through deception or fraudulent statements or actions. The act is known in Tennessee and California as rape by fraud.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deception
Deception serves to distort or omit the complete truth. Intent is critical with regard to deception. Intent differentiates between deception and an honest mistake. The five primary forms of deception are Lies, Equivocations, Concealments, Exaggerations, Understatements.
I am not redefining the English language. You just don't know the correct meanings of words. There's no justification for ignorance. There's no mitigation for imagining your lies and rape have value.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
December 12, 2013 12:14 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
So "Sex enabled by cosmetic makeup is Rape by fraud." So if I wear makeup I am raping the man by fraud.
Wait a minute. I am reading artifice and illusion as adornment, make up, sexual clothing, seductive gestures, etc. So that is rape by deception eh. Am I doing the raping literally? Or just metaphorically?
My experience is that whether I wear make up or not has no effect on the men around me. Maybe that's because I am too old.
BTW I was on reddit and found a wonderful youtube video of a great young Chinese woman doing Chinese language lessons on youtube for free. And she is really good. If you ever wanted to learn some Chinese try it.
https(colon)//w w w (dot)youtube( dot)com/watch?v=OZyQXDn5RPE&list=SPB6OS7jfsIYSLvBnkcdS3X5PlBvmVGYyp&index=1
Now is she raping by being so wonderful in teaching Chinese. She is spontaneous, engaging, very competent (I have studied some Chinese) and appears to be a lovely person. Tell me your opinion. Please. Gee is that please I just used "raping?"
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 12, 2013 12:26 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Jon [and you ARE a Jon, don't lie to yourself], I can only deflect an attack, something you've done only just now. My question was in earnest.
How can you justify deceiving a woman about who you actually are, when you damn those same women for creating a deception with no more than paint that a toddler could see through? Is a lie about a personality somehow more forgivable than a lie about appearance?
The rest of your post isn't really worth reading, I'm not going to click your links or indulge your fantasies, try to keep on topic in the future.
Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
December 12, 2013 12:34 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
jonny was justifying deceiving a woman. Did I miss something?
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 12, 2013 10:13 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Well, from my perspective based on the definition he produced, yeah pretty much.
By failing to show the woman in question the persona he presents here he is willfully deceiving her by omitting parts of the truth. If he were then to have sex with her it would seem to fit the definition, assuming of course that the woman in question would not give consent had she read the content here.
Of course the flip side of that is that the persona he presents here is the false one, making Jon an epic troll certainly, but not a rapist by deception as he hasn't yet sexed us up. Assuming of course he doesn't use this site for hookups.
This does raise an interesting question with respect to our time on the net and interaction between each other. Considering the previous argument, have I raped by deception by not introducing my last to Awes0meG4m3r69? Or is this acceptable because while I consider some of his actions to fall outside social acceptability (desecrating corpses ect.), those personality aspects are more fabrications to "do as the Romans do".
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
December 12, 2013 2:22 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
So "Sex enabled by cosmetic makeup is Rape by fraud." So if I wear makeup I am raping the man by fraud.
Can't you read? I didn't make the rules.
I am reading artifice and illusion as adornment, make up, sexual clothing, seductive gestures, etc.
I don't really care how you read words because you don't get to redefine the English language. Artifice and illusion is misrepresentation and deception.
Am I doing the raping literally? Or just metaphorically?
You are literally invalidating the consent of those you deceive for that reason.
My experience is that whether I wear make up or not has no effect on the men around me. Maybe that's because I am too old.
Your experience is of course, valid for the entire globe but if you didn't need to wear makeup, you wouldn't. So you're in denial. In this picture, a homely girl on the left turns into a rapist on the right. You can appreciate the degree of deception and why men would be raped by her intent to deceive them.
i.imgur.com/9QamrX4.png
Now is she raping by being so wonderful in teaching Chinese. She is spontaneous, engaging, very competent (I have studied some Chinese) and appears to be a lovely person. Tell me your opinion.
My opinion is that you're an idiot. Aside from the confused delusion that there is value in speaking anything but the global language,how is she raping?
Rape by deception is a crime in which the perpetrator has the victim's sexual consent and compliance, but gains it through deception or fraudulent statements or actions.
Score: 0 (4 votes cast)
December 13, 2013 10:03 PM | Posted by : | Reply
You people are beyond help.
Score: 2 (4 votes cast)
December 13, 2013 11:11 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Does that include you too?
Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
December 15, 2013 7:34 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Compromise becomes impossible, as a simple example, when a "moderate" "thinks" there should be more restrictions on guns, they want gun owners to give up something they want very much-- in exchange for nothing.
Not exactly true:
1) Presumptively mad gunman slays children
2) "Liberals" demand punitive gun controls
3) "Conservatives" demand punitive madman controls
==> punishment all around, e.g., New York's SAFE Act.
Punishing people is about all the government can accomplish…
when rewarding corporate supporters is the way politicians pay the media tolls for delivery of their sound bites.
Both species of politician are deeply committed to "saving lives"
(but don't ask an economist about the "opportunity costs" of funding the punishments… much less request a Benefit/Cost Analysis based on a plausible valuation of human life in a society that shifts its rewards towards the punitive).
lose lose
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
December 15, 2013 7:35 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Nice analysis in The Matrix. "There is no outside." - Foucault
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
December 15, 2013 7:44 PM | Posted by : | Reply
PS: Not to mention, as soon as you identify a label for an ideological perspective that mostly suits your personal value system, "bad actors" are hard at work pulling the rug out from under your feet by redefining the label?
Used to be, I would have been called a "Classical Liberal"Then I had to call myself a "Libertarian"
Now I'm afraid to call myself.
- spontanopoesy courtesy bonze blayk 9/15/13
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 15, 2013 10:35 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I found jonny's, semyourbloggers's, and Phelt's discussion of artifice and strumpets fascinating. I don't have the same level of rhetoric or knowledge as you all do; so please bear with me.
"Creating artifice and illusions is rape." The law you cite very well defends your premise. But you seem to take your definitions beyond the realm of the extreme: "Artifice and illusion is misrepresentation and deception." Sure, cosmetics, 'hot girl mannerisms', and sexy clothing all deceive. But then so do men's tuxedos, cologne, gelled up hair, and any demonstration of power or wealth. You cast your net so wide that ANY aspect of artifice or presentation or grooming falls into the realm of deception. And that pretty much makes all of humanity whores. You may be right.
It's the nature of the social contract to acknowledge the shortcomings of artifice and many of the problems that you correctly point out. That's why certain groups of people attempt to connect with something deeper and more meaningful. Whenever I meet people, I immediately acknowledge their appearance in my head. I assume they're wearing make up, displaying symbols of power, etc--it's part of the game we play. I also assume that everyone does this--I assume when I go out in New York City, that every woman I encounter is dolled up--and so I never feel deceived even though in a technical sense it is deception.
You don't seem to offer any solution. I'm going to attempt to and draw on Alone's (WarGames) advice: 'the only winning move is to not play'. I think the solution (at least for me) is to acknowledge the artifice and surround myself with people who don't attempt to shroud themselves in it--or at the least people who place little value on it. I think it's important to focus on the intellectual and emotional and spiritual and to move away from the sexual and physical.
But now I'm getting into gobbliegook; so I'm going to stop. I look forward to the next round of rhetoric and sophistry!
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
December 16, 2013 12:30 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Nice. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Would Roman history have been different if Cleopatra's nose had been longer? (Is a beautiful nose artifice and seductive illusion? Better slice it to make it ugly for jonny.))Or if she hadn't put kohl on her eyes. Now there was a woman who didn't need to be taken care of. She ruled Egypt, murdered her brother to gt rid of a co rule, spoke about 12 dialects all up and down the Nile, knew all about her subjects crops and exports, planned strategies with Caesar and Antony.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 17, 2013 5:23 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Sure, cosmetics, 'hot girl mannerisms', and sexy clothing all deceive. But then so do men's tuxedos, cologne, gelled up hair, and any demonstration of power or wealth. You cast your net so wide that ANY aspect of artifice or presentation or grooming falls into the realm of deception. And that pretty much makes all of humanity whores.
Yes, but - and this is the point I've been trying to make in a number of inept comments I can't bear to post - women don't need to be whores and they don't need to lie. That men are lying whores as well is irrelevant because they don't want to be; women force them to be. Women don't need to manipulate male desire. Women don't need to steal children's biological protection mechanism to exploit male protective instincts. Women don't need to be evil leeches. Their needs aren't biological.
If a woman wants sex, all she needs to do is state the fact. Cosmetic illusions are required not to enable women to acquire a biological need, but to allow women to induce inflated desire in men with the explicit intent of exploiting the artificial arousal. Their motives are brazen malice. It's pure evil.
"Yes, yes, yes, YES....NO!
Stop right there
I gotta know right now
Before we go any further
Do you love me
Will you love me forever
Do you need me
Will you never leave me
Will you make me so happy
For the rest of my life
Will you take me away
And will you make me your wife
Do you love me
Will you love me forever
Do you need me
Will you never leave me
Will you make me so happy
For the rest of my life
Will you take me away
And will you make me your wife
I gotta know right now
Before we go any further
Do you love me
Will you love me forever?"
Women aren't competing with each other for sex.
Women are competing with each other for sex appeal. They're horribly broken, courtesy of broken women who broke them, who were broken by broken women. Men can intervene and end the cycle by protecting girls from women's shame, but men are pretty badly broken themselves. I think it all needs to be shut down and by it, I mean the species.
Tell me these aren't rape:
i.imgur.com/x7HBa70.png
i.imgur.com/YH3gKN7.png
i.imgur.com/iIV3PyA.jpg
i.imgur.com/urIjwJx.jpg
i.imgur.com/2Z6eT0q.jpg
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
December 18, 2013 7:16 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Is a beautiful nose artifice and seductive illusion?
Until recently, I would have refused to consider the possibility that you weren't being petulant and stubbornly feigning such obtuse confusion about the nature, motive and effect of artifice and illusion. But I've been in so many conversations with girls displaying such infantile obstinance of late, I'm forced to consider the possibility that women are operating in an entirely unforeseen realm of lunacy. This girl tried to convince me the other day that a padded bra was ethical in ways breast augmentation was not because "fake breasts are fake". She couldn't be made to understand that she was the victim of her own labeling.
For the benefit of preschoolers and literate women, a beautiful nose will be artifice when it is artificial. It will be an illusion when it is illusory. I can see how that would be confusing in a world where God is good, No means Yes, deceit is nice and children love their mothers; however, if this is the real life (where fantasy has a 0% historical win rate in head-to-head clashes with reality), then I'm afraid your obfuscation of malice with ignorance represents an implausible denial of your choosing to embrace insanity by valuing the lies your mothers told you. In reality, truth is the default, lies are the corruption, mothers are malicious whores and nearly every girl living a life of non-contribution is literally delusional enough to imagine her lies and suffering are prized by her victims.
But rape isn't made acceptable by virtue of guys' acceptance of it (as one girl asserted, rationalising doing what she wanted to do by pointing to men's willingness to pay for rape as proof that being raped by her is what men prefer).
What is deceptive is what deceives. What deceives is malicious, by definition. Malice is self-defeating in a world where human fortunes rise and fall together. These are absolute truths.
Score: 0 (6 votes cast)
December 27, 2013 1:02 PM | Posted by : | Reply
This "jonny" fellow really has a lot of special needs.
Score: 1 (5 votes cast)
December 27, 2013 3:50 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Yes well he grew up as a child in one of those religious prisons in Australia I believe. Children of God or something. Literally a prisoner deprived of education, his mother a "whore" as women were chattel, etc. He escaped and ran away as a preteen, found himself alone, no education etc. I told him his only out was to turn it into art. Perhaps write about it in some way.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 27, 2013 4:32 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
How do you know all this about him?
Some of jonny's ideas are quite aggressive. But when others appeal to me, I find myself quite frightened. For example, he says "women [induce] inflated desire in men with the explicit intent of exploiting the artificial arousal." I agree very much with this. But jonny goes on to say that "their motives are brazen malice. It's pure evil." I think pure evil is a bit of a stretch. These ideas aren't necessarily self evident "absolute truths". Rather, I think some women may simply be misguided and don't know any better way of living. And I don't think most men would hesitate to use power, money, status--anything really to take advantage of women and everyone.
Rather than concluding that women or whores and evil, etc etc, I conclude that all people could probably do with a more compassion, more honesty, and less artifice.
Alone has said in various posts (paraphrasing) that dismissing someone's ideas by the basis of hypocrisy or status or because someone is a child is a foolish thing to do. And I tend to agree. I think regardless of jonny's intent and problems, there is still much I can learn from him simply because he's probably not a sheep.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
December 27, 2013 4:41 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I know this about him because he told us one time.He is terribly damaged but quite a singular person. Since I have discarded therapy as a cure but only a coping mechanism devised by The Matrix, I side with Foucault who was influenced by Artaud on this. Madness is not madness if there is The Work. In Artaud's case there was The Work for example. I see this as Jonny's only possibility in the world coming from such damage. Damaged people are dangerous. Make dangerous art instead.
I also sent him the radical link to Young Girl written and conceptualized by a collective in Europe. Jonny's concepts on women are the same as Young Girl but not as intellectually solid as theirs, but intuitively correct. This is what hooks you, the intuitive correctness of much of what he says. The problem is that it gets mixed up in the stew of one of his rants that is repetitious and boring. He needs to learn to write better and for that learning to occur he needs to read really really good writers. Alone often is so dead center that s/he awes me. But not so complete in thinking as Baudrillard.
BTW you all should know about the Global Center for Advanced Studies just forming. Awesome people teaching there and lots online, very affordable and will include advanced degrees and NO DEBT.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
December 27, 2013 4:46 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I'm going to have to chew that over for a little bit. I've been looking for some of the authors that influenced Alone's thinking. Foucault, Artaud, Baudrillard--are they worth reading? People throw out the name Zizek too. On a thread somewhere a few weeks ago, someone mentioned that the Stoics were worth reading; so I'm making my way through Seneca and Marcus Aurelius. When I have more time, I'm going to brush up on my Latin and translate myself. Do you have any other suggestions? Any specific place to start?
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 27, 2013 5:10 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I'm partial to starting with Foucault as much of him as possible. His work will take all that you already know and just change the Order of it, not the subject matter, but the Discourse you have learned it in and the analysis of that Dominating Discourse. This is Alone's problem. S/He is still writing - thinking - in the Dominating Discourse of classical Hegelian dialectics. After about 9 months straight of Foucault I went to Diane Rubenstein's This Is Not A President and then on to Baudrillard's Forget Foucault which you cannot appreciate nearly so much without being grounded in Foucault and Nietzsche's essay on Genealogy of Morals,where Foucault got his genealogical thinking from. Foucault's rigorous reasoning and beautiful prose makes this building structure very worth it. He was reading Seneca when he was dying. Learning Latin is a long process, so I would go with the best translaters. It would be fascinating but a very long, perhaps lifetime long, detour. Unfortunately no one has the time now as crushing things are on the way. Zizek of course is wonderful, and he is another ball of wax. But wait for him as he will take you into a maze that you can't get out of unless you are solidly planted.
Baudrillard is the philosophical heir to Nietzsche. Rand is his fictional heir. Babette Babich, philosophy at Fordham faculty is the great Nietzsche scholar of our time since Hannah Arendt.
And do check out the Global Center for Advanced Studies as you can audit online or register for summer courses in person ($500 per course and there are 3 of them coming all sound wonderful with great professors)if you are interested in degrees and certifications to keep up requirements. They have a facebook page for you to start with.
Stick around here as it is interesting. Alone is really and truly unique among psychiatrists, who are mostly med people. He seems to be to have been psychoanalytically trained but I am not sure.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 30, 2013 8:58 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Thanks, I'll keep your suggestions in mind! I'm a little busy working on my MD to take any courses or pursue any other certifications but I will definitely find time for some 'light' reading!
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
December 30, 2013 8:15 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Nope, backwards. The Elitist Superstructure is using the media to create consensus around what they are going to do anyway. It's about defining the range of acceptable opinion, the things that are just to crazy to talk about. Pay attention to how people talk about a political issue, pick one. You'll find that absolutely nobody will have an opinion outside of the window. (http://www.mackinac.org/OvertonWindow#Explanation) In other words, outside of a given range, no one will publicly voice that opinion.
Take something like like the Duck Dynasty situation. The opinions run along two threads. Position #1: Phil said something mean and nasty and must be punished. Position #2: Punishing Phil for saying something mean and nasty is persecution. What's outside the window? Is it OK to silence the voices who say that saying mean, nasty things should be punished? Is it unreasonable to allow mean nasty things to be printed if it might offend someone? Any of those opinions are possible. It's even possible that someone thinks that the problem is gays being public. None of those opinions will be offered. It's outside of the window.
But who sets the Window? the media. At first it's shocking, as the media first starts to tackle a topic. In the late 1970's the idea of gay being remotely acceptable was unthinkable. You can google gay and WKRP Cincinati if you don't believe me -- they built a whole episode around the idea that the mere accusation of gay would naturally make a man jump off of a roof. Then, in the 1980's 1990's it was common to have a character come out. Ellen was one. Now, it's not even weird. The original state is now unthinkable. The debate is now "marriage and divorce" not "should this be allowed at all". Overton Window in culture. I think the change in this case is a good thing. We should be inclusive, but you see my point. The OW moved because the media pushed the limits. The media told us what to think. It's a neutral force, as it depends on what it's being used for. But that's how your opinion was literally handed to you.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
January 5, 2014 6:32 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Take something like like the Duck Dynasty situation. The opinions run along two threads
I would argue that the appropriate opinion to have concerning Duck Dynasty is "who is Duck Dynasty" followed by "I don't need to have an opinion on this thing."
The media aren't the propaganda arm of some nefarious, shadowy forces, but entreprises seeking profit. When they present something to you under the pretense that it has any importance, they do so armed with a set of assumptions backed by millions of dollar of market research.
They think "this is what will get people to watch." I'll Occam razor it and say that, for them, there is no other motive. There need not be any other.
Hence, given an abrasive media story, the TLP questions : what does the fact that this is what you care about says about you? What assumptions did those that presented this to you made when they selected this for you?
These questions aren't trivial. For these companies, there's literally billions at stake.
I understand the attractiveness of positing the existence of an "Elitist superstructure" as a giver of initial impetus for a change in opinion. It makes things simple. But it removes you from the equation, which may or may not be the point.
It would be as if you weren't responsible for the content that was presented to you. But we wished for it.
---
Here's an unrelated-related thought. Do you think your opinions matter? I don't mean from the perspective of the system as a whole, but in an abstract sense. Are your own opinions important to you, do you think it matters for somebody to have well thought out opinions, that they say something important about them, define them?
Score: 2 (4 votes cast)
January 5, 2014 6:34 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I do like your comment. Thank you for taking the time to compose it.
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
February 22, 2014 8:32 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
You do realize that you are LITERALLY exactly the person Alone is maligning don't you?
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
February 27, 2014 11:11 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
This "jonny" fellow really has a lot of special needs.
A lot? You couldn't even identify a single one.
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
February 28, 2014 12:25 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Literally a prisoner deprived of education, his mother a "whore" as women were chattel, etc. He escaped and ran away as a preteen, found himself alone, no education etc.
No, women weren't chattel. Women were running things in the CoG. Girls might have been chattel but from where I sat, they sure seemed to be willing participants. Women held the power for the same reason they hold power everywhere, they control first access to children's minds. My mother was no victim, she's pure evil. I was bred for utility and what rendered me unsuitable for my intended purpose was my troubled status. I was declared insane and exorcised in these transparent spectacles that were clearly intended to embarrass me into conformity but I despised everyone so I was immune (whereas in high school, I went from loving reading to hating it in about 30 seconds when a girl turned up her nose at my book; and these were genuine feelings).
I ran away at eight, returned by police. I was a prisoner but I was chained by Society's laws which declare children to be the property of their parents (until 14, the minimum age they can work so I had to wait until then). The government was paying huge amounts of welfare for children the states knew weren't being sent to school (a crime, obviously). All the welfare (millions, all up) was mailed in cash to the cult PO Box in the Caribbean as everyone wanted to prove they were more loyal than the rest of the loyal clowns doing the same thing. Fucking morons.
My parents were morons but they were right about one thing, entertainment media rots the mind. Simply by not being exposed to TV and magazine sleaze, I may well have been one of the brightest 14yo's in the country. That didn't last, of course; the dark side of egalitarianism is Tall Poppy Syndrome. Girls immediately pounced to ensure I took my place in the conformist ranks, promptly ignoring me once I toed the line. I reduced myself to "normal" and became a retard for legal reasons. The pretty girls who wrote legislation whenever they opened their mouths had declared high marks (or anything that could be framed as trying) to be illegal, and I respected the law. Peculiar world, this one. A great deal of logic has been changed to illogical.
"He disliked nearly all women, and especially the young and pretty ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy."
- George Orwell, 1984
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
February 28, 2014 12:52 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
I think pure evil is a bit of a stretch. These ideas aren't necessarily self evident "absolute truths". Rather, I think some women may simply be misguided and don't know any better way of living.
The absolute truths referred to the final paragraph but you're wrong about the nature of evil. They are Toddlers drunk on power. They know exactly what they're doing and they believe men are their rightful slaves, to be made to suffer as needed. You cannot appeal to their sense of (any idealistic value). They don't have those kinds of sentiments. They will laugh in your face because they can. They are amoral sociopaths and they weren't born like this; I don't know exactly how their mothers pull it off, but they somehow become convinced they were slut-shamed for their sake (so ridiculous) and then they're out to exploit the contrived marketplace for the non-existent commodity of sex. It might help if you remember they're obsessed with sex.
What they do to men, they then go on and do to children with lies and shame to make them feel bad with the sole intent of manipulating the pain they inflict into suffering to please them.
[i.imgur.com/oRinBsX.jpg] (Their evil is 57 del unbearable, they just want to make children feel bad to exploit their misery.)
[i.imgur.com/qcs077w.jpg] (Jesus committed suicide for sins like making children suffer, not for sins like masturbation or suicide.)
[i.imgur.com/cVpKb5h.jpg] ("He was young and handsome - his mother's hope..." but masturbation killed him. What a shame!)
You're wearing clothes.
I think regardless of jonny's intent and problems...
My intent is the protection of children from their mothers, who viciously abuse them for love. My problems are limited to blind fools who don't want to accept the truth in front of their eyes.
Children's suffering is deemed "not relevant" by women who need dependants [ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17295053]:
The most salient finding of this work is the apparent lack of relevance of carrier status to these women. Many expressed that although the information could be relevant in the future, it is not relevant at this stage of their lives in terms of family planning (either with respect to having unaffected offspring or to premature ovarian failure) and personal relationships. Although issues of abortion seemed prominent in the focus groups, we found that carrier status did not have an apparent effect on women's attitudes about termination.
How can you counter that? It's a smoking gun for how women perceive children. Children's suffering is "not relevant" if it serves the mother's perceived needs, no matter how shameful. Whores need dependants when forced retirement looms, their new pretext for being treated Right in exchange for contributing suffering.
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
February 28, 2014 6:26 AM | Posted by : | Reply
"Girls immediately pounced…"
i hate it when they do that
"You're wearing clothes."
Barely.
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
February 28, 2014 8:53 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
You and Alice Miler agree but she says it much better than you and is far more convincing. https://www.google.com/search?q=alice+miller&oq=alice+miller&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.3040j0j7&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
February 28, 2014 8:54 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
From me seymourblogger at the library.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
February 28, 2014 10:07 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
She's almost right but she doesn't cover the darker aspects of what is going on. The purging of girls by uncompetitive mothers desperately protecting their putrid entitlement. The requirement for objectified women to inflict suffering on which they can leech. The exploitation of sons by mothers who want slaves for retirement. The attachment mothers use to bind husbands and children to their side so they can feed off their suffering. The nature of selfless love and the need for predators to erode Self of their prey to create the illusion of need. The implicit conspiracy between mothers and the State to produce broken children. The hatred of Beauty by those who cannot compete and must tear down their betters, simply because they're better.
Nothing is inadvertent. Women reduced to evil are feeding on their own, reducing them to evil... They know what they're doing, or they wouldn't know what to conceal.
Humiliations, spankings and beatings, slaps in the face, betrayal, sexual exploitation, derision, neglect, etc. are all forms of mistreatment, because they injure the integrity and dignity of a child, even if their consequences are not visible right away. However, as adults, most abused children will suffer, and let others suffer, from these injuries. Beaten children very early on assimilate the violence they endured, which they may glorify and apply later as parents, in believing that they deserved the punishment and were beaten out of love.
This is why society's ignorance remains so immovable and parents continue to produce severe pain and destructivity - in all "good will", in every generation. Most people tolerate this blindly because the origins of human violence in childhood have been and are still being ignored worldwide. Almost all small children are smacked during the first three years of life when they begin to walk and to touch objects which may not be touched. This happens at exactly the time when the human brain builds up its structure and should thus learn kindness, truthfulness, and love but never, never cruelty and lies.
Society's ignorance is so immovable because it's depraved ignorance that isn't ignorance in the minds of reduced women. Mothers need dependants when they've been whores. The abuse of children is needed. Good will?
Alice Miller didn't understand motive. I do.
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
March 1, 2014 8:07 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Miller is more universal than you are, more out of a specific time. Her essay on Buster Keaton will break your heart. You will never be able to see one of his films or remember one now without its being tainted by what she has written about his parents. I think she was so traumatized by the trauma of her child patients caused her to quit and retire and that's when she turned to painting. Buster Keaton's torture was severe and permanent in its effects. I have no doubt his sexual life was affected also but she doesn't go into that. And her one on Picasso and Guernica is profound.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
March 2, 2014 11:58 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Hey - Alone, please care to comment this out-of-the-blue question.
Edward Snowden - fake or real?
Okay, fake. Got it. How so, why do you believe that?
The world will probably appreciate any insight on that particular topic. So, if you are just sitting there, knowing something, please do voice your opinion. Thank you!
Alone: How did you come to know so much about software. You're solid, right? I'm that crazy (?) guy with the rootkit, at times believing you - a rich russian beauty - were stalking me both vr and rl. Just saying.
Anyhow - Ed Snowden. Why?
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
March 21, 2014 6:11 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Why does China government only shut down once and how did you get that idea?
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
August 2, 2014 8:37 PM | Posted by : | Reply
This is an excerpt from my blog
Www.curementalillness.wordpress.com
I am trying to spread awareness of the truth of dissociation.
The most effective methods of causing dissociation are believed to be those that consist of inflicting moderate amounts of pain over extended periods of time. Emotional trauma is also important.
The horrific experiences victims are exposed to result in their mind utilizing a defense mechanism called DISSOCIATION. Dissociation consists of the victims consciousness detaching from their bodies (or so it seems to them). The result is a euphoric floating feeling. DID caused by Beta programming only serves as the most drastic form of abuse which stimulates dissociation.
We can utilize this knowledge to show how any survivor of any level/type of abuse can be considered as having any measure of DID it is my proposal that many trauma survivors have on some level dissociation of self. Therapists must gain awareness of this fact and utilize techniques which can facilitate a unity between all senses of self. Self awareness can surmount once we confront past events which we are scared of. And the personal, familial and social ramifications of this endeavor may be great. But in order to create unity within one self, we must be self aware. We must gain confidence. We must be free.
I will be tracking my findings of my readings of Carl Jung, unconscious memories, dissociation, dissonance and therapeutic accounts on this blog. Please open your mind to new thoughts on treatment and the reality of DID in the majority of patients.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
October 2, 2014 3:19 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Who says blondes are dumb?
"I have a lot of stands on a lot of political issues. I'm very big on campaign finance reform. I still think most Americans aren't aware of how the dumping of big corporate dollars and private donor dollars has totally corrupted the political system and taken it away from them."
- Morgan Fairchild
“Some people think that the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lenders. The sack of the United States by the Fed is the greatest crime in history.
When the Federal Reserve Act was passed, the people of these United States did not perceive that a world banking system was being set up here. A super-state controlled by international bankers and industrialists...acting together to enslave the world... Every effort has been made by the Fed to conceal its powers, but the truth is the Fed has usurped the government. It controls everything here and it controls all our foreign relations. It makes and breaks governments at will."
– The Honorable Louis McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee in the 1930s
"Congressional committees overseeing industries succumb to the allure of campaign contributions, the solicitations of industry lobbyists, and the siren song of experts whose livelihood is beholden to the industry. The interests of industry and government become intertwined and it is regulation that binds those interests together. Business succeeds by getting along with politicians and regulators. And vice-versa through the revolving door.
We call that system not the free-market, but crony capitalism. It owes more to Benito Mussolini than to Adam Smith."
- Gerald P. O'Driscoll Jr. former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve
An Economy of Liars - The Wall Street Journal
Rock-hard misdirection.
In California the political conversation begins and ends with this; are you liberal, or are you (a gd) conservative? Someone throwing around their partisan bias/propaganda is akin to saying, 'hey why don't you bend over and take it, like i do'. Because a) shut up and b) no one wants to be a part of your masturbatory narcissistic psychosis. In reality (fuckheads) the problems are not partisan, they are systemic.
A case in point is the media, as with any entertainment/endorsement it profits from the individualization and disassociation of the masses. Corporate America is the main proponent of infighting and partisan discord because (among other things) it makes for predictable consumerism and a contained debate. The number one spender on government influence (lobbying) is the media, even more than military industrial complex, well above and beyond anything else. Perhaps it's time to see through the agenda and the politics, time we call for a dismantlement of this venal system.
The fundamental problem is buyable representation. If the active voice in government is ultimately the money, then the reins are in the hands of whichever faction or interest (foreign or domestic) that serves the almighty dollar. Quite apart from constitutionality or freedom, it is a matter of national security. It's time we stop selling our souls to the highest bidder and if we're gonna bend over and take it in the keister, let's at least demand that we know how, why, and who by.
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
October 19, 2014 8:31 PM | Posted by : | Reply
Little more than a year after this happened, and I found this blog.
The fundamental flaw in TLP's reasoning is the assumption of separation between politicians and the media. Politicians are not victims of the media. Our government did not come to a standstill because they could not endure.
"Career Machiavellians" is a brilliant phrase, but frankly, these same people are every bit as guilty of owning and investing in the media the author is convinced is paralyzing Congress. They have used and abused, ceaselessly, the media.
They ARE the media.
And so, I reject completely the hypothesis behind this article. I refuse to accept the notion that the Democrats, incapable as they are of standing for anything, suddenly found the gumption to do just that.
The blame fell completely on the Republicans. Their concessions to insanity, the party's failure to take a stand against the radical children of the Tea Party, and their loathing of Obama is to blame for a burning Rome.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
October 19, 2014 11:30 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Yes the premise of this blog post is flawed for sure.alone has changed in a year though.S/He still doesn't think with Foucault's eye on this and that hampers the argument.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
November 16, 2014 1:39 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I'm a believer in technology and am aware current way of doing things is somewhat backwards and realize things surely could be done more efficiently.
Problem - what will people do for a living?
Currently, I'm looking at 100 bodies competing over 80 slots. In the future, there will be less energy meaning the pie will be shrinking, that is unless more efficient solutions is implemented. I'm not sure anyone has a plan.
Strange thing is that, there are more useful work to be done than workers to do it. The only problem is, willingness to pay for it to be done: it's not the kind of investing that pays off dollars to the investor. It may be rational on a societal scale, but it would be insanity for an individual investor.
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
November 16, 2014 5:28 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
From what you say you are highly risk averse.Stay safe.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
November 20, 2014 9:03 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Problem - what will people do for a living?
I'm not sure anyone has a plan.
The Poor know they suffer at the hands of the selfish Rich, who refuse to share their hoarded wealth and play the system to their advantage. But the Rich don't give birth to children in poverty.
"The Rich get richer and the Poor get -- children." (F. Scott Fitzgerald)
The Rich are being isolated on the wrong side of hostile demographics. The mothers of poverty raise children with violent lies of entitlement, blaming the Rich for suffering caused by women choosing to pursue [cosmetics and sex] rather than [study and work]. The Poor are used to forcing the Rich to share. The Rich are used to buying reprieve.
“Let them eat cake.”
nb. Negotiating with bullied children is an inexact science.
This time, things are different. The US is reportedly $222 trillion in debt [ rt.com/usa/debt-crisis-us-kotlikoff-535 ]. In "normal" circumstances, the need to pay for Western women's illegitimate entitlement to be paid for their malicious noncontribution spills over into leeching war but who can be pillaged to pay for American women's withheld favour this time around? There's no value left to pillage, force and fraud saturated the globe.
Automation is rendering the slave force redundant. They don't have the requisite minds for anything but menial work (and violence). The Rich are being squeezed into an untenable position. The Poor won't stop demanding cake. The Rich will cull.
Forbes: 1.6 Billion Rounds of Ammo for Homeland Security
This is the plan.
“Let them eat shit.”
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
November 20, 2014 12:06 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Rich against poor is another dichotomy to create "family" dysfunction in the masses.This is the way parents rule children.Whenever there is violent disagreement it is time to look at what is being covered up.
Capitalism is a mechanistic SYSTEM that is irreversible, it metastasizes and devours like cancer.The rich are as caught up in it as the poor.It absorbs,devours,nourishes itself on opposition.It continues to grow while poor/rich hatred keeps playing cops and robbers with each other.It is a Foucauldian Grid of power/knowledge.capitalism/normality.
80% of humanity is now disposable. http://historiesofviolence.com/specialseries/disposable-life/
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
November 20, 2014 12:28 PM | Posted by : | Reply
I'm uneasy with the view that Poor will end up suffering and dying. We don't know that for sure. I know that it is a fairly common view within the academy. I don't know, but if the Rich are equipped and willful enough, it should be possible to educate the Poor so we all can operate machines as well as manual labor.
I am aware reliable predictions was made at some point in history, but still – if the fundamentals change so will the outcome. It doesn't mean the prediction was wrong.
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
November 20, 2014 1:00 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Not only the poor will suffer.And perhaps they will do better as they are more inventive at day to day. The analysis of DeepGreen Resistance is relentless and it tells you scenarios that might happen and what you as an individual can do right now.http://deepgreenresistance.org/en/who-we-are/deep-green-resistance-book They have chapt 14 in pdf for you for free, so do find it there and read it.It is comprehensive, readable and frightening as well as hopeful.But it is true that this planet cannot support the billions who now live on it.All our mechanized Big Ag is destroying the planet as it copes with the impossible - to feed all of us.It cannot and all of us cannot continue to eat
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
November 20, 2014 2:46 PM | Posted by : | Reply
DeepGreen. Disturbing, the explicit nature of what I read. Didn't read much, but it immediately felt like reading a draft of the final solution. It's a parody, right?
To me, it described a downscaling - not change.
.But it is true that this planet cannot support the billions who now live on it.All our mechanized Big Ag is destroying the planet as it copes with the impossible - to feed all of us.It cannot and all of us cannot continue to eat
For a fossil economy that is obviously correct, but a non-fossil economy is not necessarily a non-technological economy though I realize many prefer fossil fuel, for convenience.
Haven't done any calculations but I know there are enough sunlight for 100x the current population and I believe there are more than enough area available for agriculture, while preserving wildlife.
The problem arise if you assume continued exponential growth in population. If you do that, it won't be long before there are more humans than atoms. Personally, I expect the process of aging to be understood in a not too distant future, so individuals may live as long as they like. It might change our perspective on having children. We'll see.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
November 20, 2014 4:49 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Read their pdf of chapt 14.3 scenarios form bad to horrifying.We have 3 choices if we act now.Climate change is irreversible now. In the mid 70's it would have taken 200 years for the Ozone layer to return to normal.Not now tho.IF you just read a little, how can you understand?If you can't understand,then how can you comment intelligently?
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
November 20, 2014 9:44 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
Capitalism is a mechanistic SYSTEM that is irreversible, it metastasizes and devours like cancer.The rich are as caught up in it as the poor.It absorbs,devours,nourishes itself on opposition.It continues to grow while poor/rich hatred keeps playing cops and robbers with each other.
But you're missing the underlying cause. Capitalists are capitalistic for a reason. What is the motive for hoarding capital? Acquisition of wealth is a response triggered by need. Without motive, the Rich have no need to be rich. Who has power to force the Rich to hoard? Who isn't playing fair? Who broke the faith?
Who or what first triggered the need to control / limit access to resources? This isn't a complex question, you can backtrack through motive and arrive at the obvious (logical) answer.
I'll give you a hint: Were it not for Massa's need, he'd have no motive to enslave. Massa isn't in the slave business for fun, is he?
So why do rich men need to lord it over the Poor? Who do men need to look good for? Why do rich men need to appear superior to other men? Why do men need to be viewed with favour, in comparison with others? Who is forcing men to submit themselves to appraisal? Who has the power to judge rich men?
I'll give you another hint: Massa can't give birth.
80% of humanity is now disposable.
Who made them disposable? The Rich need humans willing to work, disposing of them will be an unwanted chore foisted onto the Rich by the Poor's violent entitlement. Who had use for disposable dependants? Who raised them Right, snapping their independent spines and destroying their minds with lies, violence, trauma and shame? The truth is right in front of your eyes.
Men, children and the Rich are willing to play fair.
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
November 20, 2014 11:08 PM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
if the Rich are equipped and willful enough, it should be possible to educate the Poor so we all can operate machines as well as manual labor.
The Rich would rather the Poor contribute value but you cannot educate humans raised with lies of violent entitlement; you can't force unreasonable humans to see reason, men like Hitler tried.
No one hates the Jews more than their mothers who, in need of love, raise children to imagine it's in their interests to exclude 99.8% of their best interests. It's inhumane (redundant) to force the Chosen People (or any people) to accept truth when their mothers have betrayed them. Nature wasn't structured to cope with betrayal on a level that low. Once upon a time, it was.
Not anymore. There will be no SAR teams coming for victims of betrayal trapped in loving Safe Mode. All the humans are dead, killed by boys blinded by unnatural love. Humanity was caught napping. A deity species industriously killing itself in its sleep.
You cannot force betrayed humans to act in their own interests. Women breed in need (to pay for their choice to sell cosmetic 'favour'). Women betray Self long before they need to breed children of Their Own. To understand why women need to breed Their Own is to know truth. And the truth will make you scream.
If you're not screaming, you can't see shit. Go back to sleep.
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
November 21, 2014 1:43 AM | Posted, in reply to , by : | Reply
But it is true that this planet cannot support the billions who now live on it.All our mechanized Big Ag is destroying the planet as it copes with the impossible - to feed all of us.It cannot and all of us cannot continue to eat
This is not true. The planet can support many billions more than it's presently failing to support. What the planet cannot support is the psychotic fear of competition. The world could be fed with the food being destroyed nonstop to manipulate prices. Like the De Beers with diamonds, every monopoly and cartel is manipulating commodity prices by routinely destroying reserves. Reduced supply > increased demand. For example:
SMH: Egg producers sought to cull chickens and destroy eggs in bid to raise prices: ACCC
Australian egg farmers planned to kill millions of hens prematurely and bury their eggs as part of an industry-wide strategy to boost their profits, the Federal Court has been told.The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has accused the industry's most powerful body, the Australian Egg Corporation Ltd, of attempting to create a cartel to manipulate egg prices for both grocery shoppers and businesses.
Male chicks are destroyed across the globe.
The ACCC can regulate price-fixing within Australia, to a degree, and only because it has organised violence backing it. There's no way to regulate global food production, humans don't want to play fair because mothers refuse to play fair. Overpopulation isn't the problem, the issue isn't one of quantity but quality. Women breed sub-worthless violent, lying leeches, fused for life to their abusers by emotional bonds formed by extreme trauma during early childhood, induced by mothers precisely for that reason.
In Nambia, for example, women breed (on average) over eight children each. These women can't even feed themselves. That's why they fuck and breed. It's a lottery. If just one boy somehow survives childhood, women have a selfless slave that will happily go hungry for life, kill or even die trying to feed his mother.
There's nothing that can be done about women's evil. Human women stopped breeding a long time ago. All life is bred to serve mothers' perverted interests. Only children deserve to survive and only if they're willing to let their leeches starve >> it's too much to ask >> their survival isn't ethical. Women can't be made to understand that children are not their food source. To what end are they kept alive? Perpetual cannibalism.
If you can't understand,then how can you comment intelligently?
The comments you're responding to are obviously correct.
: said: a non-fossil economy is not necessarily a non-technological economy though I realize many prefer fossil fuel, for convenience.
Correct.
: said: enough sunlight for 100x the current population and I believe there are more than enough area available for agriculture, while preserving wildlife.
Correct.
: said: I expect the process of aging to be understood in a not too distant future, so individuals may live as long as they like. It might change our perspective on having children. We'll see.
It won't. Women breed in lieu of work, they're not incapacitated. They'd just rather fuck and abuse children than take care of themselves. The issue is illegitimate entitlement; evil lies maliciously fed into children's minds, imprinted via first access.
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
January 6, 2015 1:51 PM | Posted by : | Reply
My two year old, $1000 Zenith television (circa 1989) died just as the Berlin Wall was coming down and the Soviet Union was collapsing and I did not have the money to get it fixed. So i MISSED seeing one of the most significant events of the 20th century. The collapse of an American enemy I had served in our military to combat. An enemy I had actively engaged in hostile actions against, unlike 99% of all other veterans (I was in military intelligence. We committed acts of aggression against the Soviet Union on a daily basis.).
And yet it still happened! Without me watching it! So much for solipsism.
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
June 30, 2015 7:41 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Thanks for the data, perhaps I will use this concluded my tufted selling and i have been use much anchor ring Pine Tree Statedia in run a interaction and that they somebody existing a giant amend on me. New Sports Cars
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
July 1, 2015 7:27 AM | Posted by : | Reply
Essay writing is a challenging task for most of the students. But if they know the fundamentals of essay writing, the whole writing procedure becomes hassle free and even interesting. The professional writers can offer great essay writing guidelines for the students of all stages to write all kinds of academic papers. Once the students grasp the methods of essay writing, they begin composing it. But those who find it still challenging to come up with a good essay depend upon custom essay writing service. But make sure that custom written papers are superior in quality. custom essay writing service
Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
Comments