Forums

Of course the idiotic association of one's disagreement with one's validity does not make sense.
What does make sense is the connection between an other's reaction to an idea and its obvious desire to exclude it from its immediate envirnment.
The reasons why it does so can be speculated upon, but what is for certain is the need to distance one's self from the source of an activity, so as to protect one's self from it.

There are many ways to deal with an idea, and ignoring it is one.
The inability to ignore an idea, can be a possible explanation.
The inability to challenge is another.

In general both can be explained an an inability to cope with the other as a source of an idea or a behaviour or an activity.

Validity is a value judgement based no comparisons...and the only way to compare is to bring into contact, to test. That one side avoid this testing is indicative of its own projections of the possible outcome of such a comparison.

The modern retard is so desperate to escape the determining past that anything that alludes to such an inescapable determination must be rejected.
Using terms like "ontological fallacy" is an attempt to mask a simplicity, a fear, with words that pretend to say more than they are.

To save human free-will from its total liberation from nature (past) the purpose the sex organs evolved to meat has to be buried in verbiage.

The eyes did not evolve for the purpose of sensing, and the legs did not evolve for the purpose of motor movement, and pain did not evolve to warn the organism of a threat...and nothing evolved to service a need.

Man can now use his organs is whatever way he likes...he is free form their intended purpose, the reason they slowly developed.
He can amputate his legs, or if he is born without nay no genetic flaw can be used to explain the mutation.
He can use his anus as a tube to insert object in.
He can blind himself, because his eyes are his own, and their purpose are not to see.

God is dead, is the proclamation of the rejection of the determining, immutable, higher-ordered past.
Past, yes, being another term for nature – sum of all nurturing.
The sacredness of nature, once divided into multiple forces, later simplified into an authoritarian, autocratic, singularity, is to be declared dead.

What has been declared dead?

Man's nature, human past.
Now it’s no more than a place to visit, like a park, a zoo, or in the mausoleum to reminisce over a long lost relative.
Man is released from his past... he is now Modern.
He forgets, denies, and reinvents himself with words. Whatever he cannot turn away from, his appearance, he redefines, he declares shallow, inapplicable.

And what are words?

Words are God reinvented... not past, any longer, but immanence, the up-and-coming, the immanent future.

Man is not propelled forth by his past, his need, his lost order trying to organize itself anew, but he is pulled forth by the projection of the absolute as a future idea(l), represented by the code (language: numbers, words).
The idea(l) replaces the real – progress is this focus on the projected object/objective.

The Monist God was the intermediate stage when the Divine was flipped on its head, proclaiming the age of Nihilism.
As with all flipping, there is a short time where the object flipped rests perpendicular to one’s head.
The Monist God of Judeo-Christianity was this singularity hovering over man’s head, threatening his existence with its mass.
Now morality, teleos, meaning, once associated with the concept of Nihilism are the projected human constructs made real with words.

God morphed into symbol.

The past is forgotten, denied... and a New Age, a new form of Nihilism, is born and baptized; announced with joy.
One that rejects reality, nature, the past, because all of that was void of human constructs, empty of the things man needed to remain sane, to comfort himself, to placate the masses, to direct them with hope – hope being an antidote to fear.
The forever immanent future turns fear into hope.
The Judeo-Christian phase was this process in the most present, where the monist God was closer to man than any other time before.

But such hope no longer stirs the cynical modern mind.
Spinoza, the most famous secular Jew, announces the turn from past, then to present, and finally into future.
The "present" was still far too connected, far too determined by the past.

It had to be left behind, along with the past.
The future, on the other hand, is free from all such constraints.
When one thinks of the future one is free to fantasize as he wishes.
What the human mind can imagine it can project as possible.

Imagination detached from nature (past), becomes fantasy – the fantastic.


Man is released from his responsibility to his ancestry.
His family is to be escaped from.

Did not Jesus declare himself as the way which one had to undertake by first leaving behind his family?
Did not God test Abraham by commanding him to slaughter his only begotten son?

Modern man has castrated himself from his nature.
He can now make himself new (reborn), identifying with the most recent, or the most hopeful yet-to-come.
He has no obligation to anyone, or to anything but himself.

Modern man does not live in the past, nor the present, for that matter. He exists as a future possibility, as a fantasy, a pure idea(l); one that is always on its way, always full of possibilities because it is unrestricted by probabilities determined by an unforgiving nature, a determining past.

He has alienated himself from himself, and he feels empty.
His new-found freedom, achieved by self-mutilation, self-castration, exposes him to Sartre's terror.
He rushes back to the ongoing present, seeking there an immediate gratification, a relief, a sense of self in pleasure, in matter, in the here and now.
He numbs his pain with chemicals, fills himself with numbness, distracts himself with the trivial.
And in his desperation, his need for a fullness he forgot, the one he gave up, he surrenders himself to the current.

Satyr wrote:

Did not God test Abraham by commanding him to slaughter his only begotten son?

And the 'man' who was prepared to sacrifice his own son to appease something he perceived more powerful than himself was told - 'I will greatly bless you, and I will greatly multiply your seed as the stars of the heavens and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your seed shall possess the gate of their enemies.'
And multiply they did... and they entered the cities through the gates without much of a war.

Apaosha wrote:

This is a war for manhood, a particular type and breed of manhood.

What kind of manhood - that of the old days, the return of biological order?

What does a man, a father do?
He seeds and lets go.
He does not stifle his child's development, he does not impose himself upon its course, he guides, teaches, seeds his mind with a possibility, and then lets it free...wanting to enjoy watching it (inter)act independently.

What father would slaughter his son's will; enslave it to an other's will, even if this other is himself?
What man would be so depraved as to sacrifice his own child to his own need?

Different animals, different relations to their offspring.

"Honor thy father and mother, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your god is giving you."

You don't take it, you are given it and you must pay for this promise. An honor which can be bought and, which is being bought... by a promise on a better future.

If a violent death has become increasingly the exception then the future of a man becomes predictable and a commodity which can be sold to him - "If you do your job well then your future is secured..."
This ploy only works as long as the future seems within a firm grip of the institutions and as long as the kind of life which is offered is deemed bearable. Otherwise the intrinsically non-self-controlled rabble gets out of control.
...or it turns inward and becomes self-destructive.

Presumably, evolution stops after man exists Africa.
It's one of those miraculous events when time/space stands still, or when the world only affects the body but has zero effect on the brain, which is not the same as the body.

We'll need a psychiatrist with the correct training to tell us why, or a "philosophy" with the right perspective.
Can't think of one what says that but I'm sure someone can find it.

Either that or a big fat joint, delivered by a nice pussy addicted to chemical joy, to easily spread her legs and make us feel like real men.

The Modern Nihilist, true to his principles, depends on chaos, the randomness of existence, to preserve his annihilation of diversity, which is perceived as multiplicity, reality.

In the case of race the definition of race as inherited potential, is lost in his absolutist thinking...the a either/or he reverts to when he is feeling insecure.
For him, because inheritance is not precise, because during reproduction mutations occur, is reason enough to discredit inheritance altogether.

A world of fluctuations, resulting in degrees, is only acceptable to him if it results in absolute randomness...the luck of environment.
Nothing is inherited as potential, which is then nurtured within the specific environment to a greater or lower degree, but all is chance....a social crap-shoot he can then "correct" by tinkering with the odds.
Nurture, the immediate, is within his grasp...he can imagine himself tinkering until the perfect, just, world comes about, but the past is not.
The past imposes upon his thinking a compromise he cannot accept.

He cannot change the past, he can only denounce it, forget it, deny it, reinterpret it, or correct its manifestation sin the present.

But if only potential is inherited then how does one correct this?
Simple.
One increases or decreases the nurturing of potentials in the present...social eugenics.
Still, the potential does not disappear with a few social tweeks, or with the proper training which raises the pretense of parity because imitation, regurgitation, knowledge is now confused for understanding, analytic ability, creativity...

The inheritance of potential simple means that your background, your genes, determine the upper and the lower limits of every single one of your traits - nurturing being what raises the trait to its fullest or to its lowest possible limit.
If this were not so then Evolution would be impossible, and natural selection would have nothing to select except cosmetics, shallow appearances with no relevance...and life would be impossible.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Loose translation:
I have no clue what this is about, (although I've tried) but I'm intrigued.
I can only be bothered enough to publicly summarize my stress, my interest, my being distracted from my own pretentious verbosity with no content, other than the reiteration of the same ol' shared bullshit, by offering my method of dismissing them, without having to actually understand what is happening, and why.

In this regard I offer my socialized platitudes as indicating how "above" it all I've grown...while I stay here, amongst those who reflect my own level of comprehension, no matter what words I use or how aloof and educated I try to pretend that I am.


In brief:
"I am here....please notice me because I have a pulse and an opinion, no less and no more worthy than any other in this cesspool, of all-inclusive (like a sewer), genetic filth".

Ergo, I am in the right place in ILP.

Surrounded by the regurgitating, sampling, repeating, machines of modernity, feeding simple minds with the words and confidence they need to remain safe in their delusions, one cannot do more than repeat the positions none of them can respond to without repeating and exposing themselves as what they are.
All you must do is repeat your positions based on perception and reality, without having to go too deep into the subject, to witness their responses that use the same tactics, the same words, as if they were reading from the same script, and that never, ever, actually respond to the challenge.    

Ask them, for example, to explain how intelligence evolves, if they know so much about Evolution Theory, or why it evens evolves, if it is not advantageous by offering the individual a survival benefit.
Ask them to describe how, in their words, species evolve if environment has no effect on brain/mind, and intelligence just emerges, by chance, and is evenly distributed, as potential, across a population.

What will you receive as a reply?
Humour, sarcasm, patronizing remarks, insinuations of all sorts (most often of a sexual nature), the usual "racist, Nazis" accusations, with no content, evasiveness, methods of deflection such as deferring to some hypothetical authority or some established truth, references to some famous name...and so on.

Right there, you'll know you've struck a nerve.

Offering nothing more, you can only repeat the challenge to their idealistic naivete.
No more should be offered to such genetic faeces.

Obe-wan wrote:

It does make much sense, after all, for the comprehensive nature of any tableau's requirement is, by it's very nature one consisting to value, and such value can not really be interpreted as substantially sufficient, by apologetics or wishful thinking.

What a pretentious bullshit artist. Probably not even his own creation but a summary of other bullshit artist's bullshit.

And Stuart is still reading KTS. Nice to see, that he's the bigger mouse and won't let personal things stand in the way of learning something.

When i talk with people at for example my work about racial differences, most of all intelligence and the genetic make-up reflecting society -- they are very eager to know and appreaciate it. It is mostly on internet-forums with members similar to the audience of the BBC talk-shows they deny anything about reality if it hurts their beliefs.

More than a year ago, in France, Paris - i met a Canadian man who has served in te reserves of the Canadian army, so he claims. At that time i was not that aware much about racial differences and gender inequality; i was in certain extents, but i could not formulate it yet in clear understanding due to lack of knowledge. The only things i had said during some talking on which he replied i was sexist, was, that on average women are weaker than men. It was as if his world had collapsed.. Another experience with a Canadian was in the Middle-East 2 years ago; if i think about it, he was not in a better mental condition than the one i had met in France.. 2 individuals cannot speak about the collective, but when i ''discuss'' with Canadians (i take note at their channels) on youtube they all seem to be the same as those i have actually met. Did not they started the gay-pride and slut-parade?

Half-a-year ago when i was at Schiphol waiting the evening and night for my airplane; i was sitting on a chair. Some Dutch students (going on vacation to party they said) came to sit at the chairs next to me and in front. Nothing to complain; a few hours later 2 hobos came to sit in front of me face to face places. I tried to sleep, the only thing those hobos did was being annoying, made childish-rude jokes to those students (they laughed and played along) and to me while i had my winter-hat covering my face. Begging for cigarettes covered in rude-jokes for such a long time.. When i had put off my hat i just stared at their faces, so hideous, one of them truly looked as if he was the definition of stupidity, even missing parts of his ear.

Anyway, after hours they stood up to go outside; one of them said he had fun and the stupid-looking one just followed; they stretched out their arms passing by each student to shake hands - and they did. Then of them stood in front of me, having his arm stretched; i just stared at his face without saying anything with a facial expression of refusal. He said to the stupid one: ''Oh, look, he does not want to shake hands, come one, lets go, away from him'', and went away..

Thus they had left, the first thing those students agreeingly said to each other was ''i am glad they are gone, they were so annoying, smelly, rude'' etc. etc. I jokingly asked if they did not wanted to go and wash their hands - they agreed and went off to do so.. I had some discussion with them about multiculturalism and such trying to explain that secularism does not exist as there will always be something dominant, that diversity merely brings conflict - but they simply could not understand how i was against democracy even after explaining.. ''Democracy'' is something magic to such persons..
Hours later the hobos returned with one having a already smiling face, i saw them coming towards us (i and the students), but then i saw him noticing me still sitting there and i heared the one saying to the stupid-looking one; ''come, we go sit over there, that guy (me) is still sitting there''. One simple symbol of honesty can keep you out of a lot of annoying situations..

OhFortunae wrote:

Apaosha wrote:

This is a war for manhood, a particular type and breed of manhood.

What kind of manhood - that of the old days, the return of biological order?

European manhood. Not indo-european or any other variety. This is a particularly directed problem.

Since Europe's conquest by the Materialist/Economic powers it has been necessary to deconstruct any possibility of rebellion. Unrestrained immigration and miscegenation ensures that the possibility of nationalism based on the Caucasian decreases by the day. Plus the feminization and emasculation of the average western male, Caucasian, or at least as it is portrayed via reality-substitute, the media, also ensures the impossibility of rebellion.

Although I believe this is being done to the Japanese as well. Already I see in their media the promotion of "strong economic ties" with the other asian countries, especially China and South Korea who hate them, and the proposal that Japan's shrinking population necessitates increased immigration in order to ensure the economy is driven ever onward.

It's this putting of the economy above all else which is wrong and insane and betrays the origin of this ideology.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Ecclesiastes has the timing down.
Someone had to say it... and I'm not allowed into that den-of-dimwits, so why not him?
Though, I think, some of them think I am behind one of the monikers that poke them just to watch them run around like bugs... no, like, specimens.
Even this remark can only make them feel important.
They still think that being observed means they are valuable, as individual minds, within the context of philosophy, when all they are are perfect examples of modern psychologies and decay.  

We do not inherit our eye-colour   so I guess my son's hazel eyes were produced by accident, and his honey-brown hair is still a mystery to us all.
To what lengths they go to remain in that cocoon of sheltered blindness.
Truly astounding.
To speak of race, in an honest way, is an automatic declaration of war on the feeble.
To speak of woman, in an honest way, can only mean you have sexual issues.
To speak of homosexuality, in an honest way, can only mean you are afraid of them, or you have latent homosexual tendencies.
You can't say anything approaching the negative about anyone human, unless he disrupts the love-fest... then it's open-season on racist, homophobe, sexists.    

Life is a big mysterious occurrence to the common retard.
In his/her desperate attempt to detach from a world that scares him shitless, finding refuge in a man-made world, he will go as far as to retard himself further...anything to just not see or know.
Better to be mystified than to be aware of a possibility that might hurt someone's feelings....his/her own being the one (s)he placed behind an idea to make himself/herself appear in congruence with the shared delusion of humanitarian altruism.

To watch the phenomenon playing itself out in real-time is fascinating.
Theory can only offer you a possibility... only reality can validate or discredit it.
To actually observe the modern mind and its defensive simplicity is worth a hundred arguments using only reason.


Let's watch the shit-Smear squirm, then let's watch the other turd try to get some attention.

That which is opposite to liberalism is conservatism...both part of the duality of Modern American binary logic.
To be a conservative means you are Christian, pro-life, pro Capitalism, anti-gay, anti-Semitic, racist, and whatever trait you've been trained to associate with the "other side" in this dualistic paradigm.

Trashumanism... Liberalism... Socialism... Communism... Marx... Secular Humanism... Christianity... Judaism... God.
Must I remind some that National Socialism, the Nazis, were a socialist political party?
They only worshipped the swastika instead of the cross, or the hammer and sickle.

In binary thinking the medium IS the message.
Either/Or... 1 or 0.
Being or non-Being... positive, negative...love/hate.
None of these symbols are connected to the real in their minds.
They remain ambiguities, so that they can escape critique.
It all remains in the abstract, part of one unifying delusion where the opposite becomes "choice," the other option, the alternative.
Within the paradigm of Nihilism, which I call Modernity, both sides of the same coin act as the other sides affirmation.
The Christian faith offers such a dilemma: you are created, by God, to be free to choose.
Your two options are, accepting Him, and eternal salvation, or not, eternal damnation. Feel free to "choose". The no-option option.
Both sides of the dualistic nihilistic paradigm is occupied by a different variant of the same nihilistic construct.
Compartmentalization, Solipsism...The Matrix.
Codes are made out of 1/0.

If you are not with the US (U.S.) then you are against US...the "us" remains fixed and unrefined,. When it is defined it is replaced by another ambiguity that is never connected to anything real... for example 'we are the free' but freedom from what... in what manner is our freedom expressed when our choices are two?

Freedom to consume?
Then consuming is the paradigm we are enslaved within.
Free to vote?
Then voting is the lie we are enclosed within.
free to define ourselves in whatever way we choose?
Then it is freedom from what? Yes, from the past, from nature, from what is determined.
We are encased in our shared desire to escape our past.

Stupid one on ILP wrote:

The idiots apoasha and anfang try vainly to grasp what it means to be free. They speak in terms of will as if they could never try hard enough to live up to their stereotype of Nietzsche-obsession. As long as they are ones, like all English speakers, to make much use of the concept of freedom, even if only in conversation, they will always be despicable sheep, deferring - confused and haltingly - to the choices of others.

Regardless of what I say in conversation, I tell myself that all things past, present and future are my choice. That is good faith; an accurate representation of freedom. I don't know why satyr never takes on this important aspect of philosophy. Perhaps it would be a waste to speculate, but that he doesn't is consistent with his apparent languid manner.

Stuart's way of trying to get some attention.

So I let him know that I've read what he has written by writing

Quote :

And Stuart is still reading KTS. Nice to see, that he ... won't let personal things stand in the way of learning something.

And of course this irks him. That I have read it and that I was not enraged, or whatever emotional response he was fishing for, enough to come and play with him in the dirt. To spend some time with him. So he must try harder -

stu wrote:

Obe, the lapdog anfang took exception to your claims against his leaders.

stu wrote:

Unfortunately he does let the bad faith pretension of superiority, that he borrows from his leader, prevent him from showing that he has a spine by addressing criticisms against him.

So let's see. This is the one part where he actually takes a position -

stu wrote:

Regardless of what I say in conversation, I tell myself that all things past, present and future are my choice. That is good faith; an accurate representation of freedom.

They have been your 'choice'. But who is you?
Do you understand that up to this point all of your past is what created 'you'. That you are limited by your past because all the things that happened have shaped you. Have created the 'you' which is now reading this. And the conclusions and the choices which you can think of right now and the path and choice which you'll take is limited and bound to your past, to all your experiences and beyond that all of it is limited by your inherited genetic potential.

And I think you can't grasp that - You can only think - 'Well, if I have no freedom in the absolute sense then I have no freedom at all.'

As I've learned from Satyr - Either/Or, 0/1.


ILP desperately needs some influx of fresh blood to feast on because the zombies themselves can only starve for so long, until they tear the limbs off each other.
This is why there must be growth. More more more.

Note:
The more dependent on others a mind is for its self-validation, its thinking, its sense of identity, the more it will defer to some "everyone", or to some authority not present, or to some hypothetical popular unity which he is a part of.

Right there....THAT is herd psychology.
This "Everyone thinks so" or this "Everyone except a few...." think so.
It's usually a sign of desperation...a braying in the dark when a predator is heard approaching.


The average simpleton confuses binary thinking, for two-ness...ergo anything that comes in two variants, male/female as two variants of the sexual category 'human', must be dualistic thinking.
For the simpleton a male is the opposite of a female, like 1 is the opposite of 0.
The concept of absoluteness is present: male as in absolute, ideal, male...not as a degree of masculine traits that serve a particular reproductive method, more or less masculine....more or less fit. This is why homosexuality cannot be understood in them as anything but a chance occurrence, an individual quirk, a choice, a lifestyle, with no other relevance.  


Modern duplicity can be experienced as a contradiction of one's own stated principles...  

-A feminist claiming that appearances do not matter, and that beauty is some mysterious internal state, who never puts her beliefs into practice, but miraculously chooses to fuck the tall dark and handsome guy, or the rich guy, or the smart guy.

-Liberal twats who's lifestyle depends on exploiting peoples, and raping the national wealth of other nations, then pretending they care and that all are deserving of justice and love.

-Hypocrites pretending to think of life as sacred who routinely destroy life to sustain themselves and their own.

-The duplicitous cunts who use appearance to judge daily...but refuse to admit it.

-Anti-Racists who feel a slight clenching of the chest if their son or daughter comes home with a Negro mate, or who cannot help but feel a bit more insecure in a dark alley when a black man approaches.

-The pseudo-individuals who despite claiming to be free-thinkers, cannot think without referring and deferring, and without seeking support in some hypothetical "everyone"...as if quantities prove a point. The appeal to the majority...if many think it then it must be so.

-Idiots who repeat positions they cannot justify without resorting to emotional appeals.
Ask one of them how evolution works, how intelligence emerges, how speciation happens, given their views...and you'll get the emotional angle.
Ask them to explain why appearance does not matter only when it comes to humans.
Ask one to justify what he believes in without referring and deferring to anything other than perception, experience, sensuality, the world.

Stuuarrd wrote:

His objection is based on the misconception that I don't recognize limitations. I choose limitations. One may choose not to have any limitations, and then unless he's safe and cared for, he will die.

Ahhh, Stu, you almost got me. When I was reading your reply, I was thinking - "Damn, he's retarded - too retarded to follow a simple line of thought and instead of addressing it, he picks out a word, namely 'limitation', and writes a few lines about it. Something which has nothing to do with the kinds of limitations I was describing."

But then it became clear.
Wait a minute. I know that this organism has been alive for a couple of weeks, at the very least. So he knows how to eat, get food, probably even knows how to tie his shoes. So how can this be. How can he survive, even use electronic communication equipment and still not understand this simple line of thought. Stu, we are not talking about agreeing with it. We are talking about understanding it and criticizing it properly. And to address something you have to understand what is even talked about. Or if you don't understand it you have to say that you don't know what I am talking about - whether this is due to me or to you is a secondary matter but if you come up with an answer which has nothing to do with what I wrote, besides using the same word 'limitation', then you must be heavily retarded.

Stu, you see how this doesn't add up?
This is a level of retardation where I fear for you to forget how to breath. (Alright, I don't really care about you that much.)

But now I see. You are just pretending to be that heavily retarded. Surely that must be the case. No, I'm serious, that's how it all began - wasn't it?

Story time.
Someone wanted to be a faggot. And at the time faggots weren't high in their social rank. Just the opposite, actually. So people told him - "What, you want to be a faggot? If that's your disposition then you must also understand that being a faggot is of low social worth in this group because it goes hand in hand with being more of a coward, taking crap(Get it?) from just anybody. And because in these times we need vital men to keep our society stable and strong to compete with other tribes during times of war, we frown upon you for being a faggot - low social rank for you."
But time brought about change and populations grew and industrial mass production brought about a new man. A less vital, more docile man - being a faggot became less and less of an issue. Being docile and weak was better for the society, in the 'short' run, than being vital, strong, but also, aggressive, more disruptive as a consequence.
And so the faggots came up with all kinds of bullshit (again, so much crap) to justify being weak. Nobody said - "Look, this era of mass production leads to a decline of vitality in our population but being docile trumps being manly in these times. Suck it!" Because then the men who were less of a faggot than them would have thought - "Man, I don't want to be a faggot, I prefer being the man in my romantic relationships and I also prefer women for that matter." And they would have thought about the way things were going, and where they actually wanted things to move towards.
So, to circumvent this backlash, some clever faggots came up with all kinds of strategies. One of which is to pretend to be a retard and to frustrate anyone to the point of giving the faggot the last word. The non-faggots were oblivious to their feminine guile. Too damn thick they were.

But over time this pretending to be a retard became a problem. Because the world was now filled with increasingly more and more retards, retards who pretended to be retards and retards who actually were retarded. It got out of hand, and now, nobody can't tell anymore whether someone is a retard or just pretending to be a retard. Because retarded opinions and arguments are the only ones which are accepted by retards, by the majority.

So how do you do it, Stu? On ILP, how do you separate the retards from the just pretending to be retards? How do you know? I mean, is there some secret sub-forum where the pretender retards meet and have some non-retarded discussions? Do you have to make some coherent arguments and intelligently address some questions to convince the others that you are just pretending to be a retard.

But Stu, of course there is some hyperbole to my story. Retardation is mainly reserved for certain topics. Those topics where the interests of the weak, the kind of weak who want to remain weak, are threatened. Yet it has already spilled over into other areas as well. This retardation is burning bright and is already threatening to make every kind or argument about every kind of topic to be for and by retards.
And you know the saying - 'Fake it until you make it.'
Within a certain potential there is something to it, that saying.

I think you are not well mannered Stuart, so I don't expect a 'Thank you' for all my attention to your post on ILP. And so, I wrote this not only for you.

Now we have a general outline of the modern.
He crosses time and space, being that he exists in all ages and in all places, as the type of mind most dependent on the immediate; it is always wanting to be a part of a majority, in all times and places; it is the mind most up-to-date, fashionable, trendy, and current.
It abhors what is passe, old...it is continuously looking forward...forward to....forward to a something, someone, that will save if from its past, nature, what limits and determines it.
A mind existing within a contained perceptual-event-horizon.

Like an animal, (s)he exists within a temporal box of immediacy.
His memory is short.
He eats, shits, fucks, sleeps, consumes, produces, socializes, and knows nothing beyond this.
He, like a simple creature, has little to no concept of the past, and because he has no concept of past his projections into the future are always detached, fantastic, extraordinary, supernatural.
Past, like nature, is a quaint zoo, a park to walk through before returning to the urban routine; past is history, full of dates, names, places, stories, that have very little impact on his reality in the "present" looking forward to...

He is hedonistic and materialistic because Manimals always are.
Having no past to draw guidance, identity and pride from, they remain simple creatures with simple creature delights, finding purpose, and meaning, in simple animal things.  

The Modern Manimal, because it can only be modern in that it can only live in the present looking forward, changes its mind often, because society/politics changes positions, and because technological advances alter social interactions - criteria, standards change.
To remain updated the Modern Manimal must adopt the latest changes....upload them into its empty skull.

He, being always on the forefront, will be the first to change...he adopts and adapts.
His goal is to be on the cutting-edge of conformity...the leading dog in uploading the latest trends, knowledge, understanding.
This inconsistency in his thinking, this constant changing his mind is, for him and his kind, proof of open-mindedness...they are progressives.
Progress means this need to remain updated, current, in the forefront of social and cultural advancement....the towards
The Manimal's pride is rooted in consuming and producing - money-making, copulating with as many females as possible, travelling to as many places as possible, eating as much food as possible, drinking, experiencing as many drugs as possible.
The Manimal is a Capitalists dream: an empty mind feeling constant hunger, constant dissatisfaction....the Zombie.
Knowledge, for the Manimal is another consumer good...the more the better.
What he lacks is understanding and that he can find in the popular pools of data analysis on-line, on Television, in the cinema, in pop-culture...etc.

In all cases quantities are replacing qualities.
But these quantities have to be acknowledged, validated, admired, otherwise their activities do not provide the needed social benefit.
Quantity unprocessed material, must offer something to the Manimal, and because it cannot understand it can only find usefulness for quantities in being admired by as many others as possible, enjoying them.
Because it is quick to adopt whatever is new, whatever is trending, whatever is the latest, he will not understand his own positions. He is changing them too fast to completely digest them, even if he could.

He will learn the words associate with them but will have no ability, beyond the superficial, to justify and validate them.
He will know without understanding.
He will parrot, regurgitate, recycle, with zero personal input.
The modern Manimal is a reflective surface.
Always behind an authority, an institution, a popular belief, always referring and deferring, always evoking the "everyone thinks so" argument....he is incapable of thinking on his own.
If he is pressured he will use the methods I spoke of elsewhere to save face and to escape immanent exposure as being the retard, the stunted mind, that (s)he is.


My favourite, at this time, Modern Manimal on ILP:

The [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. Poor thing thinks that changing his moniker will help him escape his nature, his past.
Notice how he declares, states, dismisses, but has no clue what Satyr said, why he said it, and how it relates to reality.
This is the turd who once claimed that philosophy is not about making value judgements.
As he put it, with a bit of help from moi was that the "BEST philosophy, is the one that never makes value judgements"....yes folks you heard it.  

Watch him return to his favourite topic....himself, over and over again.
For him a philosophy forum is a place to discuss how "happy" and "popular" he is....or how clever, and how much he impresses the American retards in his neighbourhood, in his family tree.
How much money he makes, how much pussy he fucks, how wonderful his life is, how this and how that...and there he is night, after night, on ILP, a thirty-something year old man-child starting threads like "What are you doing?", feeling cool about being a pot-head, being proud of considering Tupac's lyrics, and RAP music, poetry, the best art ever....or posting laconic declarative sentences with zero content.
An "adult" who still thinks getting shit-faced and fucking dumb whores is the height of happiness.

If asked to explain his positions he makes a quick excuse to avoid exposing himself as what he is.
Or he links to to text which is written by another.
I once asked him to explain how those positions applied in the discussion we were having...and guess what he did.
He gave me the "I can't be bothered" line....his best line.  

In the link above he is asked by the one still smarting from being run-off KT - but not banned - to offer an opinion on which philosopher most influenced Satyr, in his view....read the response on your own.
Classic.
Ask him what Satyr's positions are...or someone else's...forget Satyr. Ask him what Nietzsche believed, or what Heidegger said...ask him.
Then prepare for a Wikipedia synopsis.  
Go ahead, test him.

This modern Manimal spent months offering declarative accusations such as "racist," against anything he was trained, like a good puppy, to look down on; emotional postings full of cynicism, ridicule and sarcasm, and then he claims that his only position is that the races should be treated equally.
After all that defensiveness he now changes his position, having come across other members on ILP who openly admit that they are racists, in that they do think races exist and that they matter, and he is no longer anti-racist, he is anti abuse.
He must fit-in, ya see.
He must appear like he was in-the-know, from the start.
He once claimed that racists were all dumb....and that he is an "intellectual", reading many books.
Go ahead, test him...be my guest.
I want to watch him squirm some more.  

Why is this douche-bag one of my all-time favourites?
Because he is pompous, simple to the point of being cute, and willing to put himself on a pedestal.
He wants attention...and he gets it.
I want to observe him.

He's the worm on the proverbial hook.

Is this turd rare, is he the exception to the rule?
No, and that's the only thing that makes him interesting.
He is a part of a majority.
He is but the most base, the most simple manifestation of a growing majority...of Nihilistic Modernity, of Feminization.
The others are more careful, they hide better, they are better hypocrites, but this turd is full of hot-air, he is proud, he craves attention, he wants to be seen, and this makes him the perfect specimen to study the type.


Oh, and one last thing...
For a real glimpse into the character, the nature of this specimen, this man-child, Manimal, consider this:
How many times has he posted a photo of himself?
Why do you think he does so? Is he that attractive?

The assault against me as fat and ugly when he could not say anything about my mind, or my views....why?

How much pussy does he really get and does he pay for it....with cash or with some sniff?
We all know how easy modern females of a certain age are...we all know the addicted ones, with no daddy at home, are the easiest of all.
This turd feels proud because he can exploit these pathetic creatures, making him what?

Why would someone with such an exciting life be on a forum every fucking day, particularly when he has nothing to say about the philosophy?

When he was discovered as a drug dealer, how much effort did he put into trying to convince everyone that, in these economic times, he is some kind of Wall Street hustler?

Take a look at this, one of my favourite threads by him....in depth, personal, philosophical on his level:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Indeed, for a guy who gets easy, free pussy, he sure seems focused on charming ladies on-line...in a philosophy forum, of all places.
Finally, notice his interest when PhilosophyGirl admitted her drug problem.
Like he's done this before. As if drunk, high chicks are what he pounces on....part of his charm.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Go back, if you are interested, and read his responses to PhilosophyGirl when he realizes she's a drunk and an addict.
Notice how he smells a potential victim.
Yes, that's how impressive he is.
When caught and cornered he claims to be trying to help her.  

Yeup, he's so sly only American retards would be impressed by his methods.
This is why he thinks I am a fake, like him.
He thinks I am lying, manipulating, pretending....because HE is.
He has no clue how to evaluate my positions, but my effect on others is what he covets.
Because he can only understand influence on his level, he takes himself as an example, and concludes that Satyr is a liar, a hypocrite, a playa...because that's what he likes to think of himself as. But Satyr is a bad one, compared to him, ya see, because Satyr insults, when he flatters, and Satyr is honest, when he lies.
His conclusion?
Satyr is a wannabe...a want-to-be Shit-Smears, but he is not as smart, as duplicitous; he is overwhelmed by bitterness, anger, making him a pathetic, a bad playa.

Go ahead, ask him what an ubermench is....ask him why Satyr's positions are wrong on any subject.
Ask him to link you to one place where Satyr claimed to be an overman or an alpha-male.

This fish-bowl is gold.  


 

It took some time but the masks dropped.

Where will I find a replacement Manimal to study now that this turd has been flushed into the sewer?
One among the ones who befriended him, took him seriously, could not see his face behind the masks perhaps.

There are so many Manimals these days...some more some less, but few as open and willing to drop their panties as the shit-Smear.
It was a joy watching him perform, and interact with his kind.
When discovered as a drug-dealer, using drugs to exploit pathetic females of the American intellectual variety, he changed his moniker toi Mr.Reasonable....a very telling change.

"Mr."...a need for respect.
"Reasonable"...if you use the word then you acquire the virtue.
Like a retard named Genius.

The constant attack he used... "learning how to reason" tells me he's read some self-help books on how to think. His almost total dependence on on-line supportive knowledge, like Wikipedia, tells me he is most insecure about himself in this area...it may also explain why he goes to ILP rather than to some social forum full of retards on his level....this he could more easily impress with his bullshit.
His interest in philosophy is as a help manual into how to think and how to impress and manipulate humans, or how to think about odds and numbers to make money easily.

His appearance is that of a smarmy geek, quick with the smart-ass comment.
He stands out among the level found in the U.S. and so he sought better company on-line.
He's probably witty, giving him threat cuteness some girl like, but most of the attention he receives from them is of a non-sexual kind. He's a cute smaller brother, to have fun with.
He probable exploits them with alcohol and drugs, and being present.

One possible motive might be to find a higher quality female...one out of his league, in the mind department.

His animosity towards me only increased my interest in him and his methods.
I think, without wanting to appear too presumptuous, that he considered me someone who saw through the pretenses the others bought into.
A potential risk to his on-line game. Someone who takes away the focus from him, and reduces his potential to impress and to manipulate.
Others followed distressing him to the point where he had to change his moniker and approach.
That others kept bringing me up must have irked him a lot.
In his attempt to discredit me, to ridicule me, to dismiss me....he inadvertently told us all what he was about: word-games, pretense, a snake-oil salesman, a hypocrite, a shallow, needy, little mind....a typical modern.

Confusing my motive for his he assumed that I was a lower grade version of him....a wannabe he could pity because I was not as talented in bullshitting. But he couldn't fully understand why some found me interesting...so he went for the esy: they are all fools, naive, not like the kind he usually impresses and exploits.  

Earlier in this thread I outlined some of the process used when a Modern Manimal, Man-Child, or retard, uses when confronted by any idea that challenges his herd belonging and safety, or threatens to expose his/her social persona:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

He displayed all these stages in his engagement with those who threatened him and his game.

I predict that after some time when he heals his ego wounds he will return with a new angle, if not a new moniker.
But, unfortunately for him, the same essence will remain, because no matter how fast yo run, how much you deny and forget, the past/nature can no more be escaped that self can....only awareness can be escaped.

Fascinating.

I think, when someone is selling bullshit all day then it becomes very difficult for them to separate bullshit from non-bullshit. Over time, actions form also patterns in the brain and reality becomes blurred.

Anfang wrote:

I think, when someone is selling bullshit all day then it becomes very difficult for them to separate bullshit from non-bullshit. Over time, actions form also patterns in the brain and reality becomes blurred.

Yes...and it then becomes a matter of protecting yourself from being exposed.
This is the herding mechanism of Modern minds. They all use a form of bullshit in their reasoning, each to a varying degree of duplicity, but all share this need to remain convincing.
So, their unstated agreement is that we will discuss any topic just as long as you don to explore my duplicity and I do not expose yours.

The 'evil', ill ones, the ones who must be excluded, are the ones who refuse to abide by this unstated social rule.
They disturb the game, the performances.

Talk about injustice, but never bring up how their lifestyles are privileged and dependent on exploiting millions around the world.
Talk about right/left in that typical western, nihilistic binary way, but never bring up how both sides are varieties of the same lie.
Talk about nature, and Evolution Theory, but never bring up how this may apply to human populations, human types, human genetics.

The "debate" happens within the boundaries of their bullshit reality.

They believe in Evolution Theory, they claim to be empiricists, and that they want honesty from the other, but try to discuss  any subject honestly. Try to follow reasoning along evolutionary contexts.

The final fallback from these duplicitous fucks is the "we all know this, but we're faking it because the issue is moral".
Judeo-Christianity of the brain.

They think in self-serving ways, where an opinion must benefit the opinion holder, so they assume all are like them.
They assume uniformity while claiming to believe in complexity.

They say they are empirical, but refuse to accept appearances as real and as important.

They say they love nature but then they offer ways to intervene and wrap and change nature.
Who wants to change what he loves?
Not I.

They say they believe in Evolution Theory but when it comes to humans evolution does not apply...it ended when the Jesus came, or when we realized we were all part of the same species.

They use humanity but refuse to accept it as a sexual label.
So, female/male are social constructs but human is not?

It's a trade-off. A very smart manipulator is very much aware of what he's doing. He needs to have both states in his mind within control at the same time and never allow for his sense of reason to adopt the lies which he is telling someone else. This requires much effort and energy and so it cannot be done for a prolonged time. The advantage is that reason and a clear view can help to evaluate the situation better, from a more realistic vantage-point. Another advantage is that the integrity of the individual remains largely in tact. And with integrity I mean of course the integrity, the honest evaluation of oneself within. Because towards the outside, pretenses can be upheld for a long time if one knows a few basic rules.

The other approach is to fuse the sense of reason with the manipulation scheme. This makes it possible to uphold the manipulative state for longer and longer times until finally it becomes second nature, or first nature for that matter, because it will be the only nature left.
Less expenditure of energy to sell the lies because one starts to believe them oneself. But also a loss of awareness, of reality because the lies become inseparable from the reasoning part. One becomes a part of the new reality. Which has its advantages especially in worlds which are dominated by human, shared, constructs.

I doubt the specimen, in this case shit-Smears, has any clue about anything other than how to manipulate retards lower than he is.
If he did he would have exhibited more cleverness than he did....with his "philosophy is not about value judgments" or in his inability o defend anything he said without referring and deferring to an "everyone" clause.
The specimen simply developed a verbal ability to confuse those who lacked the mind and the understanding of words that he did.
He assumes reality is manipulated simply by using words, and this falls into the general beliefs of his kind.
He also developed, in time, methods of remaining safe, obscure, behind his social persona.
When he comes across people who can see through him he assumes, wrongly, that they are like him.

Trivers, Robert wrote:

If…deceit is fundamental to animal communication, then there must be strong selection to spot deception and this ought, in turn to select for a degree of self-deception, rendering some facts and motives unconscious so as to not betray – by the subtle signs of self-knowledge – the deception being practiced. Thus, the conventional view that natural selection favors nervous systems which produce ever more accurate images of the world must be a very naïve view of mental evolution.

The bullshitter must become convincing, trying to surpass the other's evolved ability to see through bullshit, by buying into his own bull.
He does not only pretend but he believes in his own lies.
But he cannot justify them, or defend them if he comes into contact with some who can contradict and expose him.
He concludes that the other is like him, but inferior, because unlike him he is trying to "sell" ideas that make him unlikable, whereas this bullshitter is more talented by selling crap that make him likeable, that gets him pussy and so on.
The motive of clarity, despite personal costs, he cannot process.
It is beyond him...because if it were not then his own lies would not be as convincing.
The explanation has the added benefit of being self-flattering, so he clings to it for dear life.

Satyr wrote:

It is beyond him...because if it were not then his own lies would not be as convincing.

Yes, I think so too because if it were a role he plays then he'd slip up again and again. The ego can't keep the truth inside, it must boast about it from time to time about its success to fool them all. The more truly modest one is, the longer such a role play could take place without slipping up.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Look at his posts defending himself in exact details.. As if those photos are proof of anything besides artificial joy for the moment.

I hope he is high in all of these pictures because otherwise his eyes would betray a not very flattering character.

Actually he already showed his character manifold in his actions, so...

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Krisy, one of the many other nit-wits on ILP harp in with her sarcasm.A perfect display of stupidity. No organic thinking, no ability to follow a continuity...she's someone using some lien other's inheritance. It is not hers...she is detached from her own inheritance.
She's mutt with no sense of self.
A typical Modern.

The idea that language, as an representation of conceptualizing, emerges within particular populations, reflecting the particular bloodlines and how they interacted with particular environments, is beyond her ability to grasp. that some of these memetic inheritances go viral, infect other inferior populations, spreading, also alludes her simple mind.  

This is what Fausty wanted to include in his discussions on logic...this is Fausty's and Carleas' ideal member.
the douche-bags thought that if you include enough of these retards the forum would explode in creativity, would become popular, would make them money, or interesting discussions would ensue.

Put shit-Smears, Krisy the mother hen, and a Bull-Dyke, mix in a few simpleton liberals, a few anarchists, and stir the crap around....then wait for brilliance to happen.
What response does she give, in the way I predicted?
Yes, sarcasm...because she cannot offer anything but that.
She's being exposed as a hypocrite, without a clue, and her only defence is the usual.

I think what little Stuey should do is stay exactly where he belongs...casting little pebbles of discontent, trying to let us know how after he left us, when he castrated himself away from us, we were left with nothing but our gaping wound...he being the biggest little-prick out there.

Kriswest doesn't ask or care to understand who 'we' is. It doesn't matter because we are all equal and if we are all equal then it's pointless to ask who 'we' is. We is just many equal people - which ones? Doesn't matter, all are equal. It's just one more undifferentiated cell for the super-organism to be turned into a specialized one through training.
A few specialized cells do all the creating. Of course they are just like all the other cells, just differentiated by different training.

A distaste for hierarchies within the social order. I think that's a feminine disposition.
A hierarchy is required for an organism to have a chance at having a greater impact than other organisms within the social organization. And this trying to extend ones' own order (in form of genes for example) to spread it, is part of the masculine principle.

The destroyer gods are often female. Makes me think that the ages of destruction usually feature unleashed femininity.