Forums

I know this is going to feed her emptiness, and flatter her immensely, but it's just too hilarious to pass on...[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

C-Turd wrote:

I spit him. Uncanny aroma of blue-collar. A bad year, perhaps? We shall keep the rest in the cellar and see if it gets better with age. If not, we can at least throw it into a marinade. Tenderize some old funky meat.

Blue collar...
HA!!
Good one.
A bourgeoisie put-down from the upper-middle-classed "white-collared" specialists of middle-America...with a brownish sweat-stain forming in the milky-foaminess.
A yellow ring around the collar.
Maybe tomorrow, to get under my skin, she'll refer to me as a manual laborer, with callous hands and overalls...
The shame...the shame of it all...

[url=]Oh Father...[/url]

Satyr wrote:

Now that [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] with bold lettering and with mathematical precision, we can only hope that this genius can turn his efforts towards cold-fusion, levitation, and immortality.

A good numerical formula might suffice.  

They are so ashamed of lack and experience reality as a  negativity, and do not realize how negative their own proposal is for 'resigning' to the dark side of reality, in the all the positive, civil humility of "it cannot be helped or removed"... unbelievable...
Its just more progressive Xt. than the old version of the Xt. moral that wanted to "abolish" the unpleasant side.

Humanarchists do not Reject it like those Churchists, they Resign to it with a helpless face and call it 'positivity'.

The need to hide, after exposing self under the delusion of self-grandeur and an idealized sense of self, forces the mind to overcompensate downwards.
When it pretended to be high and mighty, only revealing that (s)he is low and weak, to stimulate the process of fight/flight, the Modern uses what (s)he is more comfortable with, the level (s)he is at home in.
Here the absence of self-knowledge, results in an overestimation of self, and in some cases in an underestimation of self.

That is when you truly see their, true, essence, as a detached, indifferent, observer.
In the preparatory, stress-induced, fight/flight stage, the other exposes the true essence of himself/herself, outside the egotistical pretenses, social imitations, and the blatant lies.

They say that you "do not truly know another until you fight him"...and this is so.
But you must add to this as being equally so that "you do not truly know someone until you watch him in flight".
Not only the circumstance but the direction and the method of fleeing.  

During the fight/flight paroxysm, manifesting, in some cases, as a sexual, erotic, delirium of instinctive reactions, akin to the feeding frenzy, the others core identity is revealed.

The average modern nihilist is so convinced that the past is overcome that (s)he convinces himself/herself that by suing words to contradict this past, his/her own presence, and his/her own behaviors, that this past, this nature, can be erased, forgotten..that it can be burned in words to the point where it is no longer applicable. But this is exactly why (s)he remains a victim, if you want to call it that, or a more predictable representation of this past which (s)her does not acknowledge, so as to begin overcoming it, but hides, buries in words.

Words, numbers, do not suffice to "correct" the world. They can only represent it and symbolize it in approximation.
Using words, and numbers, to hide from the world will not do. No human artifice, no matter how clever it is, does not affect the world just be saying so.
If the symbol is not understood as a representation that may direct action, ACTION, and it remains on the area of symbolism, then it is only effective amongst minds that share in their comprehension and indoctrination of the underlying "logic" of language and symbolism.

If you are, for instance, a hypocrite and a liar, you might convince another hypocrite and liar, or a simpleton, already seduced by the "logic" of the medium (see McLuhan), but this has no effect on the reality that made this needy hypocritical liar as he is.
You cannot pretend yourself out of your own past/nature. you may convince and seduce others, like you, and you can all live, for a time, in the shared delusion of self-flattery and the unstated code of liars (I will not honestly tell you what I think if you promise to do likewise), but this has zero effect on reality.

This is more of an escapism a self-narcosis, using others as your supporting cast.
It has an immediate, superficial, effect, but not a substantial one.

To the one who has learned to see through such pretenses it becomes a pathetic display of human weakness.

phoneutria wrote:

Just pulling your leg a little, dear.

Love you too, baby.

The best thing to do with a hypocrite and pretentious liar, an obsessive narcissist, which is becoming the norm not the exception these days, is to let his/her lie and pretense play-out on its own.
There is no need to intervene, particularly since it has minimal effects on you, if you are sufficiently aware, so why not observe and let it go on, analyzing and validating your own theories about human nature and about Modern nihilism and the genetic.memetic effects it is having on humanity?

Let him/her (inter)act with those of his/her own kind, and watch what happens.

In time, you will see patterns in this (inter)action which will make the outcome predictable.

When one guard goes down another goes up. Vulnerabilities, exposure, out of necessity.
When pressed into action people's true colors often seep through: watch as they act contrarily to their convenient ideals.

The noblest ego, the most profound arrogance, begins from a sense of insecurity and weakness, building itself up with experiences.

The buffoon, the hypocrite, begins with weakness, circumvents the experience stage, because it is uncertain, risky, and costly, and, in this age of immediate, path-of-least-resistance, gratification, it projects its own desirable object/objective of strength, wisdom, genius, value, godliness, whatever, and works backwards from there.

How?
The same way all nihilistic, modern, psyches do: it uses words to convince others, weaker than itself, of a lie, it wishes were true but is unable to make it happen.
It prefers to bask in the lie, rather than pay the cost, or take the risk that is entailed in taking on a journey towards a destination.
"Will I suffice?"
"Have I inherited the gifts required to reach this goal?"  

These questions are so terrifying to the average modern that 9s)he refuses to respond to them honestly.
The potential answers can be devastating, because the world cares not for the individual's desires and his/her hopes and ambitions.

And when you've been raised to assume your own value, as a given, then no alternative answer will ever suffice.
The cult of victimhood leads to the cult of immediate gratification, and the cult of entitlement.

If you have the 'eye' you can always discern the pretender from the authentic.
The pretender is the idiot who goes straight for the desirable, without going through the intermediate stages of risks, costs, and/or suffering.
He imitates the end-result that inspires him, or seduces him him out of his degradation, not realizes that without the intermediate, personal, suffering, he can never support this end-result with awareness.
He makes of himself a joke to those who have, and who can, and the only ones he can impress are those like him.

The weakling, coward cannot help but expose himself to one who has the ‘eye’. He is the one who wants to imitate, the desirable, inspiring, outcome, without having to go through the intermediate stages of costs, risks, and/or suffering.
He wears the end-result as his fake persona, because he is unable to go through the initiating requirements of attaining it with his own merit.
He may convince those like him, or those worse off, but to the one who has gone through those necessary stages of humiliation, suffering, uncertainty, he remains a fake; a fake they can see and watch, enjoying his buffoonery.

The comforting idea(l) that the outcome is accessible to all, no matter their heritage or their courage and motives, is why the hypocrite will remain, forever, a big joke.
He may impress and convince, for a short time, finding some relief from self there, but in the long run his lie cannot help but be exposed to even the dimmest of spirits.

The, still, average, all too average, imbecile on ILP cannot comprehend that a "line" is a human construct (on any geometrical shape, for that matter)...and that it has no reality outside a human mind that has simplified, generalized a phenomenon down to an ambiguity.
He thinks that connecting the math to the geometry, both of which are representations of human abstractions, with an obvious internal, inherit, apriori, logic, that he is exposing reality, when the only thing he is "exposing" is human conceptions and human methods of making sense of reality.

This form on manimal is still unable to comprehend why a computer mirrors the human brain, why a guitar can be shaped like a spinal cord, and its tunes reflect human sonar apprehensions, and why a bulldozer reflect a human appendage, and why a television set works on the principles of neurological pulses.
It believes it is uncovering the deep truth of the world when all he is doing is extending human abstraction to its extremest reach.
Math, for example, measures the mental models in the human brain.
It fabricates statics to do so.
And you have the binary system mirroring the on/off neurology of the human mind/body dichotomy, bridged by the neural network over which the brain presides.
If these abstractions do, in fact, refer to a phenomenon, they approximate the dynamism, of the phenomenon by reducing it to a noetic static thing.


If one truly comprehends why the "piece of string" has no absolute, precise, measurement, in the above documentary one may begin to pull his head from his own anus, and he may, even, hope to begin to break free from the antipode of the nihilistic paradigm which is not only about the nil but also implies the absolute one.

If, and when, this hypothetical mind can break free from the nihilism of modernity, which includes a "right" to its preferred "left", and a "conservative" to its preferred "liberal", and a God to its preferred Satan, and a "negative" value to its preferred value which it calls "positive", then it may begin to explore its own condition with honesty and lucidity.
Courage is not presumed since it is only inherited, and it cannot be faked or imitated...and, yet, it remains a necessary ingredient to Know(ing) Thyself.

Why do the modern variant of Judeo-Chritianity skirt around defining what one/nil means, when they build their delusions upon them?
Because one is, to the secular humanist, what God is to the Jew and the Christian and the Muslim.
And nil is what the Devil, the evil, is for these same nihilistic precursors to the Alexandrian Age.


In between those two manmade absolutes, the absolutes which are 'absent', and so man lacks projecting them as object/objectives, lies existence.
Not on one or the other side, but in-between.


"In-Between" is an interesting concpet, because it has no real meaning outside the one/nil, the absolute poles of masculine/feminine nihilism.

In-Between IS reality, which contradicts both sides of the nihilistic paradigm.
it is the "towards" the fluid to the implied static absolute singularity and absolute void of binary thinking...reflecting,a gain, human neurological processes, evolved to makes sense of reality, not to substitute it.
Both one/nil and non-existent, just as are God/Satan...they are the very representation of what does not exist.
The static to the fluid, the singular to the multiple, the fluctuating to the whole...the real to the unreal...the phenomenon to the noumenon.
Once this is grasped, on an artistic level, then the reason why reality is counter-intuitive, without being fantastic, begins to set into the mind...like why a painting of a tree is not really a tree, but only a representation, approximation, symbolism of it.
Because "a" tree is not static...it is dynamic.

The abstraction of a "now" a 'here" is also an interesting concept.
It is the cutting-away of the past, the depth of experiences passed on through genes and memes, so as to arbitrarily decide what past applies and what does not.
This is the quintessential essence of abstraction.
To construct the static thing it arbitrarily, or in accordance with its depth of individual perception, decides to eliminate all other dimensional fields.
To fabricate the one, the god, the now, the here, it disregards what precedes it....the dimension is severed, abstracted, detached from its fluidity, so as to create the simplification/generalization.

This is, exactly, what abstraction means.
It is what consciousness requires to perceive.
This separation, detachment, distancing.
The cutting-away point is always ambiguous, it must remain so if the outcome is to be taken literally and not as an approximation a symbol a representation.

The wave is turned into a particle.
The fluidity of existence, this Becoming, is terraformed, magically - but humanely, oh so humanely - into a thing, a particle a here, a now, a one, symbolized by a number and a word.
It can be symbolized by a t-shirt, a statement, an image.
It does not matter once the translation from fluid to static is taken literally as a correction of the real.

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

I've been commenting on this for years.

This is the foundation of nihilism, of its subsequent cultural outcome as Modernity, and Americanism.

Rome being the civilization, that represented Hellenic culture...and Hellenism being a manifestation of Indo-European paganism.
This, sets up the Rome vs Jerusalem division in the west, which takes on a different form in the east.
this is what characterizes the current conflict in western discourse, and the conflicts that arise from it - most of which remain psychological as in schizophrenic, because the nihilistic paradigm dominates, creating this false dichotomy of right/left, positive/negative, right/wrong, God/Devil...pain/pleasure, 1/0.
A division the majority identifies with.

"Freedom" in its absolute, literal form, is the same as saying "one" or "here" or "one" or "self", the last detached from any past/nature that would inhibit its definition and its desirable expression.

freedom, is the same as saying "independence", the favorite idea(l) for feminists and all slaves who dream of salvation from the corporeal and the past/nature.

Need, and this extreme suffering, indicates a contradiction to this concept, if it is taken literally, and absolutely.
To need is to care, and to need and care is to express a dependency.
Existence is an expression of dependencies.

Indifference is the manifestation of power, as it indicated independence from the particular, not the general.
Therefore, independence, freedom, is an expression of overcome, of detaching from, of not caring for and not needing the particular - it is an expression of superiority, of a qualitative surpassing.
Superiority means a degree of strength, power, in relation to otherness.

As all value judgments are relationships, juxtapositions, comparisons.

So, too, does 'here' and 'now' indicate a relationship, and not an absolute state of being.

Self...
The concept of self, is also a detachment, a temporal separation, if taken literally as an static, thing, a singularity, independent of all past/nature - Nihilism.

How did I define nobility?
Whomever cares can look it up.

I mention it because the same applies here.
Nobility being the (re)cognition, acceptance, adherence to, the appreciation of, this fact.
Therefore, all, including the lowly and weak, can be noble, and respectable, if they (re)cognize this and do not pretend it away.
When they pretend to be otherwise is when they become despicable, comedic, pretentious,  and pathetic.
This, too, is part of Know(ing) Thyself.

To be in harmony with the past, with nature, is to be totally authentic.
To make of self a conduit between past/nature, and a projected, realistic, object/objective, an idea(l).

The more in-line this past/nature is with this projected, desirable, idea(l), the more attainable it is.
The more fantastic, out of line, out of tune, fantastic this self-assessment is, this self-valuing is, all the more this projected object/objective will be.
The result is chasing chimeras, in the dark, blaming others when disappointing outcomes follow, never taking responsibility, and, so, forever reaming a victim of reality.
The identify with victim\hood is soothing, at this point.

Once you blame other, before taking account of self and personal choices, then the easy way out becomes a salvation and a prison.

Ergo...self-empowerment, real pride, real arrogance, begins with humility, humiliation, and shame.
Otherwise, if it skips this step, it remains a fake, a superficial display of need without the constitution, the risk/cost, the depth.

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

Retard wrote:

The 9 you see at school is the peak of the Universe's mathematical domain. This Universe doesn't have numbers beyond 9 - instead it mixes numbers 1~9 to create numbers more than 9. Therefore 13, is actually a 4 (1 + 3).


....This Universe is creating shapes via numbers. T

As you can see, "the Universe" is creating.
It does not go beyond the human finger count, with the 0 being the later additive to balance it out (9 being no more than a multiple of 1, and 1 having no meaning whatsoever, outside the human brain.)
No one anywhere, except in the mind that simplifies/generalizes, and fixes, to construct the simplified/generalization, of a singularity, by separating.
Later this separation, distancing, indicates a unity, in their pathetic minds, because it is a separation of the same experience of fluidity...which they can only conceptualize as a whole.

Instead of god we have the singularity of Uni-Verse, which creates.
It is not man, who uses numbers and words to describe, and understand, the universe, the world, but the numbers, and the words, presumably - because numbers are nothnig more than more abstracted words - which is "creating"?

Do you see how judeo-Christianity, via Marxism, becomes secular humanism?
It changes symbols, and terms, and symbols, but the underlying psychological attitude is unchanged.
The creator is transformed from beyond to human.

Why, do you think, they consider appearances superficial and changeable?
It is BECAUSE, in their paradigm it is.
The goal is unchanging, what changes is the apparent, what they call the "shallow" expression of this already determined fact.  

This is Judaism, and Christianity, and Islam, using the same goals, and presuppositions, and only dismissing the God part to become more viral.
Same shit repackaged for a more savvy, modern, consumer.

The nihilist will always propose a concept that refers to nothnig empirical, has no experiential connection, no attachment to the world.
He will not propose it as an artistic depiction, a representation, but as an actual indisputable fact, and than challenge you to disprove it.
They will propose the unreal, simplification and then accuse you of simplifying and then dismissing their proposal based on the real.

This, too, is part of nihilism.
This reversal of argumentation.
They negate the real with their proposition but if you reject it, then it is you who is negative and you who must prove the negative.

if you cannot, in an absolute way, because there are no absolutes, then they retain the 'right" to assume that their proposition, no matter how ludicrous, is, at least, possible.
That's all they need to inflate it into a probability.

And the sickness, calling itself health, propagates numerically, remaining qualitatively the same.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] has a code.
If it capitalizes its dogma, and puts a bit of color to it, it gains in effect what is lost in symbolism.

This retard is an example of Alexandrian Madness.
He cures cancer, he corrects nature, he is god, with symbols.
The magician's armory.
He is the "matrixician"...agent Smith of the Matrix.

Hocus-pocus.
Number codes everywhere.
A world made up of symbols.
The Hyper-Real...

Satyr wrote:

I know this is going to feed her emptiness, and flatter her immensely, but it's just too hilarious to pass on...[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

C-Turd wrote:

I spit him. Uncanny aroma of blue-collar. A bad year, perhaps? We shall keep the rest in the cellar and see if it gets better with age. If not, we can at least throw it into a marinade. Tenderize some old funky meat.

Blue collar...
HA!!
Good one.
A bourgeoisie put-down from the upper-middle-classed "white-collared" specialists of middle-America...with a brownish sweat-stain forming in the milky-foaminess.
A yellow ring around the collar.
Maybe tomorrow, to get under my skin, she'll refer to me as a manual laborer, with callous hands and overalls...
The shame...the shame of it all...

[url=

The Brazilian toff.

Zara wrote:

I think he is obsessed with ILP... what do you guys think? Hehe

I am indeed, and you are obsessed with one individual.

My interest in ILP have been explained, as has your obsession with Satyr.
Nothing more to say but watch it play-out, over and over again.

Zara wrote:

I think he is obsessed with ILP... what do you guys think? Hehe

That you want The D.

I'm sure.
One built on an occupation.

How Modern you are, white, white, collared, princess.

phoneutria wrote:

Supra-Aryanist wrote:

The Brazilian toff.

Blue-collarness is not an occupation, it's a mindset

Whatever,, milord and yours, atleast has a mind for some mind-set,,, you have no mind to begin with... So mind it!

Satyr wrote:

I'm sure.
One built on an occupation.

You labourer!

Satyr is a mole.

Like a beauty-spot in this blue world...

phoneutria wrote:

*gags*

Did you get abused?

Shouldn't you be discussing rape, dear?
You seem into it.

phoneutria wrote:

*gags*

I'm laughing hysterically.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].
It's quartz-like.

I recently discovered video of the gang on ILP in one of their secret get-aways.

You will discern in the back the MENSA members, the playboy with 160 I.Q. the guy who explained everything, and up-front now, pushing the older "geniuses" to the back, the VO crowd, who, amongst other things, have cured cancer, and blown academia out of the water.
Nobel Prize immanent...mathematically proven.  

It's called valuing self.

Permit me to make it convincing...

One retard and another retard, multiplied by nine retards, make one brilliant combination.

LOL, what.

Somebody defining Manimals but taken from his own model, projecting himself upon others yet denying that he is the label himself that he put onto others:

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


But the women he attracts to his forum and they describing their relationships with a particular kind of men, who had been manipulating gullible women; might be interesting to go through a little bit.

Quote :

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

''1) Women usually don't openly flirt with a man unless they are encouraged to do so because women don't like rejection. Your P created the dynamic for them to feel comfortable showing admiration and giving attention.

2) Jealousy and fear are normal reactions that have a biological base. Due to our biological disposition, a woman will feel threatened when her man wanders, cheats, or is attracted to another woman because in the days when we were hunters and gathers this signaled a threat to our survival and existence. NO man = no food for the woman and children. It is a a woman's biological need for protection and safety that triggers these unsettling emotions.''

Quote :

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

''my P wears a uniform for work so when he isn't working his attire is very casual like t- shirts and jeans but for some reason nearly every thing the guy wears has some type of writing on it whether it be for a sports team or a musical group or comic book character kind of thing. If Ps don't really have any interests of their own I always wondered did he actually care about these things or were they just to draw attention or strike up conversation with others who are interested in those things? Just something I'm perplexed by''

''I noticed mine would only wear these types of t-shirts (logos or ?) when things were really calm, when he was happy. To me it seemed like when there was nothing else going on, no drama, no confusion, no anxiety that he had nothing to feed off and when he put on one of these t-shirts it gave him an identity because he was so empty inside.''

''If your P wore a uniform for 8 hrs a day and that was his identity, then he comes homes and takes off that identity, what are you left with? Nothing. It might explain the randomness of the t-shirts, the fact that he wore them all the time, and not really having anything to do with what's on them. He just had to be somebody. Just a thought.''

Quote :

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

''Well when I kicked mine out last year, he actually hung a noose in a tree in my backyard. I have all the texts on an old phone. He keeps going on and on "come on, you want to watch me do it"..."your gonna let me die in your tree"..."this is what I mean to you". All the way I'm texting, "please stop, the cops are on the way", "you need help, and once you get it will be fine", "please stop blaming me for your misfortunes"''

As always, the group, whether you call it nation, tribe, clan, cult, if governed by a pseudo-democratic ethos, and a spirituality of of uniforming unifying oneness, follows the same lowest-common-denominator rule.

In nature it manifests in herd behavior, which is then responded to with predator pack compensation.
But in nature there is no "we rise or fall as one" nihilism.
The weakest member of the herd is splintered off and killed....thusly keeping the herd healthier and the pack fed.
The lowest-common-denominator is sacrificed.
The herd does not slow down to accommodate it.

Now notice how moderns strive to raise the weakest and lower the strongest to achieve parity.
Understand it as a desire to avoid being that one stray.
The herd will move as one, with equal speed - "no child left behind" and so on.
It will become a SuperOrganism no predator, or pack, can take down.

The psychology of the past is satisfied by allowing a uniqueness (slight differentiation) within the shared premises of group dynamics (acknowledged similitude).

Like herds no single leader emerges, or tolerated for long.
One is the fastest, and takes the lead, and later it is replaced by another...and all reduce their potentials to accommodate the entirety.
Once integrated into the herd psychology some brave ones may emerge as defenders of its values, its unifying principles.

All distinctions are reflections of others within the group - "individuality" as an internal relationship of the uniforming multiplicity.
All individual traits only have meaning, value, within these shared premises - they are so by association, requiring acknowledgment.
Each member must be seen if what he is, or wishes to be, is to have value.

What divides, and is external to the herd paradigm, such as symmetry, strength, distinction that fragments the common identifier, is the evil, other - the predator, the virus, the illness in relation to their integrated health.
Outside of this herd environment all values become uncertain.
The individual grasps upon this herd for dear life.

They need not understand how or why....like fish swimming in large schools that confuse predators. The individual fish need not comprehend the reasons why it is preserved...the behavior is reinforced by preserving the ones that exhibit the particular behavior.
It later, may, develop a mysticism to explain it without shaming or insulting any single participant - making the innate, by now, behavior a unifying, virtue, that maintains the schooling principles intact.