Observations and Thoughts too short for their own threads - 1

Simple Minded:

Average women will try to make a man jealous by mentioning her "boyfriend" or even kissing, showing affection in public, or making out with a guy. Women do this because they use their own emotions, feelings, and thoughts as a baseline. When women see a man with a woman, they are jealous, and they feel more attracted to him because he is in demand. Women apply their own logic and rationale to men. So if they like a man, they will try to invoke 'jealousy' and desirability in him that they feel themselves. But this is counter-intuitive and produces the opposite effect.

Instead of making herself more desirable to the man she sexually desires and craves, she causes the opposite effect. When a man sees a pretty woman making out with her boyfriend this is an immense turn-off. Because 1] she is less chaste, less virgin, more "used" than as if she were "pure" and 2] he must compete to have her. Males dislike both reasons and will stop pursuing this type of woman. Whereas females have the opposite mentality, and will go very far out of their way, and take great risks, to have a man who is "already taken".

So females, in not understanding male pathology, produce the exact opposite effect than what they intended. They intend to make a sexually attractive man "jealous" by making out with her boyfriend, in front of the guy she really likes.


Males crave and desire what all males lack: the hymen, sexual purity, chastity, and virginity.

Females crave what they lack: virility, energy, pride, dignity/culture.

"Yeah but that's just your opinion maaaaan"

The primary pathological defense of the Modern is this: Even reality can be reduced to a subjective opinion. Here is the logical fallacy at work. Because an admittedly "Subjective" mind is used to interpret reality, then any and all descriptions and explanations of reality are "Faulty" and prone to error. So even if you're 99.99999% correct about something, like gravity pulling a rock down a hill, then the Modern can attack your subjectivity insomuch as his/her own subjectivity is also an error. In the end, everything is a "Mere Opinion" to the modern, ready to be subverted into something weak, small, powerless, and non threatening. Rendering reality dull, lifeless, edible, easier to swallow, colorless, etc.

If a thinker, and especially a philosopher, devoted himself to reality and objectivity, removing or at least separating 'Subjective' contamination then the Modern would still reject, in the end, any "objective truth", "objectivity", or even "truth" from the core grounding of his/her mentality. Because a human can error, because a mind is finite, then all is absolutely disproved and open to doubt. None can be right. None can be correct, accurate, truthful, convincing, persuasive. From this delusional, mentally ill vantage point, the modern can continue to regress and retreat into herself (Autism) and never face the "Negative" consequences of failing to adapt to reality.

This is the very logical fallacy (Irrationality) that motivates and insulates Moderns and most Humanity throughout the world now, to separate civility and humanity from "animal" behavior, instincts, and reminders of Nature. Thus it is only through the extremities that Nature is once again "Respected", such as... acts of extreme violence (recent gay bar massacre in Orlando), warfare, natural disasters from weather, "freak occurrences", economic failure, social and cultural degeneration, poverty, starvation, welfare, etc.


Reality is then pushed by the Modern to the realm of all 'Death', 'Evil', 'Negativity'. Anything (Morally) "bad" is what, hypothetically, could "wake up" the Modern from his/her comatose state (of civil slavery).

Understand that "The Matrix" movie is too accurate a portrayal of Modernity. People's minds are literally entrapped, ensnared, enslaved, by the (humane) world. And this is called "Modernity" and or "Humanity". Unable to think outside or beyond the premises of slavery, the common man-imal has no choice except to obey and "go with the flow" of life, one day to the next. Because there is a certain competency, cognition, and consciousness required to think "Above" the lies of society and humanity. You require a certain high degree of courageousness and intelligence, to navigate your way "Outside" of humanity. Only from the outside-looking-in can a Modern have any appreciation of the state of affairs of today, anywhere on the planet now.

And in the end, no matter how "Real, Honest, Truthful, Objective" you maybe, any and all great philosophers, intellectuals, thinkers will be misconstrued, perverted, and slammed by the populace. Because they lack both the intelligence, and the integrity, to fully grasp, understand, and consume the knowledge and wisdom passed to them. Philosophy is not for them, was never intended to be so, but instead passed between philosophers of the ages. And that is the connection of philosophy with the distant past, the Ancients.

To reestablish Gene and Meme together, a unification of the (christian) mind-body duality. Whereas the Modern seeks to separate him/herself from nature, a philosophy necessarily understand the more challenging route, to re-connect and re-establish the past, to present, and to future.

Globalism and Mass Media Consumption:

Globalism has forced Moderns and Mankind into a dead end, a "prison planet" where men dwell in Cells, Cubicles, and Compartments (apartments). Thus mankind seeks two forms of recourse. The average mind, the manimal and modern, become addicted to television, music, video games, and all forms of hedonism, also pornography. The simpler the manimal, the simpler the taste. Most Moderns are content with the basics, television shows, movies, music, hedonism, video gaming, escapism, or sporting events, football, soccer, hockey, etc. and all of these media "Programs" are exactly that, Programming, desensitizing, cultivating mass delusions, paranoia, and a severe disconnect from reality. People are actually and literally taken, Captivated, by mass media referred to as Sensationalism. But modern minds are becoming so dull, stupid, and autistic that sensationalization increases. It's not enough to penetrate each set of eyes with television screens, flashing colors, loud blaring noises, exaggerated drama, etc. So people seek out the next fix, something "stronger", more immediately gratifying.

This is when sensationalism becomes political: Liberalism, "Social Justice Warriors", Feminism, etc. Mass stupidity turns on itself, and begins to consume itself. Because delusions so far disconnected from reality, have very little impact on reality. It is only within the self-contained (Autistic) state of humanity that people care and value such things.

It is human infighting, a result of over-population, which is further a result of all past human success of great intellect, fortitude, and pioneering.

Yesterday's great victory (Post World War II western countries) leads to today's degeneration. From Surplus and Boon, to Deficit and Regression.

Why does the wolf find the hunt exhilarating? It's not because he values it. It's not because he constructed an ideal and approaching that ideal gives him pleasure which he experiences as exhilarating.
The wolf on the hunt is happening...

The lover of truth is not the same as the lover of his values, that’s a different thing.
The lover of truth is happening…
It’s a drive for truth, a will to truth, and that truth may make him question his values.


You value something? How much do you value it.
Something is a work of quality? Of what quality?
Curious thing how ‘quality’ also came to mean ‘of high quality’.
Or ‘to value’ also came to mean ‘to value something highly’.

It’s a product of quality… - And what kind of quality might that be?
It has value… - And what kind of value might that be?

There is only the one value and it was good, said G-d.
Now the modern priests derived a multiplicity of values from the one value and that multiplicity is still good.

nihilism as coping

For what truths a person cannot bear to consider, nihilism acts as a venting (coping) mechanism. Their ego is assumed, associated with the nihilistic ideal which they hold (as valuable relative towards it) and then upon the challenges of truth they defend their ideal and not themselves. So long as their idea(l) remains unscathed or they are continually trying to "find it", they have an excuse against any fatal truth which might be presented to them. So long as it is _possible_ there is such a truth out there and they are attempting to find it, there becomes no reason for them to accept evidence which contradicts them. When two of these same types meet and disagree, they are arguing past each other about their own private and evolving idea(l). It becomes a show of logic and language, with truth referenced only when it's perceived to be a "final blow". In a war of memes: lying, creating or concocting is the path of least resistance for victory.

Why is a reference to truth always a final blow? When you wish to maintain yourself as a vaguely superior or interesting person, referencing reality is very risky, it is a commitment which those referencing it would be held to by the another. It risks getting rid of mystique not only by their perception but in your own self-perception when they have held you accountable.

Public self

The public self is a nihilistic self - a falsity of faith and teller of lies.

The void which the public self projects onto the other when it is lying is the same void which a Judaic mind was forced for centuries to create. (Being a stranger in a land which you must adapt to means you have to be good at acting like you are not an outsider, while also hiding yourself by gaslighting all who look at you) The projection of the void is an attempt to destroy. In confrontation with a judging other, it is an attempt to gaslight them - to destroy their sight, their senses.

The best liar, though, also experiences the same void viscerally. That way, they still maintain confidence and sanity against such lies. When the demands for lying (publicly) outweigh the capacity for the private self to maintain cohesion, they are presented with a choice: to be arrogant or to destroy that aspect of themselves in order to adapt to the environment. Those with a bigger event horizon - both backward and forward (with confidence) will have a higher reserve of personal truths upon which they can maintain cohesion of their private self - also granting a higher capacity for untruth of the public self - the voids of which they must also experience/project onto their private self so they may empathize (not symp.) with their target.

The construction of sound into rhythm is creative traveling, an expression, an extension of a DNA configuration which seeks a connection within the others DNA to be processed, if the DNA is similar to the DNA which created the formation of sound then it will be processed similar to it's created process, this results in unification of organisms using sound as an extended means of communication to know thyself through self and the other.

Sexual Evolution:

If insects and ants are lowly evolved, very low on the "food-scale", perhaps above Vegetation but below Reptiles and Fish marine-life, then examine a typical Ant Queen. She retains both the womb (K-selection) and can have millions of children (r-selection). Thus insects are more "asexual" rather than sexually defined. It isn't until the 'rise' of mammals and eventually, Manimals, that K-selection and r-selection separates. Thus within mammals and "humans" that the male has come to represent the r-type (Quantity, sperm represents "Many") and the female has come to represent the k-type (Quality, few eggs within a lifetime, fewer children).

To examine "Evolution" and/or "Sexuality", or simply Biology, Genetics, Anatomy, a discrepancy must be found and (re)-discovered between ants and humans. Why and how did this divergence occur? Why have human males "evolved" to become "expendable" while females invaluable and automatically valuable to the whole (majority) population?

Pose these questions to Moderns, and those on ILP, and press for a "serious" answer. You maybe surprised by the results and answers you get. Or you may not. Prediction: most will avoid, divert, and downplay responses. The "You can't be serious" response of most Moderns and Liberals.

If duped that a person or politic represents the entropic decay of the universe, that they are its authority and through them they will be death's prophets... and likewise if one person or politic has declared themselves the prophets of life... then one has accepted a deception, with the prophets being the magicians through which one seeks appeal to what they claim to represent.

apaosha wrote:

Quote :

Once this theory about space and time being mental constructs is accepted, it means death and the idea of immortality exist in a world without spatial or linear boundaries.

What's the difference [from solipsism]?

[The person whom apaosha is responding to above] Confuses solipsism with a third person objective look at the self...

If one says "space and time are mental constructs" they can mean that they are a medium of perception, built objectively into the human being as a mode of interpreting reality

or, they may mean that there is no physical world, but only a mental world where it exists. Solipsism.

Where these two get confused, in the latter claim (solipsism) retards can pretend they are "smart", saying an authority with a reputation for their objectivity backs them up (who used the former claim) and that those who disagree are "idiots". Meanwhile, they have failed to understand what exactly was being said by their source.

This, also, is where a dishonest and avoidant nihilist may switch his definitions at will. He may at one point say that "white people" do not exist but as a social construct but then label a person as "white" when they encounter them in the world. In fact, this extends to color itself. Red becomes both a human construct and a physical property of an object in the world.

NTS:

It is not so much that Nature is "forgotten" rather than suppressed. Moderns paint a coat of green over the Egyptian pyramids, and then pretend like the mountain has disappeared. Instead moderns say the pyramids are gone and all that are there is a grassy knoll. This is the method of shrouding the world instead of letting it be, and recognizing it for what it is, why it is, and how it is. Modernity will go to almost any length to pretend that the pyramids (Nature, The Past) is no longer there, gone, or at least, "no longer relevant".

Christianity (Humanity) claims that we have "Overcome" nature/past already. But does that mean the pyramids have vanished, or are forgotten, or that people should look away from them?

Basic shitlibs are evil ingenious masterminds. Crafty, clever, strong willpower,...
They only act like morons in discussions to enrage you, they are that cunning and smart, each and every one of them.

Maybe not.

Maybe they react like a weak moron to anybody who doesn't give a shit about their views and shows his willingness (or lack of self-restraint) to use violence. They react with deference.
And when you are a weak moron and ashamed of being one then you cover your deference with moral outrage over how anybody could not praise the aggressor.

I'm a good guy.
Many other guys oppress women but I won't do that.
I am better than those other guys.

I'm a good white person.
Many other white people oppress people of color but I won't do that.
I am better than those other white people.

I'm so meta, I'm even better than those 'good guys'.
I'm better than them by telling them that they shouldn't think of themselves as better than other whites or other men because they all have male privilege or white privilege which must be acknowledged.

From stupidity to making a virtue out of stupidity.

Time, I guess, to ban 'military-grade, high-capacity, high-powered, assault' trucks.

Henry Quirk wrote:

Time, I guess, to ban 'military-grade, high-capacity, high-powered, assault' trucks.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] will slowly change the face of architecture, and vice-versa, hooligans will adapt to that too, and on and on…
Except for key landmarks, cities will eventually look different, unrecognizable even maybe...

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

Henry Quirk wrote:

Time, I guess, to ban 'military-grade, high-capacity, high-powered, assault' trucks.

Something along the same vein: They're likely going to make self-driving vehicles the "only safe option." Government tracked and approved vehicles (which you buy) can only be driven by technology and not the driver unless there's an emergency; in which case the cops are sent out immediately to "investigate your issue."

My guess: another 50-100 years it will be discussed.

Driving has no connotation of "freedom" for modern types. Going anywhere, you still carry with you the burden of "global consciousness." [Think globally, act locally.] There is no more "running away."

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

Henry Quirk wrote:

Time, I guess, to ban 'military-grade, high-capacity, high-powered, assault' trucks.

Time to send liberals into the Middle-East to give Muslims a hug. One-way ticket.

In almost every way, "Liberalism" is a mere defense mechanism of the Social Elites and privileged (upper class, top 50% of income/economy bracket). In other words, "Liberalism" protects the average white woman from "feeling bad" or "feeling guilty" for the suffering and suppression of all other ethnic and racial minorities. Liberalism is the lie that divides Class, preventing the lower hierarchy from rising higher, and also preventing the higher from falling lower (without merit). Liberalism makes it "difficult to lose", the "golden parachute" syndrome of the social elite. The rich, beautiful, healthy elites are "not allowed to lose". And liberalism props them up, and keeps them on top.

In this way, politically, it makes no difference if anything a liberal says is true or false. Truth has low or no value. Instead the mere belief of liberals (Equality, Social Justice, Faked Empathy and Sympathy) is enough to confuse, separate, divide and conquer the lower and lowest classes of society.

Liberalism is a lie that requires an above-average intelligence to either buy into, support, and maintain.

Out of Guilt, Shame, and inability to live up to their own Moral expectations, Moderns have successfully disguised polyamory and promiscuity with "Serial Monogamy". The Modern will marry, divorce, marry, divorce, marry, divorce, and claim that s/he has stayed loyal to (the ideal of) monogamy, but have they? Or haven't they successfully deluded and lied to themselves, that promiscuity and "temptation" got the better of them?

Of course, Moderns (and "liberals") want their cake and to eat it too.

Zero-calorie hamburgers. Diet soda. Innocent sluts and prostitutes.

You don't grow hungry for victory after a succession of losses.
Victory makes hungry for more victories.
Seeing the blood flow makes the beast go into a frenzy for more blood.
"The hunger comes with eating."

I have some difficulties with God, if God created everything and knows everything he has created, even surpassing freewill, then technically isn't God creating beings specifically to be punished and others not so, even if the being chooses to be bad and do bad things, then God still ultimately knew this upon creation. What kind of knowing is this, and why does he need angels to record the deeds of earthly beings, God's power capacity sure is questionable..

So in a way, he created beings to ultimately suffer and to be punished, blaming the being for it's own wrong doing, despite the fact that God technically created it and knew it would all happen before it even happened..

Hmm maybe this all knowing, means eventually he will know at the end then it is all brought before him..he seems slightly loose with his creation, kind of distant..

These kinds of things have always troubled me about the concept of God and belief in such.

If one thinks all is truly subjective, then there is no need for them to say or do anything at all.

Of course its usually those who believe in subjectivity that tend to be the most vocal in its defense.

Moderns don't realize that if one rejects hate as an emotion, one also necessarily rejects love, for they are both based on self-identification - love as a sympathy towards something which reflects or compliments us, and hate as an antipathy towards that which repulses us, and often threatens that which we love.

Likewise, doing away with all pain would do away with all pleasure because they are both a consequence of the stimulation of our senses.

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

Every "right" does not become something I am entitled to, but something I am responsible for.

When everyone can popularly partake in the title of intelligence, it's basically lost its meaning - as a distinction of hierarchy versus those who are unintelligent.

It is a great relief when one manages to justify one's genetic disposition with a religious doctrine validated by the most high.

Satyr wrote:

How else than within the humanistic cocoon, mitigating between judgment and action, to intervene upon cause/effect, and the costs/benefits, could he even consider curbing his ego, transfiguring ego into selflessness; a humble submission to the protective group?

Cowardice transmogrified into bravery, as they dismiss their fear as if it were irrational - that it had no justification to exist. The fear they had of becoming absorbed within the whole, destroying their bodily ownership and the integrity of their self-interest.. Destroying the foundations of love for the sake of some more forgiving conception (all of humanity) instead of one more distinguished..

The surrender to the whole is called "bravery", where those persistent fighters are declared [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and "irrationally selfish" because they are those who never forgot where they came from.


Human history is forgotten and avoided - instead, they look back to before man and into their future, for guidance. Eventually, there will be no more humans left for these zombies to consume and the history they turned their backs on will come back to bite them. Their leaders will be ever more forced to feed the ravenous masses while not exhausting themselves. No doubt, the leader will continually steer the masses from one declared human against another - and the zombie that was declared 'human' will wonder why the leader betrayed them.

Marriage is a trade between the male and female sexual prerogative.

The man marries for access to sex. The woman marries for access to security (resources/food/safety). The natural male instinct is to "Pump and Dump", to have sex with a female, and then walk away. However the female instinct denies this, and tries to force the male to stay and provide for her, and the young. Different animals, species, and mammals have different methods and trades for this, different behaviors, but the essence remains intact. For example, the mating courtship is longer in mammals than other species. A male must "prove himself" to the female, first, otherwise she will resist his sexual intrusion. And if a male forcibly tries to impregnate a female then she could, at any time, terminate the progeny herself. A female *NEVER* has to rear her own child. Her doing so, is a *CHOICE*. Perhaps this is a cause of why some mothers do, in fact, abandon their newborn children, leaving them to die.

The first and early developments of Marriage was a third-party intrusion into the sexual act. The "Priest", the religious authority, would Manage human relationships. The Priest would guarantee to males, that they would get sex through marriage. And The Priest would also guarantee to females, that they would be taken care of, and given security. Thus the development of "Churches" began, also leading to the "State". From this bedrock, human civilizations formed, based on a three-party system. The male and his nature (to find sex), the female and her nature (to find security), and the third party (priest) to guarantee a "fairer exchange". Thus religion began to Manage humanity, societies, and eventually even Breeding (the slave classes), to specialize, to breed specific groups, warriors, workers, more priests, merchants, or whichever types were required for development.

The hour of the darkness has risen, creeping slowly, pushing, consuming the light, the white, in its expanding path. The darkness emits, upon earth all beings will be made to bow, to surrender its essence and pledge allegiance to the shadow. The overcome, the frightening desperation drips as the savage hunger grows, bleeding a need to feed as the only continuation to breathe, the sacrifice of self for a blind comfort, an offering of flesh to be consumed alive, slowly and gently, a prevailing insanity. Who is the king of created misery with those who wear the golden masks? Behind which blemishes grow and grow, turning the gold into dust baring all there is to be seen, a ghastly sight indeed,

The fingers point and point with a venomous rage, into a unified direction towards the little light that is yet to be tainted. This clear bright evil is responsible for our state, the roaring crowd screams.....

mannequin wrote:

The fingers point and point with a venomous rage, into a unified direction towards the little light that is yet to be tainted. This clear bright evil is responsible for our state, the roaring crowd screams.....

Confusing the messenger with the message. Exposing the ugliness of their flesh, they blame the light for showing them for what they truly are.

"Do not look at me, look at that who shone the light on me! He is responsible for this ugliness. If he would only blind himself with us - if he would only stop shining so brightly - we would not need to know such evil. Knowledge, of Eden's apple, is the evil."

(On art)

All is shape, the depth and nature of the shape is expressed through color, the variation of the color in relation to light and dark reveals the nature of the shape.