kalmia

We cannot ignore the characteristics of an emergent property, but focusing on that as an entity will only lead to frustration due to an inability to affect any real change. We cannot deal with government or any other system without dealing with the specific actors in a system. We cannot deal with the actors in a system without dealing with the delusions that enable that system to persist. We are currently surrounded by societies of people who will attack us for not paying taxes. They will support the armed criminals who come to carry us off to a cage for not paying. Society has become the overwhelming power of the parent. But I would maintain that we do give up power over ourselves in ways that we don't have to. The fact is that the state enforcers are not always there to stop our behavior and compel us to do things. We also have the ability to form societies of people who will not attack us for failing to pay for criminal behavior. If we do not begin forming these societies, we have consented to be dominated. If you want a free society, always look for the areas where you can deny consent and get away with it.

I would like to see a chart going back further.

I would not expect any, but it matters because the structures only exist in our heads. If we find the source of them getting into our heads, we can put a stop to it or rid ourselves of these memes.

It does matter, but yes, rulers being powerless without a demand to be controlled is an extremely neglected point. Children don't have the opportunity to refuse this domination, but adults do, and nearly all plans to rework society neglect this very basic and necessary fact. The reason it is neglected is that it draws attention to the fact that children did not have this option. Believing that it is the system that is some other entity is much easier for those who are afraid of assigning responsibility where it is deserved. The system, including the state do not exist outside of the minds of those who believe in it. I think this was neglected or misunderstood by both Stefan and Peter. There is no state if businessmen do not believe in it. When they seek political power, they are reinforcing the violent state and keep it in place. I think Stefan lets businessmen off sometimes on this fact. Saying that the state must be removed so businesses won't use it is putting the cart before the horse. I think Peter may have been trying to make a similar point even if he was misrepresenting the term "market". I do not understand hoe Peter intends for his system to be implemented. How does he intend to impose it onto people? If he does not intend to impose it, is he planning to sell it to them, meaning he hopes there is a MARKET for his idea? ::shudder::

Peter Joseph and Jacque Fresco are con-men. I have seen parts of their act in my religious upbringing. Assert anything strongly enough and be the winner. That is the bulk of their game. PJ seasons heavily with his word salads to fog his real intentions from those who don't understand that he isn't speaking coherently. I have watched some of Fresco's stuff, and it is an old man with childlike fantasies. That is useful to a point, but if he intends to actually achieve anything, he needs to connect it with practical steps. Unfortunately for him, that would mean letting go of his delusions of being the central planner of the future, a role he has invested himself in and, and a role that will remain as nothing more than a fantasy til his moment of death. Always keep in mind that manipulators get angry at those who reveal them as nothing more than manipulators. I'm listening to this now. It is SOOO full of projection.

I think we had 14 people.

There will be lessons learned for whatever replacement comes.

We are all playing games, or other behavior patterns aka memes. Any system is a collection of behavior patterns people play out. Few are aware of these behavior patterns of theirs. Self knowledge allows us to see where we are supporting the systems we claim to be against and shift toward something else. If we are going to build a free society, we must develop the memes that comprise a free society. Replace the destructive memes in yourself with memes of a free society. Necessary to this is building community with others who reinforce these memes.

I think it is useful to look at Peter Joseph and his followers as well as many who lean toward the commie side from the perspective of what was lacking in child development. When it comes to the refusal to accept personal responsibility for changing things and desiring some magical system change from the top, all they are saying is that they refuse to accept that their didn't take proper responsibility when they should have been carefree as a child. Much of the desire of adults to behave in irresponsible ways comes out of this piece of carefree childhood missing. Recognizing that those who rule us do so because there are people with a masochistic streak seeking to be ruled is a bit disturbing for many to accept. Rulers have no power unless there is a demand for domination. Structural violence persists because people seek violence. I think most refuse to accept this basic reality because they would have to give up many of their excuses on why they should not be the ones to actually change themselves and their immediate world. It allows them to linger in this desire for carefree childhood with a responsible and benevolent parent taking care of them. PJ mentions the violence that children endure because of parents who are bullied at work who then go on to bully their children at home. Looking back on my childhood, I am sure this is often what was going on with my dad's behavior that I hated so much. He always played the beta throughout his life. And playing the beta does not eliminate the desire for control, it only shifts the control onto someone weaker. Betas play that game because they refuse to look inward at the games they are playing. Rather than recognize the past abuses that they endured, they seek out new abusers to validate it and then complain about the situation they are in. The solution is self knowledge where people recognize that they are playing these games. Those who become conscious of these games will not raise children who fear assertiveness and negotiation as so many blue collar betas do. It's much easier to blame the system than it is to recognize that the system does not exist outside of our heads. And if we believe in the system, we perpetuate the system. I also found it interesting that his example of the flaws in the market were his experience in a business that could not stay in business. Any business that stays in business without coercive privilege is one that is always looking at its actions from the perspective of it's customers and and suppliers (including suppliers of labor, meaning employees). There also seems to be a bit of confusion based on the Out of Eden myth which is common in many confused ideologies. It bases a view of the world around a myth that things were idyllic in the past, and the world has moved perpetually toward evil and destruction. Like so many myths, this is just a telling of ones personal history. We all start out idyllic and pure and recognize the evil that exists in the world as we become more aware. Human history is a history of moving away from widespread mass murder and open theft to one of co-operation and the resulting civilization. When basic survival resources were more scarce, violence was a more useful strategy in accumulating resources. The market is a recognition that mutually beneficial exchange is more productive. The free market is, by definition, mutually beneficial co-operation. Since we still are in this transition period, it is difficult for many to see that it is a move from brutality toward market co-operation, and the market is not the producer of this brutality. Since there is such widespread acceptance of both market and hidden violence now, even successful capital accumulators advocate for violent means to accumulate capital. This does not negate the fact that the violence is a remnant of a primitive violent past. The ability to produce surplus has allowed the ability to trade and the ability of a parasite class to grow without as much visible violence. We must clear up this Out of Eden myth to move forward toward a free society. Another claim made by Peter Joseph is that the government is an owner and a business, and is a sense this is true. Those who are part of this organization are owners in a sense, although they aren't in any way legitimate owners. Government is a business that supplies domination and destruction because there is still a demand by masochistic people for a dominator. These people have not given up a desire for control so they want to see others destroyed, and so they desire for certain classes of people to face death and destruction. Currently it is certain foreigners, drug addicts and certain ethnic groups since there is a desire to hide much of the violence.

If you can make it over to Indiana, you are welcome to this:https://www.facebook.com/events/1382252005343341/ Saturday, 5th of October 2013 We will change the location since it is listed as being in a national park, and the passive aggressives don't want to have a guy unlock the gate in the morning and lock the gate at night so we will support their mass theft and murder. I would like to plan something in Chicago, so if you want to be a part of that, come and bring your ideas.

I am not one of the few women on here. But I will add a few things. Many men have this insecurity of believing that they will bother a woman by approaching her or asking her anything. I think there is a certain amount of self fulfilling results in this. The more you believe going in that you are bothering them, the more you will end up bothering them. If you convince yourself that you are going to add some type of value to their lives in this interaction, the more likely it will be that you actually add some value to their lives. Even if things don't go anywhere beyond this one interaction, and they decline your offer for more, they will act positively if they are of even slight emotional health. The men that your sister and other women are complaining about are the men who are approaching wrong. Remember that you are learning how to do this, and remind yourself that it is ok to make mistakes and do it wrong and learn from your mistakes. Always stop yourself any time your get the urge to self attack. Rephrase everything, including your mistakes, in the positive. As for the women's point of view, it helps to spend some time imagining this. Consider any women that puts any effort into getting attention. The more effort she puts in, the more of a return she is hoping for. If she puts in a lot of effort into getting the attention of men, and she does NOT get approached, she feels incredibly rejected. My advice is to look into inner game type material. You are getting in your own way with self sabotaging thoughts. Also, start with slow baby steps. Make an anxiety ladder of every thing involved in order of anxiety, and gradually push yourself up this ladder. Try things like regularly going out in public and making lots of direct eye contact. Try to keep a relaxed face or even a slight smile. think positive thoughts. Work on saying hello or whatever to lots of strange women. etc.

I believe we can do a lot by exposing individual statists and promoting organized ostracism. However, we must keep in mind that there will be a long transition between where we are now and a large society where statelessness is accepted. I can't rule out using physical force in defense in all cases. I believe almost all people will lash out when given no other options. Look at Roger Pion. I think he felt like he had no other options. We can reduce the need for violence by coming up with other options. It might also be worth noting that Chris is an anarchist atheist who is the son of a Catholic IRS agent. I sense a bit of rage in him due to this.

In a fairly recent podcast, I heard Stefan say that he wanted to marry someone "in my age bracket." I have wondered what motivates this especially among men who have been adults for more than a few years. I get why two people who grew up in school around each other would fall into this. But what about beyond that? Is it a carry over from age segregated schooling?

"These people will use those remedies as a drug to help them deny their own truth. Why do they do this? Because they are driven by the panic fear felt by the children they once were at the prospects of some more beatings if they should dare to see the truth or speak out about it." We build up emotional defenses against feeling certain emotions and thinking certain things. Some people are not in a position to just let themselves feel unpleasant emotions. It is emotional scare tissue on top of emotional scare tissue. People are buried under emotional reactions that prevent them from thinking in a reasonable manner. Psychedelics can undo all of that. What's revealed after that can be healing for some and horrible for others. They aren't for everybody. The emotional aspect often gets overlooked in these in favor of hallucinations when hallucinations are really a minor side effect. The real benefit is in the emotional healing for those willing to take it. Psychedelics can show you the answer, but many refuse to listen. I know a guy whose life centers much around drinking and smoking weed (which can be beneficial in moderation). I asked him about mushrooms and DMT that he used, and he said he was done with psychedelics after DMT. I asked him what he did not like about DMT, and he said it made him feel foolish for mush of what he does with his life, specifically mentioning drinking and smoking weed all the time. I think some just refuse to listen to what their subconscious mind is saying.

Renowned Doctor Gabor Mate on Psychedelics and Unlocking the Unconscious, From Cancer to Addiction Drug addiction expert speaks on the mind-body connection and the medical and emotional potentials of psychedelics. Photo Credit: By Gabor Gastonyi (Clare Day) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons May 30, 2013 | Gabor Mate, M.D., says the "unconscious mind" can cause medical afflictions like cancer, addiction and trauma. In his speech at the Psychedelic Science 2013 conference, Mate rejects the assumption that the human mind and body are separate entities, and points to an inherant connection between psychological/environmental experiences and medical afflictions. He contends that the war on drugs is actually a war on drug addicts, and speaks to the addiction cessation potential of psychedelic substances. He also discusses the potential ability of psychedelic substances, particularly ayahuasca, to reverse medical issues like cancer and addiction when coupled with therapy.The following is the transcript of Dr. Gabor Mate's speech, "Psychedelics and Unlocking the Unconscious; From Cancer to Addiction," which he delivered at the Psychedelic Science conference in Oakland Calif., on April 20, 2013. My subject is the use of ayahuasca in the healing of all manner of medical conditions, from cancer to addiction. And you might say what can possibly a plant do to heal such dire and life-threatening medical problems? Well, of course, that all depends on the perspective through which we understand these problems. Now, the medical perspective, the allopathic Western medical perspective in which I was trained is that, fundamentally, diseases are abnormalities that occur either due to external causes such as a bacterium or a toxin, or they’re accidental or due to bad luck, or their due to genetics. So, the causes are outside of the usual internal experience—the emotional and psychological and spiritual life—of the individual. These are biological events, so the medical assumption goes, and the causes are to be understood and the treatments are to be administered purely in a biological fashion. Underlying that set of assumptions are two other assumptions. One is that you can separate the human body from the human mind, so what happens to us emotionally and psychologically has no significant impact on our health. Number two: that the individual is to be separated from the environment. So, what happens to me if I get cancer? That is just my poor personal, pure personal, misfortune, or maybe because I did the wrong things like smoked cigarettes. But, that my cancer might have something to do with the lifelong interaction which I’ve engaged in with my environment—particularly the psychological social environment—that doesn’t enter into the picture. But what if we had a different perspective? What if we actually got that human beings are bio-psycho-social creatures by nature, and actually bio-psycho-spiritual creatures by nature—which is to say that our biology is inseparable from our psychological emotional and spiritual existence—and therefore what manifests in the body is not some isolated and unique event or misfortune, but a manifestation of what my life has been in interaction with my psychological and social and spiritual environment? Well, if we had that kind of understanding then we would approach illness and health in a completely different fashion. What if, furthermore, we understood something in the West which has been the underlying core insight of Eastern spiritual pathways and aboriginal shamanic pathways around the world, which is that human beings are not their personalities, we’re not our thoughts, we’re not our emotions, we are not our dysfunctional or functional dynamics, but that at the core there is a true self that is somehow connected to—in fact not connected to but part of—nature and creation. An illness from that perspective represents a loss of that connection, a loss of that unity, a loss of that belonging to a much larger entity. And therefore, to treat the illness or the symptom as the problem is actually to ignore the real possibility that the symptom and the illness are themselves symptoms, rather than the fundamental problems. CONTINUE ARTICLE===>> http://www.alternet.org/drugs/gabor-mate-ayahuasca-maps-conference-2013

http://www.returnofkings.com/14113/what-american-female-mental-issues-mean-for-you I’ve been beating the self-improvement drum here on the manosphere for some time now. From promoting the consistent questioning of what you bring to the table to outlining the need to build effortless attraction, the theme I’ve advocated for is clear: young men need to consistently identify their faults and, through doing so, take control over their own romantic futures. Left out of this discussion, however, are a few crucial realities that relate to things that even those most devoted to the cause of self-improvement will find entirely out of their control. The first of the realities relates to our culture, which is inherently hostile to many of the goals sought by the self-improving male. The second and less well detailed reality relates to the mental state of those that so many of us seek to approach romantically. As I put quite simply many months ago, many young American women are simply not alright in the head: The USA has long had the highest rates of mental illness in the world, but the latest reports on the extent of it are still pretty shocking: mental illness struck one in five U.S. adults in 2010. Among the highlights, people in the 50-plus age bracket had the lowest incidence of any mental illness (14.3%), while those ages 18 to 25 had the highest, at 29.9%. Women had higher rates than men: 23% versus 16.8%. When broken down by racial and ethnic groups, the highest rates of mental illness were seen among people who reported two or more races (25.4%), followed by whites (20.6%), blacks (19.7%), Native Americans or Alaska natives (18.7%), Hispanics (18.3%) and Asians (15.8%). This is an important story for American men looking to maintain perspective: at least a quarter of the women you run into at any given time are not going to be alright upstairs. When you take into consideration that the highly sought after 18-25 demographic has even higher illness rates and that many of the mentally ill go undiagnosed, you could be looking at a vastly higher proportion of not-entirely-ok girls, possibly approaching 50%. Alright, so that’s been said. What does all of this mean for you? Continue article ...

Fuck!

Block is a curmudgeonly university professor.

I think he was on a Sunday show a while back. He appears to be forming a community in Richmond, VA. I met him at PorcFest 2012 and enjoyed talking to him. I also noticed that he has the charm and charisma part of his presentation much more mastered than the vast majority of libertarians. I think some of it might come from his Bolivian background. Being more outwardly passionate about something is much more a part of certain Latin American cultures. I have been studying some marketing and sales, and one thing that I notice lacking in many libertarins that is necessary in marketing and sales is enthusiasm and positivity. He has much more of that than the vast majority. I also beleive in forming local communities and see that as the next neccessary step to advance a free society. I am interested in anyone who is doing this. There are some doing this in New Hampshire, and there is also Justin Stout doing this in North Carolina.

I grew up in a very fundamentalist baptist cult. Looking back, I see how so much of it was designed to make the members feel very awkward around anyone outside of the cult. There was awkward speech and rituals that I was ashamed others would find out about and ridicule me for even though I didn't really partake in many of them. Even though I continued to attend the church, I never felt like part of it. I was there, but felt very detached and emotionally withdrawn. I still often have a bit of this years later when around any social group. I feel like an outside observer in almost any social situation. One thing that has helped me has been MDMA. It gives an immediate. Sense of self acceptance and well being. I have used it to push myself socially and remain a better person because of it even when not on it. I don't feel like I need it to do many things that I was completely crippled from doing before. LSD can help with this too, but it's more of a mind rushing trip of thought s shooting up from the unconscious. If you are considering cannabis, use it after consuming some self help materials including Real Time Relations, Nathaniel Branden's work on self acceptance and self esteem and some other materials on social skills and self knowledge. Cannabis suppresses short term memories at the benefit of long term memories. Learning something and then smoking can help those ideas come together. Those that smoke continuously, especially from a young age, are often not spacing out the usage to connect long term memories. Journaling or writing in some other form while high can also be helpful, although ideas can sometimes come too fast to retain. Another thing I have noticed with cannabis is that smoking around those who aren't also smoking with me can make me feel more detached. I think I fall way back into my own thoughts. This can be pleasurable at times, but don't make a regular practice of it if you want to be social. Another part of self acceptance is accepting that your experience is not going to be the same as those with different backgrounds, whether you use drugs or not. You have your life and it's experiences, and they have theirs. Your journey is your journey and no one else's. Their journey is theirs and not yours. There are other materials I have used to learn to be more social, and I could list more if you are interested sometime. My advise for what to use and when would be to use psychedelics occasionally after consuming self help materials and use the periods after as time for reflecting on what was different while on them. To get positive long term benefits, you need self knowledge and the abilit to see how you change while on them. If you can get MDMA, use it to push yourself socially only, and space out the usage while reminding yourself of how you felt on it whenever you feel hesitant or awkward socially. If you take it while pushing yourself, you will also anchor those positive feelings to doing soemthing you currently feel awkward about. I still have the urge to do things I did while on MDMA even though I am not on it. These social things were things that made terrified and repelled by in the past.

Most young men try to win attention from attractive women by doing them favors. These women normalize this as their view of the way the world works. "Ask the universe nicely, and you will get what you want." Or something like that. Take a look at Facebook for example. Look at the women who will ask for some small favor and get a mass of cocks willing to help them out. It is a very distorted view of the world that hits them particularly hard when they hit the wall, and their behavior stops working. SInce they are normalizing this, they are unlikely very conscious of it. They are constantly exchanging the value of their appearance for what they get, while others are forced to come up with some other value to exchange. They secretly want to be valued for something else. If you learn to not put up with their shit, even if this is difficult at first. They will value you more for it. It shows that you don't value their beauty that much.

I have been thinking a lot about the idea of how the only way for the free society to form will be for small communities of those who believe in the NAP will expand out. Much of what has given the state its power is the tools it uses to divide us, and those of us who believe in freedom are isolated and lack community. Of course FDR resolves some of the beginnings of this. If we think of how our brains function, they still operate with some primitive tribal functions including the number of people who we consider as part of our group. See Dunbars Number. We limit what we allow ourselves to consider based on tribal approval. Those who go into far out ideas like the ones discussed here, often are the types who have faced some sort of tribal rejection in the past. Having a group that is accepting of expanding our minds into ideas that are inconvnient to the power structures is necessary. We will always have that self censoring going on when we feel the need for approval from those who don't accept us. I have also listened to some audiobooks by Seth Godin. Tribes and We Are All Weird are useful for the purpose of this topic. HIs idea is that people best organize ow days around joining up with others like them rather than someone trying to impose an idea on the masses and changing their minds. FDR has in many ways formed in the way Seth Godin describes. Stefan put his ideas out, and those that understood and accpted their validity were drawn to him. Many other Internet communities have also formed like this. Look at social networking. It functions with this idea. I have been thinking of what defines a free society and where there are overlaps with groups that are kind of in there but not. For example libertarian fundy Christian types, liberals who accept some amount of peaceful parenting, CopBlock people, gun owners etc. There are many groups, and the overlap will be stronger with some than it will be with others, but drawing this up and determing the overlap will be very useful. I have not exactly seen this done as I am imagining, but I want to do it if it hasn't been done. It really needs to be open source as no one will get everything. I haven't yet drawn this up, but it's more of an ever-changing drawing in my head. If you have somethings to add, please do. Even coming up with lists of overlapping communities would be helpful. We could all work from this diagram in the future. I am thinking that we need to have somewhat local communities, and if we think of our social brains, that needs to be 50-150 people. If they get larger than that, they will fracture a bit, and there is nothing wrong with that. I think this is doable in larger metro areas. What portion of the population will have these people is another thing to consider. I imagine somehwere between 1 in 10,000 and 1 in 100,000. But this is mostly a guess based on what I have seen personally. I am not thinking self sustaining isolated communities at least at first. Think more along the lines of a club or church. People are connected to it, but they belong to other communities outside of it. As it builds, there will be more reason to do things within the community and the power of social ostracism will become greater.

I have heard Stefan state repeatedly that anger is the only proven way to break the cycle of abuse. Thinking through what I have gotten angry at this all makes perfect logical sense from my personal experience. But I have stated this to others while adding that abuse victims will go on to abuse if given the opportunity unless they process what has happened to them, and part of this includes getting angry. The responses I recieved were dismissive stating that it is an old theory that has long been disproven, and that my statements are cruel and hurtful. (This was on a FB thread for those breaking away from a Fundy Baptist church I grew up in.) From the looks of those attacking me and misinterpreting my statements, they appear to be older frumpier women, so my assumption is that they have already gone on to abuse themselves, and only want comfort for their past. I think it is worth holding out the consequence of their abuse victims coming to terms with things, so that can be useful, but also, there are others who may not have gone on to abuse, and I would like to have some clear references to point to. Any suggestions for clear ideal references? Thanks.

Don't assume that it just gets better. You may have thought that years ago and that lead to where you are now. You have to put in the work to unlearn what messed you up. The good news is that there are resources out there where people have figured this stuff out for you, and you can learn from them. Unlike the the guys who slipped through life at a more normal trajectory dating from their early to mid teens on, you can actually be motivated to learn what really works right. Don't feel the need to copy the average shlub out there. Learn what really works, and better yourself, and you can become far more desirable and attractive than the vast majority of men. Some things to look into: Nathaniel Branden's materials. You sound like you need to focus a lot on self acceptance. Find out how women's attraction works. Even if you have been messed up in some ways, that won't be too much of a problem if presented with the correct timing. (Timing is another thing to keep in mind when dealing with women. A lot of the attitudes and behaviors you need to have with women are time dependent.) Some things that can help with this are romance novels and some chick flicks. Yeah they can be annoying, but view all this with the attitude of analysis keeping in mind that thid fiction is playing into something already going on in women's heads. The scenarios aren't accidental. David Deida's The Way of the Superior Man David DeAngelo's materials Paul Janka's materials. He can show you the mindset and how to for picking up women you cross paths with throughout your day. You may also need to focus on some social anxiety help materials and communication materials.

How about something for a $2 donation?