Wesley

I have no idea how legit or good they are, but I found the site finally. http://shieldmutual.com/about/ I think I heard it on AVTM months ago and it appears they are helping him out. I am sure a lawyer could associate with them if they are not a firm themselves.

Well, I read it! Welcome. I am sorry that you do not seem to feel fulfilled in these areas in your "physical life" and I hope that this forum satisfies some of your intellectual and emotional needs.

I think Stef alluded to it in the call, but the caller missed it. The caller was normalizing what happened to him by making dominance a human phenomenon, rather than a "my parents" phenomenon. When someone makes assertions that do not have proof to back them up when subjected to logic, it isn't about the topic they are debating. It seems self-evident to them, but that is because it is normalization of early experiences. My thoughts on the actual issue are irrelevant, because that was not what the debate was about.

I can't play guitar for you and you be able to play it, but I can give you a couple of lessons, give you a couple tips, and let you know where you might need to go. You also can learn on your own, but it will take you a lot longer to learn. Learning anything is 95%+ your own work and practice. However, help and learning techniques, tips, and tricks can easily improve things and make them go faster. Self knowledge is almost all my work, but if I don't run things by people every once in a while, I would be much less effective in my practice and get stuck much for much longer when I have a block.

Privacy =/= Shame was his point. He was not anti-nude. Nudity is fine, but that also doesn't mean that setting reasonable boundaries is not appropriate. He specifically said there was nothing wrong with nudity in itself. He claimed there was a false dichotomy between nude at all times and shaming the children. You have asserted that my changing in the bathroom somehow means that the body is something to be ashamed of when I just want reasonable privacy. If you can prove this, then we can talk about implications. So far you have only asserted that if you are not nude, then you are shaming a child's view of their body which seems odd to me, as well as bordered on ad hominem by calling Stef an "uptight mormon". I also think that there is a big difference between nudity and sexuality. Before children are ready, they should not be exposed to sexuality. The point of nudity being normal or acceptable in a nudist sense is that it is acceptable or normal to be nude and that it is not sexual in nature. If a parent is nude and acting in a sexual nature around a young child- with the child or with someone else around the child- I would call this abusive. If nudity is normal or accepted it should not be sexual in nature. When the children are older, they can learn about sexuality and should not be shamed by it, but they certainly should not experience sexuality from the parents.

Here are a couple bits from the songs I liked: "Letter From the Governement" I got a letter from the government the other day I opened, and read it, it says they want suckas The devil want me for his army or whateva Picture me giving a damn, I said never! "Learn Truth" This one I can't really pick a favorite bit. It is a bit depressing and just lets people know what kind of bad things are going on. "The Mistery of Iniquity" The Revolving Door Insanity every floor Skyscraping, paper chasing What are we working for? Empty traditions Reaching social positions Teaching ambition to support the family superstition? When the Son of perdition is Commander in Chief The standard is Thief Brethren can we candidly speak? Woe to the men Trusted in the chariots dem' Leaning on horses They run their intellectual sources Counterfeit wisdom creating the illusion of freedom Confusion consumes them I always am interested in songs with a liberty message or some truth behind them. I think it would be good to start a thread listing songs and bits of lyrics. I like having a "liberty playlist" to listen to every once in a while and to support artists- especially lesser known ones- whose lyrics venture this way. Most artists who go this way do not become popular or mainstream, obviously.

If i ever ran into legal trouble, I would love to have an ancap lawyer to protect me. I do not think you could prosecute people, but if you use your knowledge of the law to protect people as much as you can from the violence of the state, then that would be awesome. I think there is at least one law firm out there whose job is they sell civil disobedience insurance. People perform civil disobedience and buy the insurance. If they ever get arrested, then the law firm will protect them from the state. Or protecting people from IRS audits or other tax crap would be very worth-while. You can be an immediate protector for people against the state. Just organize your law career around defense against the law, or entrepreneurship to help out businesses navigate the rules, taxes, etc. You can be like that person who joined the enemy team to spy on them and help people survive as much as you possibly can. As much as you eventually want to abolish the law, in the immediate future, we all need some good lawyers to protect us. This may not be totally relevant to your question I am realizing. I am only trying to show you that you do not need to give up your principles to be an ancap lawyer.

Donor status allows upvoting. He is not a donor. I will upvote your post for him.

I have thought many times that this would be interesting, but I don't even watch TV anymore. I use netflix, hulu or torrent things. For FDR or AVTM I download shows and listen to them on-demand, often at work. I think this is the direction things are going. I would prefer an all-in one aggregator that advertised shows, had teaser clips, and would allow me to discover new content. However, most of my listening and watching is what I want, when I want it. Make a libertarian/anarchist hulu or netflix and I would subscribe to that.

I am so sorry that you have had to go through this. " Should I intervene so that they can find their true selves and be on their way to living with integrity?" It sounds like you have already tried this and you know how it will turn out. If you still aren't quite sure, then talk with them until you are sure. It sounds to me like this would not work. "Am I responsible to help anyone who's in a bad place?" There are no such things as positive obligations. You have a choice. It is not your responsibility to help people who are in need. If you tried to make this a principle, then your parents violated this principle for years when you were helpless and in need as a child. To me this all sounds manipulative and destructive. I am very sorry that they are putting this guilt and pressure on you. I hope things will get better for you soon. It likely will help if you try to not let them contact you about this stuff. I am very, very sorry. This sounds very difficult. You should not have to go through this.

The goal should be putting effort into making goals and figuring out how to achieve them. I get bored and apathetic whenever I do not understand what the point of what I am doing is. If I work a job that is boring and doesn't pay me enough, then I wouldn't feel like I would want to stay there. If that job was getting me the money to be able to do what I really want to do in a few months and I understand that it would allow me to accomplish a goal, then I am much more likely to be ok with it and look forward toward the goal. It sounds to me like you are not sure what you want. To the extent that you are sure what you want, you have no idea how to get there. This should be your goal. To figure out your goals and to figure out what you need to do to get there. This job you are currently at doesn't seem to be the problem in itself, but a symptom of the problem. This also is likely why you keep switching jobs because you want to do something different, but do not know what exactly you want to do or can do.

My assumption is that you wanted love more than anything, but it was withheld from you by your parents. Thus, when someone begins to show love you drink it up like someone who is dying of thirst in a desert who stumbles across an oasis. However, If you are dying of thirst it is better to take in water slowly and measured, just like not loving someone until you know them and their values and not rushing into it. I think that show 711 is the show I am thinking about, but they called this fusion where you become way, way attached much more quickly than would be appropriate. It is in the context of a show on relationships as a whole, so there may be a bit of wading, but I think they get into fusion early in the podcast. I do know that this can be very difficult to know when to trust someone and when to love someone without being hurt and being wrong when one wishes more than anything to get love from someone else. As usual, therapy may help. Hopefully someone else can be more useful in dealing with this kind of situation as I do not have experience to know how, only guesses.

What were your experiences with close relationships in your childhood? Especially your relationship with your parents?

Just to reiterate, the question is not sympathizing with an abuser, forgiving them, or anything along those lines. Only to understand what happened that lead them to this point and why they may have done it (even though this does not change how wrong it is). Empathy =/= Sympathy Which I also conceded that my definitions of each were likely not perfect, but I am attempting to make a differentiation between them. Lens, your argument may still be true that it is not helpful, but it seems to revolve around sympathy or blaming the victim, rather than more factually understanding what happened and why, but not sympathizing with it. In fact, empathy and understanding could help you reject it more as you could figure out how sadistic the thoughts were that lead to that point. I am kind of leaning towards the "not empathizing side" but I think the debate around it needs to be fair.

I am intentionally trying hard to not put my opinion on this and to see what others have to say. I have a feeling that this issue could provoke emotions and I apologize for this in advance. This is a simple question to get people's input. Obviously, anger and disgust are all very important and I am certainly not saying that sympathy should ever be given for people who have committed abuse. To what extent is it useful for a victim to analyze why an abuser did what they did? My understanding is empathy as knowing why someone does things or is feeling something- as in understanding it. Sympathy is more understanding and feeling it, more validating the experience than just knowing what is going on. Feel free to correct these definitions if you feel they are incorrect. Let me know what you think. This question has resulted from discussion with someone else.

Ah, ok. This sounds closer to my experience then, though prior to 2008 I listened to Rush and was republican. I started leaning libertarian but voted for McCain just because I thought he was better than Obama, but regretted it nearly immediately. Then I was introduced to Ron Paul. Tried to see every video of his and I thought I had seen them all twice. Then in looking for more content I went through some Napalitano, Stossel, Jillette, a little Rockwell and such and ended up finding FDR and eating it up and trying to listen to everything again (though there is a lot more content and it has affect my life a lot more directly). I have no idea what I watched first or why I liked it, but I ended up introducing a coworker to it and we would have videos playing in the background while we debated the viability of statelessness. It took a bit over a year from that point to realize the benefit for the psychological aspects. At that point I has become an anarchist and an atheist and was starting to look at and question my personal life and my relationships. Crazy intellectual journey to look back on

Just curious, how did this happen? Maybe I am not very imaginative but I cannot figure out how trying to record Rush turns into accidentally picking up shiny forehead radio. Then, how does listening to FDR turn into listening and joining the forums instead of immediately turning off the insane ideas. Very interested to hear those steps in a bit more detail and what things stuck out to you. Regardless of the journey, I am glad to see you made it here.

English is technically a right handed language. As you write with the right hand, your hand moves away from drying ink and doesn't block vision of the letters. The left hand can smudge and block what you are writing. Other languages go left or go down, which the proper writing hand may be different. In all reality, it pretty much doesn't matter. People hardly even write anymore, you know, since computers... and the internet... forums..... I think forcing the child to do something unnatural is far worse than any small potential or writing with the proper hand to prevent smudging in a world where anything outside of personal notes is typed.

Potentially, but you missed the most important question. Why do you keep finding yourself in jobs that are lasting a year or less? These things tend to repeat themselves, thus leaving may put you in a new job in another year or less. This isn't finding the source of the problem and trying to address it. FYI, I do not think there is a magical point at a year where the length of time spent at a job turns from bad to good.

Why would you? Why wouldn't you? This seems to be devoid of thoughts about the advantages and disadvantages of each. What are the advantages and disadvantages of changing jobs? What would you gain and lose by not changing jobs? If you feel there are problems with changing jobs which you have done a few times, what will stop the next job from being a year or less? How can you improve the situation for the future to find a job you enjoy?

I think it may make a good show to ask Stef these questions as if he was a part of the panel.

Well you still can use GPG through thunderbird, or bitcoin to send money or ideas back and forth. It just takes technical knowledge. It is more preferable for some encryption to be built into the communication by default. This then requires minimal technical knowledge. However, you can set up gateways to your friends and family if you wish to.

Cyanide & Happiness @ Explosm.net Trying to talk with a statist on how to solve problems.

I do not know, but my guess is that the existing system is good enough and familiar. The more problems it has, the more people will look for alternatives. The goal is to have established, efficient alternatives when people make the switch. Most people don't understand how the current internet works, so I do not think that knowledge is necessary for the average user. Just that the current internet is good enough. Though there is a certain amount of knowledge and resources necessary to establish a reliable meshnet that the average person could start using. Most people, by far, just follow whatever everyone else is doing. When the meshnet becomes widespread and reliable, then some minority will switch (or businesses for security encryption or something) and it will just be normal for everyone to switch over, or use each for their own strengths.

Exactly. Then for large traffic areas like hospitals or schools or between cities where there aren't people every mile you might lay a cable or two, but that is the idea. Thus, one user on a map of one mile radius dots wouldn't matter. Or at least the goal would be to have enough participants that they wouldn't matter.