Culain

I don't have any difficulty in expressing my emotions to myself, I cry almost every night. Maybe I phrased it badly but simply screaming for the sake of screaming away the 26 years of agony harbouring in me won't change anything, I want the courage to let the world know that I am a human being. Dsayer, this trauma was inflicted to me by my family. I am the middle child in a large family and my mother divorced my father, I grew up with a step-dad who was both distant and abusive to me. They never took any ownership of this when i confronted them 5 years ago. I've had all the resources since then and the knowledge to seek out proper treatment (therapy), yet I neglected it in the hopes of overcoming it myself because I'm terrified of exposing myself to others. It's taken me years to so much as confide anonymously in an online forum. The trauma is mine to own.

I just have all these mental blocks built into me from trying to be the child that wouldn't cause a problem for the family. When I was young I developed the mentality that cutting off my emotions made me tougher. My parents said that I'm a fighter because my name means 'To Fight for God'... kind of laughable IMO especially when my body was so malnourished growing up that I remained very small. I am unbelievably worried about what others may think of me despite having nobody that i consider a friend. I don't yell out because others will hear me and even though they mean nothing to me I avoid conflict like a plague. I have a habit where I lie constantly about my own condition such as telling people that I have a job and financially stable when it is the complete opposite. I lie to manipulate the perception of others towards me so that I don't cause them worry; I am so worried of others that I don't look after myself, I think it's why i gravitated to libertarianism because I could point out all the problems with society while avoiding myself. Though this has all been taking a toll on my mind, I've recently become aware that I've cultured Sadism into my mind, my mind seeks pleasure from the suffering of others... it's like I begin to normalize myself when I spend large portions of my day reading up on the horrible atrocities occurring around the world, I won't even bother getting into my more unhealthy habits because I know I'm very mentally sick.

Everyday I can slowly feel life draining away from me, I'm so full of this agony which I've never learned how to properly process or express. It doesn't matter how much content I consume because I still can't fundamentally express myself... 10,000+ hours invested into libertarian philosophy and I still have nothing to show for it. I'm terrified of expressing my feelings to others, I've never raised my voice in my whole life, I've never cried out in pain. I've self attacked to the point where I've domesticated my mind to this abuse; I'm in a state of complete collapse. I'm losing my grip on reality and I don't know if there's any fight left in me to continue. I've typed this message around 50 times over a course of 3 years but i've never been able to publish it... maybe just give myself 1 more day. Well, I'm out of time. If there's ever been one thing I've always wanted to do with my life it's been to scream... just yell as loud as mu lungs will allow, but I can't I'm just terrified of everything... everything scares me.

"No, Mr. Ham I am not satisfied!" Bill Nye Whenever you share Bill's thoughts, take a drink.

Observable was what i believe Bill was using, or just plain science. Observing the world around in the moment to make predictive judgements. Historical science was just, take something in History such as the Bible and seek evidence to support it. Which was what Ken was using. Bill called him out on this over and over again in the debate saying that Ken's Historical science aka "The Bible" is useless because it lacks the ability to make future predictions, it's just theologians spending all their time trying to justify the logic in the bible instead of actually discovering logic.

The most telling part was when a question morality was brought up in the bible and Ken instantly jumped onto the "Out of Context" position saying that it "might" be just poetry, but of course we'll never know because it's in the past. If Ken is going to take this position then perhaps the Genesis story that he takes literally is also Out of Context and it may just be simple poetry. Then when he defends that, just tell him that his proof can't be proven because it occurred in the past.

Wait wasn't Tom Wilcuts the guy that Stefan debated? It was one of the worst debates I've ever seen in my life.

Also realise that a shoplifter spends less time in jail than the person with a speeding ticket. Always uphold the rule of law. In the eyes of a cop. The speeder is very likely to end someones life so the initiative to punish them is high priority. Thieves are a just a little poor. Just give them a scare.

An investor whom is famous from the TV shows: Dragon's Den and Shark Tank, Is Kevin O'leary. He is known as a ruthless Capitalism guy. His choices constantly get mocked and called evil by Arlene Dickinson a big government supporter ;especially the military whom she loves more than her own children. (Arlene is not the character in the linked video). Here is a recent video where he debates Capitalism against one of the most socialist and dumb anchor I have ever heard.

"The economy is such a fascinating subject. Like peeking into a complicated mess of sparking wires that runs the world and no one cane fix it." The wording for this needs some work.

What if the poverty is voluntary?

Well I'm trying to look at it from a long term basis, I don't want to invest in something that is a fad. As it could crash at any moment, bitcoin is less likely to crash because the coding and programming of it makes it useful. Is the coding of doge coin better? At the very least I hope it gives us a nicer interface. Here are examples of things I want answered: Is the currency open source? Is there an upper limit to the amount of doge coins? Can you conduct transactions anonymous? Is it secure (like how bitcoin is practically hack-proof)? Is the interface more friendly than bitcoin? Edit: I wiki'd it. "Markus based Dogecoin on the existing currency Litecoin,[2] which also uses scrypt technology in its proof-of-work algorithm, meaning that miners cannot take advantage of specialized Bitcoin-mining equipment to mine at higher speeds. The Dogecoin network was originally intended to produce 100 billion Dogecoins, but a bug in the code made the production of dogecoins never ending." I'm not sure how I feel about this. All my economic lessons are telling me to stay away from it because it will never be a scare good. Sounds like a communist mentality, I'm sure Peter Joseph prefers it over bitcoin.

I was more disappointed in Joe. After watching for the first hour Joe continually falls back into the comfortable minarchist role of, "but we still need government". Peter is not skilled at debating people on an emotional level because he doesn't connect with them (or at least not to Joe). Simply saying the market will figure it out and do it better is tough for someone who is mentally dependent on government to understand. This is why I think he should look into the "slavery" argument as better method of explaining it, or point out the "gun/elephant in the room" whenever Joe would bring up "but we still need government" topic.

Twitch.tv Has a very good model of this. It's a live streaming website with two main ways for the Streamers to make money. 1) Ad Revenue/single commercial breaks that the Streamer can choose if/when to play while he's online 2) Subscription Donation- You can select a monthly subscribe button to get bonus features/privileges in the live channel for a month, half of the proceeds get paid to the streamer. ---- Earlier in the month a good amount of dedicated gamers came together for AGDQ (Awesome Games Done Quick), where they held a week long marathon of professional gamers who 'skillfully' play and master games for direct donations. They raised over 1 million dollars in one week

Can someone explain to me what are the advantages or differences with Dogecoin as opposed to Bitcoin. Let's say i can only invest my money in one, what would tip the scales in favor of doge.

The comments are disgusting on that website.

It is not Stefan's role to fix the world, it's one of the reasons why he doesn't charge money or place ads for his show, he gives the community back what they give him. He provides Philosophy from his show pertaining to first principles to help people find and promote self-acceptance. Stefan has time and time again stated that he does not care about state action (libertarian party) because his focus is on the family, it's why he spends much of his time criticizing the libertarian party's for their own parenting habits.

I remember Adam admitting that he only got involved in the anti-war/liberty movement because he got thrown out of the army by carrying an illegal firearm. He actually wanted to initially go back to the middle east because he didn't get his commemorative badge or something like that. You can still see a lot of his army mentality today because he was never properly reasoned out of it, he suffers from PTSD and uses drugs (Weed and DMT) along with carrying multiple firearms as coping mechanisms. I've seen Adam's approach of wanting to rile up the community to get angry and dismantle Government from the top down, but I think this method is a way of him avoiding his own relationships and his own past. He got robbed of around 10 thousand dollars by someone in his studio when he got sent to prison, all the donators' money was taken. There was a video released while Adam was in jail of his team trying to negotiate a solution for his release and the plans for the show, if anyone else watched it you know that it literally turned into a massive bitching fest. His team members were all at each others throats vying for control. It's kind of ironic how he claims the way to take down the state is the Top-Down approach, yet he was dismantled internally. It's possible the 'heavier' drugs found in his place that he got charged with were from another on of his team as they all were drug users as well.

You really know how to make the saying "What's the difference between a Minarchist and an Anarchist? 6 Months." into a reality.

Why is finding this one specific podcast so important, are you having similar problems to the caller?

I'm still trying to wonder if Autism (and the many different types) is an actual nature type illness or if it's just a nurturing problem from the parents.

First off with your topic title. How do you know that 99% of the population support democracy? Wasn't it only around 60-70% of people that voted in the last Canadian election? Now just so we're clear, I don't support political democracy nor do many people on this forum. You don't have to get all defensive to try and make that case on this forum. Dude, if you can't explain your ideas well enough for any of the readers to correctly identify then it is very likely an error on your part. Jer stated that he did not understand your post, you should of just tried to rephrase it there instead of throwing out adjectives like "Derogatory" at him. Then when i tried to understand your post I didn't feel like you included enough information, your 'dots' weren't visible enough for me to connect. (I still don't see them). I started with "party X sounds", meaning I'm trying my best to not misrepresent your position but give you an opportunity to see where I'm getting confused. Someone even decided to defame my post. The problem was that you didn't identify Y at all, they do not have a voice at all in your opening post, how is anyone supposed to build the conclusion that you just listed? All we know about party Y is that Party X is claiming that they are Brutish. Heck why even bother to mention that this is about a Canadian election if you won't even list who both Party X and Party Y are? When I said your conclusion was the opposite, it was the opposite of what my understanding was. I expected the final line to say, Party X wins. The other conclusion was the 'smarter than 99%' statement you made in your title, I still have not seen your proof for this. Democracy is also only bad if there is the force of coercion or violence behind it, many groups of people make democratic decision for how them and their buddies will spend their day or a company president and the board deciding on there goals; People are very accustomed to democracy in their normal lives. When democracy comes from the state the government masks the threat of force. I would wait until someone comes in who can actually understand what you are trying to convey.

war wôr/ noun noun: war; plural noun: wars 1. a state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state. In a stateless society you won't have a government, thus no war. But, there are still going to be armed conflicts between individuals, mobs, and gangs. How these smaller problems are solved will be up to the freemarket.

Yeah, I'm just as confused as you Jer. Party X sounds like the main 2 running candidates. (Romney and Obama). Party Y- I thought your argument was going to present Y as the slightly 'more' rational group that have no chance at winning despite actually discussing important topics.(Ron Paul). You never even bring up what they say or who are. But your conclusion was the opposite. Why did they win? Who are they? /lost