Phuein

I beg your pardon, for I do my own HTML work on my blog, so these sort of bugs draw my attention. As the admin can see, the Education's forum description paragraph is misplaced, and should be moved into the class="desc forum_desc" paragraph tag. Otherwise, the styling is off.

Well, I have become excited about translating this other short video, which I feel is very relevant to the modern philosophical perspective we all share, so I translated it myself. This is on my channel. I'll contact the team by email, and see if they'd like to add my subs to the official videos, as well. I thought they'd notice this thread, by now, but I guess they're too busy. No biggy.

Hey James. If you don't mind me partially hijackiing your thread... I can't connect to the chat. The page loads, but it says, "Please wait while we load the chatroom...", and doesn't change. I can see the users list fine. I have tried this several times, today, and waited for plenty of minutes, each time. The chat had worked for me, previously, some weeks ago. Using latest Chrome browser on Windows 7. And if the console can help: JQMIGRATE: Logging is active player.js?alt1407240767:32 JQMIGRATE: jQuery.browser is deprecated player.js?alt1407240767:32 [*]console.trace() player.js?alt1407240767:32 [*] hplayer.js?alt1407240767:32 [*] Object.defineProperty.getplayer.js?alt1407240767:32 [*] (anonymous function)player.js?alt1407240767:88 [*] iplayer.js?alt1407240767:26 [*] cd.fireWithplayer.js?alt1407240767:26 [*] bI.extend.readyplayer.js?alt1407240767:26 [*] bZplayer.js?alt1407240767:26 JQMIGRATE: 'hover' pseudo-event is deprecated, use 'mouseenter mouseleave' player.js?alt1407240767:32 [*]console.trace() player.js?alt1407240767:32 [*] hplayer.js?alt1407240767:32 [*] lplayer.js?alt1407240767:32 [*] s.event.addplayer.js?alt1407240767:32 [*] (anonymous function)player.js?alt1407240767:26 [*] bI.extend.eachplayer.js?alt1407240767:15 [*] bI.fn.bI.eachplayer.js?alt1407240767:15 [*] bI.fn.extend.onplayer.js?alt1407240767:26 [*] N.extend.delegateEventsplayer.js?alt1407240767:36 [*] B.Viewplayer.js?alt1407240767:36 [*] Splayer.js?alt1407240767:36 [*] (anonymous function)player.js?alt1407240767:88 [*] iplayer.js?alt1407240767:26 [*] cd.fireWithplayer.js?alt1407240767:26 [*] bI.extend.readyplayer.js?alt1407240767:26 [*] bZplayer.js?alt1407240767:26 [*][blocked] The page at 'https://mixlr.com/freedomainradio/embed/?color=188bcd' was loaded over HTTPS, but ran insecure content from 'http://api.mixlr.com/users/2530797/broadcast?source=embed&callback=onBroadcastLoad&_=1407258232606': this content should also be loaded over HTTPS. player.js?alt1407240767:26 [*][blocked] The page at 'https://mixlr.com/freedomainradio/embed/?color=188bcd' was loaded over HTTPS, but ran insecure content from 'http://api.mixlr.com/users/2530797/broadcast?source=embed&callback=onBroadcastLoad&_=1407258232607': this content should also be loaded over HTTPS. player.js?alt1407240767:26 [*][blocked] The page at 'https://mixlr.com/freedomainradio/embed/?color=188bcd' was loaded over HTTPS, but ran insecure content from 'http://api.mixlr.com/users/2530797/broadcast?source=embed&callback=onBroadcastLoad&_=1407258232608': this content should also be loaded over HTTPS. player.js?alt1407240767:26 [*][blocked] The page at 'https://mixlr.com/freedomainradio/embed/?color=188bcd' was loaded over HTTPS, but ran insecure content from 'http://api.mixlr.com/users/2530797/broadcast?source=embed&callback=onBroadcastLoad&_=1407258232609': this content should also be loaded over HTTPS. player.js?alt1407240767:26 [*][blocked] The page at 'https://mixlr.com/freedomainradio/embed/?color=188bcd' was loaded over HTTPS, but ran insecure content from 'http://api.mixlr.com/users/2530797/broadcast?source=embed&callback=onBroadcastLoad&_=1407258232610': this content should also be loaded over HTTPS. player.js?alt1407240767:26 [*] sendplayer.js?alt1407240767:26 [*] bI.extend.ajaxplayer.js?alt1407240767:26 [*] Backbone.View.extend.pollForNewBroadcastplayer.js?alt1407240767:88 [*]

That's a great video podcast to translate, Regev! Thanks for the recommendation. I'll try to get an extra person to help translating it, and if I can't, then I'll do it myself this month. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xbp6umQT58A Anybody here interested in helping with the translation of this video? Contact me for details. It's just menial labour, for a Hebrew speaker.

I know, from experience, that extreme zealots cannot be argued with, using evidence or logic. That's why all the videos that use those tools, against the common problems in Israel, won't work to help solve them. However, I have seen how learning a generally beneficial and logical perspective on life, does, eventually, make a big difference in turning zealots into regular confused individuals, who are then willing to reconsider previous prejudice. For example, I've seen how Buddhist teachings and practices, with emphasis on meditation, have given many Israelis a place of calm and sense, where they can use logic, inside this chaotic society. That's what I'm interested in replicating, but with a method that has no religious connotations. I want people to learn to think, and then take action according to their conclusions. I'm basically looking to make practical & moral philosophy popular, by not touching on the most sensitive issues - politically, and then letting people lead their own minds to those places, after gaining those necessary basic thinking skills.

Yeah. I posted above, about translating "Putting off Procrastination" (Jan 25, 2008). Here's the translated video, on my channel: I just watched it. Sadly, it is irrelevant for Israelis, and seems to be aimed at non-zionists. I posted on the Youtube comments, and here's my explanation:

He is not a critical thinker.Sound does not travel faster than light. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/emergingtech/sound-goes-faster-than-light/466 ^ For a simplified explanation. And that's where I know to avoid his lecturing.

I find it strange that you would, at first, say, "good for you for asking the question though," and then ask me the above. It's as if you sympathized with my curiosity and will to improve my situation, but then decided that I am somehow not worthy of your sympathy, any longer. I never said I was happy with this arrangement, and this might be where you are misconstruing me. I said I am happy with my occupations, but I do suffer the drawbacks of this environment. This is just like I suffer the drawbacks of living in my country, while not finding a way out that does not seem worse, or too risky (illegal immigrant), as compared to suffering the drawbacks. I have long ago noticed that people from larger and more liberal countries find this hard to sympathize with. Moreover, the idea that an adult child is necessarily not dependent on their parents is not evident. Many adults are either entirely or partially dependent on their parents, simply because those parents have the funds to support them. And I see nothing wrong with that. Utilizing the people who brought us into this world, while protecting our interests, seems reasonable. They are, after all, the people who chose to bring me into this world. Why should they simply stop being responsible for me, while I fail as an adult? When I am to choose between my horrible parents and my horrible society, for where I can get the best conditions to thrive and eventually become separate from them both, sadly, my society is actually worse than my parents, in my experience. I had started this thread to figure out, if I may be missing on another option that had worked for someone else, with similar ideals to my own.

And that's where we stand apart. So, let me try an example. Slavery is defined as many things, but it is, in part, defined as "the condition of being owned by another person." My argument is that even if the working agreement is voluntary, unlike enforced slavery, it may still be slavery, in practice. This happens under either condition: 1. Employment under a state. The state holds all land as hostage, and so all people must find employment under others, in order to sustain themselves. This is definitely a situation of coercion, even though people sign-up "voluntarily" into working contracts. 2. Free dependent employment, or just general dependency. If I employ a parent, then they and their children will become dependent on this income, especially as time goes on. Knowing this, and even though my employee voluntarily agreed to the original working conditions, I am able to change their working conditions, without dissent, because losing this job might mean risking their children's well-being. This would be abusive and terrible behavior on my part, but in a strictly Voluntary society, this must be accepted behavior. Because it is entirely voluntary. And I am by no means saying that there should be something else, instead of the free market. I dislike your cynicism, in telling me to "please start a new thread on it..." I never said that the free market is all wrong, nor that it must be perfect, nor that it should be replaced, at all... Which leads to my conclusion, which is both incomplete and short, but should not have been ignored. I said, "this is a social problem," and mentioned the social norm. My meaning is that the free market only functions as free, when the host society functions as a free society. An anarchic society. And when the host society is voluntary, but not necessarily anarchic, then it is evident that great abuse of this partially free condition will ensue, as we can see in our own already partially free societies. Society is not any person. If a child is abused by their parents, then, other than the parents, no one else is responsible for the well-being of that child. This is a case of public well-being, like cleaning up drift-wood or snow between houses and towns, for the benefit of all; even though no one specifically is responsible for it. A free society will always have a place for beneficial discussions of such public issues, which will address such issues to the best of their ability. We have evidence for this in small communities, where these issues tend to get worked out through social pressure and personal tradeoffs.

I was just listening to the recently released The Truth About Immigration: What They Won't Tell You! If you listen at 44:20, a few seconds later, there is a strong and strange buzzing noise. I rewinded to make sure it wasn't my machine, and it was still there.

The reality is that most people would, first, be too shocked to do anything. However, in a weapon-bearing society, how many random-slappers do you think would come out alive of such situations? I don't know much about The Wild West or about Feudal Japan, but I'd bet my safety that slapping any gun-slinger or katana-wielder would result in very-much-expected-and-socially-accepted dire consequences. The NAP doesn't tell people what to do. It tells them what not to do. People tell people what to do. So, this issue depends entirely on the relevant society and its' norms. For example, I'm sure that slapping a government official will result in worse punishment, than slapping some random person in the street, right?

I'm not sure where ideologies come into play, when we're talking about a technical issue. Again, nothing online is safe. Anything that you want "off the record" must be done, technically, off any record. And the Internet is one big record. Use extremely innocuous language online, and use it comfortably and publicly, and then commit to actual conversation in a place that is off the grid. Cellphones off or removed. Trusted people. Quite an impossible mission - I know. Better spies than me, have said before: "The best place to hide anything is in plain view." - Edgar Allan Poe

It's very annoying, when responses say things about me that are clearly the opposite of what I wrote. Even though I said And again: While I clearly gave an example of selling my labour that I find consistent with Anarchism and freedom: I understand that there is an automatic defensive reaction, when it comes to any argument that sounds even slightly socialistic. Yes, socialism, as an ideology, doesn't cut it logically - and is bad. However, this does not mean that everything about the market is right and fair. For example, no modern and educated person would ever argue that making a working contract with a 10 year old kid is equal to making a working contract with an adult. Today, there is agreement that kids are generally the responsibility of their parents, and so cannot sensibly be individually responsible for agreeing to a contract. Does this make child employment wrong? No. But, it does show where faults can be found within a free market, wherever other social functions become, well, dysfunctional. Predators will prey, and when parents fail, it is the responsibility of society to take over. Right?

Generally speaking, the people who stop being religious and join the secular society, and the people who become religious and join the religious society, both do so due to practical reasons. It's either people looking for a lifestyle that suits them, such as gay religious folk, or people looking for a sense of community, which doesn't quite exist within the secular society, so they turn religious. Sadly, philosophy and logic are rarely any part of this "battle". When the sub-societies within a greater society are so extremely fashioned, it makes choices about religion a thing of practicality, rather than an ideology. That's why many people say that they believe in god and the bible, but would not follow its' rules. It's also why the religious people insist that one should follow the rules, and only later, supposedly, really feel religious and all that nonsense. So, I don't see how this specific topic would help.

Are you trying to bait me, using those one-liners? How does it make me into a whore? Please, elaborate. I would like to get a clear view of your perspective on this.

None. Nothing online is "safe". However, I doubt that you need to be that safe, anyways. I like an old good quote by Dr. Phil (paraphrased): You'd be surprised how little other people think about you. They hardly ever do. Just act normal, and rephrase sensitive topics. There are many ways to phrase sensitive information, into something that can be denied etc'. Politicians and lawyers do it all the time! For example, if I don't want to say that "my child had been abused by his mother, and I feel it is my fault" - for the sake of a super sensitive topic - utterly made up by me now, then I could say, "I feel at fault for letting a dependent loved one, in my care, be abused by another relative of mine." <- Might as well be talking about completely other people, eh.

The comments about voluntarism, which I agree with, moved me to consider, why it is that I don't call myself a Voluntarist; even though it is a part of my ideology. Let me give an example, of why I rather call myself an Anarchist, or a Freedom Idealist, than a Voluntarist. There's a difference between paying someone for a material (well-defined) purpose, and paying someone for an abstract (vaguely-defined) purpose. A material purpose, say, fixing a toilet, and an abstract purpose, say, a month of my time as an employee, in a very generally defined job, say, a clerk. When I get paid to fix a toilet, an agreement is made about how the toilet should work, and what payment I expect; with some negotiable leeway, in regards to unexpected problems that may arise. I fix the toilet, I get the money, and we move on with life. When I get paid to become a clerk, an agreement is made about some of the proficiencies that are expected of me, the hours and days I am expected to work, and often, also, how I should appear and behave, during working time; including what rest breaks I will enjoy. I am generally expected to obey anything that I am commanded, that is not outside of the "social norm", which is yet another vague condition. I only get paid after the allotted time is through, so it is in the employer's interest to get me to work as hard as possible, during that time. This is especially the case, for part time jobs, where that month is likely to be the only month of the contract. It is evident, from my experience, that most jobs are bad. Most employers are uneducated and abusive people. Of course, without the state holding up all the lands as hostage, I might as well be a free farmer. But, even if that were the case, any notion of employment that required me to sign up for an allotted period of time with vaguely defined working terms, which might as well say, "Obey my commands," would be out of the question. It is, at its' best, prostitution, to sell my time to another person, without being entirely specific about how that time will be used. Ever heard of secretaries and clerks making coffee for the boss, even though it's not in the contract? Yeah... And this is a social problem that Voluntarism does not solve. This entire situation is voluntary. However, it is wrong, because it leads to wage-slavery. However, within the Anarchist ideology, the idea that any person can command me, even by contract and voluntarily, is unacceptable, and would never be part of the social norm!

And the obvious question is... Why not?

It is safe to make the assumption that everything on the internet - and I mean everything - may be viewed by others. No matter how private you make it. There's an endless horde of bots, whose sole purpose in life is to gather information, and pass it along. It's luck of the draw, if your info gets looked at, and even reposted. And they are designed to use any weakness and vulnerability they can find, to slither inside.

The "only option left" argument is entirely irrelevant to self-defense. No one can tell another, what options they have or don't have. There's just no way to assert it. There's only statistics and intuition. Any self-defense instructor will tell you that. [i practiced Krav Maga.] The only reason we don't kill a person who "only" slaps us, or that cops are not being shot on a daily basis, is that we don't want to suffer the consequences. Those people definitely violate the NAP, and are a real and evident threat against us, but we do not want to take the risk of defending ourselves against them. So, let's be honest here. Morally, cops, and anyone who makes a threat against the life of another person, not in immediate self-defense, deserve killing. Does a traffic cop, who only gives tickets, carry a gun? A taser? If they don't have weapons, then meh, but if they do, then we all know that they are meant to use them for hurting people, and not only in their self-defense. I recently wrote about Why Do We Murder, wherein I explored the logic behind taking life. My personal conclusion is that self-defense is ethical, whenever it actually defends the person. If acting in prevention means getting a worse assault, then it's not really self-defense.

I've tried to "trade" with them, previously. Sadly, I realized that I can't negotiate with fascists. Bullies. Uninterested apathetic self-made idiots. They just continue to veto and insist on their opinions, while ignoring what I think and feel. "Just do it our way, and then you can do whatever you want." Any disagreement on my side results in continuous panic and attacks, without any room for negotiation. So, I just take what I can, and give them as little as possible back, without giving any heed to their irrelevant opinions. It's horrible, but it works.

Whoa, it is "mooching"! Actually, I'm not a native English speaker, so such a slang word could easily go bad with me. Thanks for pointing this out. I appreciate the learning. Now, my thread's title looks so awkward haha (Help? Admins?) I actually chat regularly with many different people, from around the globe, both voice and chat. But, due to things being global, it's rare to find high quality English conversations. Not to mention slang. [Visiting England was an educating experience, with their English slang!] I thought about that, too, when I was younger. Especially, watching shows like Dr. Phil. He always seemed like a great mentor, although a harsh one. The big difficulty in doing this is that being an anarchist is so much the opposite of what being an Israeli means, that even the "better" guys are usually army fans, or against sharing feelings and ideas [, because that would be a waste of valuable time]. I envy people in the New World. Yeah, I know nobody uses that term anymore, these days. But, it really does apply!

The responses above already say my own criticisms of this choice, so I'd like to tackle this from another angle. Yup. You are seventeen! Barely seen the world! Barely experienced life! What's the rush? As a young adult, you have the special liberty to do all those things, for your personal education and curiosity, that you will not be able to do, as a more responsible adult, not to mention when you might become a father! This is your time to take adventures! Go out, visit places, try new professions in random venues. Meet new people. Do things that you only dreamed about! Sure, you don't have much money, but you can do so much on a budget, it's ridiculous! You can travel and work as a temp', and that way learn and grow so much. It's shameful that so many young adults are pressured, by their parents and drone society, to "become adults", before they get to try their own ideas. Don't fall for this trap, buddy.

RyanT is spot on, and I suspect that this is the real topic of the thread; and not "anarchy", in its' popular use. Phil, you're generalizing "people" into a category that is not useful. There is no "they" that attack you. There's only specific people, by age, location, occupation, or otherwise, who have a specific mental ability, according to their natural intelligence and training. What's worse, you're comparing the FDR community to them. You're treating us, as if we would behave the same, to you, as non-thinkers would; as abusers would. That's equal to falsely accusing me of being an abuser! Now... Marketing doesn't get people to do anything good. That's why institutions that preach "good", get loads of money, and then do a lot of bad. Because being good is a private and personal issue. There's no one lifestyle or code that everyone would follow, and then an entire society would turn good. Each person has their own issues to deal with, which make a strict code unhelpful. Most people are stupid and disinterested, in a cowardly manner. They will simply follow the norm. It is a waste of time and effort, to even consider arguing with them. It is your responsibility to identify those people around you, who would benefit from your wisdom, and then personally identify their vocabulary and perspective, to communicate yourself better. It's a personal issue. The only generalization about it is, when people feel sympathy to those personal examples, and get inspired to mimic their solutions. Which is what this community is all about.

First is first, you want to find solutions that work for you. If something doesn't suit your wanted lifestyle, then drop it, and find something else. The problem here is your previous crappy lifestyle - and not one specific issue. A good lifestyle makes for a healthy and happy person. I'm glad to see you making this choice at an early 25 year old! These good habits stick for life. The most basic exercise humans have is walking. If you stride (a fast walk) every day, between 15 minutes and an hour, depending on how you feel, then you will lose the extra weight and health problems that come with it. This is just basic human biology. However, to actually shape yourself up, you need some resistance training. Weights can be expensive, and so are gyms, not to mention the bother... I personally use resistance bands. I highly recommend them to anyone who's not into weights! [Details in the video and description.] A healthy diet is a simple diet of unprocessed foods. It doesn't matter what you like eating. Eat it! Eat as much of it as you want! But don't eat processed foods. Even if you mostly eat [good] bread and cheese, you will not be able to become overweight on it. Simple food just doesn't make you binge on it.