utopian

What is going on? All the sudden more women are discovering philosophy this is awesome. How do we cultivate more of this? It must be the jujus. Someone on the forum has woman attracting jujus. Welcome to the forum collie, there's lots to get lost in around here, but no doubt many people here will be happy to point you in the right direction any time you ask.

/rubhead Ill tell you what, if you guys really wanna discuss this, we can talk in PM and leave the thread for its original point.

You might be surprised what can be done without violating the NAP. I could justify the Federal Reserve, and maybe even government, without violating the NAP. Long story short, he is forcing me to choose between being painted as a fool, or attempting to validate myself to him, which will never be done, as it is not his intent to see it. Even though the very forum upon which we post validates my research. I choose, instead, not to recognize his ability to force me to choose.

I agree with this, as I have tested the dating pool and found these results about women in no short supply. Hell, I can accept of myself, that I need some kind of beauty in a woman I might want to be long term with, and I can accept women wanting something more "shallow". What I struggle with, is what I was brought up to believe, what the media told me to believe, and what I, and we here at FDR generally believe. When I was young, more towards a boy, I was taught fundamentalist christian indocrination. It was a sin for me to even think about kissing a girl, much less anything else. When one of my friend girls got my number from one of my friends, invited herself over, went straight to my room and laid on my bed, I had a mental breakdown. When I was a younger man, I was taught feminist bullshit from the television. That women are all perfect goddesses who can do no wrong, of which we should all be so lucky to partake of the loving hearts I was expected to know all women have. All I had to be was a nice guy who paid for everything and waited to be rewarded, chalking up my frustrations to sexism and misogyny. Today, I know women who cheated on men and tried to pass off their kid as that man's so that he would pay for it, when it was not even his. I know of women who slept with men just to make a friend of his, who she had previously slept with, jealous. I know women who told men they were going to enjoy falsely accusing them of rape, and the man being safe only because she was recorded on camera saying it. I read articles about women who get 13 year olds drunk and rape them, and then later cry about how taken advantage of they feel. With madness like this so prevalent in realms other than the dating world, I have no problem contributing to its end.

This is what Steph, and a lot of other people, don't seem to understand. Women these days are ruined, and in certain places in the world, we don't have anything to choose from, lest we spend our days searching for the needle in the haystack. It's only getting worse. There is no room for a heart in today's world. And perhaps a scarier thought than this is going on and getting worse; with the majority of people like this, who will be left to raise children properly? Who will be there to stand against a real life idiocracy?

Here is the actual document the report is citing; http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Pg.-291-Pgs.-287-293-JW-v-DOD-and-State-14-812-DOD-Release-2015-04-10-final-version11.pdf And the report itself; http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-23/secret-pentagon-report-reveals-us-created-isis-tool-overthrow-syrias-president-assad This is not so unknown in "fringe" communities already, the problem is that the masses will have a hard time considering it, much less accepting it. Of course, our dear old Hillary has known for a while now, that this is nothing out of the ordinary.

Once in a youtube video of Stephan's, I heard him talk about some kind of experiment where they tried to raise newborn babies without mothers, just try to perhaps only bottlefeed them, change their diapers and that was about it. No love or cuddling from mothers or anything. All the children ended up dying. I am pretty sure I heard about this before somewhere, but I could never find the source. I have been looking through Stephs videos for what could have been the video I heard it from, but I am just not having any luck. If anyone could find me the source, or know what this experiment was called, I would really appreciate hearing it. I could have sworn it was something like tchenko babies or romanian orphanages or something like that.

What is someone mad about? I am genuinely interested in this. There are investment opportunities to consider here. Is it because you didnt like me rolling my mustache? lol

David Ottinger put together a very interesting post about symbolism used in a movie, and how symbolism is being used to persuade the masses in the media. I have not read it all as it is quite the long post, but I am sure you will find it just as interesting a read as I do. https://board.freedomainradio.com/topic/44212-marxist-max-the-feminist-road-spoiler-central/

There may be no such thing as an afterlife. Regardless, you can still reflect upon your life before you die. “It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.”-Terry Pratchett You make my heart hurt frosty. By choosing to not play the game, you are letting the statists win. Sure, the game is rigged, and corporate media and other agendas have ruined lots of the women out there. But what you are doing, is choosing to deny yourself an experience in the face of the rigged game. You think the statist slave masters will ever truly let you go your own way? Just give you the keys to your shackles to go about your business? The keys are a lot more complicated than that, and the prison is a prison of your own mind. Steph speaks to such a concept in his video about the story of your enslavement; "We can only be kept in the cages we refuse to see." In the cages we REFUSE to SEE. Can you see the statist trap of mgtow? Can you see that the state is driving us, like cattle, into isolating ourselves from each other? Whether that be isolation from the other gender or anything else. I can understand wanting to not play the game and go your own way. I would love to be able to do such a thing. I would choose not to play if I could. But if I thought I could, I would be lying to myself, because even that game is rigged.

No "hard evidence" and yes, it may be impossible to actually do. It does not mean some men may not have embarrassing moments of confusion, or that the agendas won't try. Like I said, I didnt want to get all into this to the extent to where I really did lots of research. But I am far from the only one who has noticed such manipulations. Dave Chappelle is one of my favorite comedians, and has himself had issues with corporations trying to get him to wear a dress, among other things. He has noted, as well as other black men and individuals, how they have been effected by the agendas; Fast forward to 2:00 minutes;

Dating is such a philosophical mess, isint it? As far as paying goes, 50/50 has always made sense to me. Sure, I can pay for a woman. There are plenty of ways I can pay for women. That never satisfies me though, both because I am not so insecure as to feel I need to be paying, and also, if I have to pay for a woman all the time, what does that say about her? Now don't get me wrong, I like doing nice things for women in my life. Little things, here and there. Just to be thoughtful, you know. And I do think the guy should perhaps push past the 50% mark somewhat, just because of the factor of women having more problems from sexual relations, and the man needing to exercise his ability to provide as long as he is choosing to participate in actions that could result in children, whether purposefully or accidentally. The concept of "crossing the line" appears when you consider the ideas of a woman just being out for a man's money, and a man enabling a woman to not make anything of herself. If a woman wanted, she can get pregnant and abuse the system to live off alimony and child support for the rest of her life. Is that any kind of woman a man would want to have a relationship with? Is that even any kind of decent human being? What a waste of life that would be, as well as a poor example for one's children. There is this french woman I am... dating, who I met salsa dancing. She is a software engineer and currently going to a prestigious college. I have not spent a dime on her, besides perhaps some gas to pick her up and go places. She does not want kids. She wants to make something of herself, create a large scale functioning business perhaps. She pursues her goals, while also taking the time to enjoy and live life as completely as she can. And oh, how we live. I don't know how I could respect her more. We don't love each other, although we enjoy each other's company. We are both fine with that. I am sure I would never have to spend a dime on her if I did not want to. But I do want to, as I have some ideas that she might enjoy. None of it will be extravagant, but I am sure she will enjoy it all the same. There is a large concept here as well about your ability to have fun with a person. If you want a serious relationship, you certainly have to be able to deal with the tough parts, but relationships are not just business proposals. You have to be able to enjoy the person's company. Having fun is an important part of a relationship, and while you might not be showing or seeing "standard behavior" it is important to know that the two of you can enjoy yourselves. Now as far as re evaluating dating when people aren't showing standard behavior, I think the best thing you can do is be very real from the start, assertively bringing up concepts that are important to you and seeing how it reflects off the person. If they become truly engaged, hey, you might have something there. Otherwise, people are just looking to have fun, which there is nothing necessarily wrong with, but if that is the case, you might as well get to the good stuff or look for something else.

I like how you simply assume my knowledge is limited to videos. And also that this is why you think I am laughing. You are quite the assumptive offense machine arent you? I am aware of the Kruger effect. I could provide plenty of proof on why this is not the case with me. But you have conducted yourself offensively, and in doing so made yourself unworthy of real response. Are you unaware of the non aggression principle? It is quite popular around here, and you seem to have no problem violating it. If I am a fool, then the principle advocates allowing fools to be fools, as it does not concern you. If you feel in your benevolence that you should attempt to inform someone of something, you can do so respectfully. But there is no need to agress. And there is no need for me to truly engage anyone I find offensive. I might do so only if it entertains me.

I kinda don't wanna get all into this so ima just drop my two cents here. If you consider the agendas of feminism, corporatism, transgenderism, government, and yes the "gay agenda" you will begin to notice a goal common to all of them. They want to get us to stop breeding. Although they want us to be sure to spend lots of money on products while we go die lonely. Feminism has it easy, as women have an easy time being satisfied loving each other, even if it is without lesbian experiences. The tougher nut to crack, is how to get more men to confuse themselves into homosexuality, whether they are or not. Gays and lesbians do not conceive children (usually) but they do often adopt them, and there are plenty to be had in the orphanage system. It is fairly easy to get women to stop breeding, you just slut shame them while attacking their insecurities and making them chase the hamster wheel of materialism, getting them to believe they will never be good enough without it. But men... men are harder to fool. They are more philosophical, harder to influence. They have this untameable urge to procreate. It would be nice for the agendas if they could get men to love each other and be satisfied with that, like they can with women, but men arent falling for it. So instead, they are beating men over the head with political correct assaults for gayness, transgenderism, feminism and what have you, emasculating them while distracting them with porn and video games. It seems to be working quite well. America is second (or third? it has been a while since I have checked my source on this) in countries who are not breeding, in comparison to Japan. Oh yea, economics has a lot to do with it as well.

I am of the belief that universal principles trump (hue) all other principles, and that human minds are subject to them as well. A distant relative of mine has down syndrome. It is fairly obvious that certain things will never be within his purview. While he may still be capable of comprehending things that, say, a dog could not, it is obvious that in the same way, there are things that I am capable of comprehending, that he is not. I myself am normal, although most of my IQ scores test above average. The concepts I am able to comprehend, according to my scores, are outside the realm of the general public's comprehension. Yes, in theory, everything should be within my grasp. But that is just what I am wondering at. The moth cannot comprehend what the dog can. The dog cannot comprehend what my cousin can. None of these can consider, what might be outside of their capability to consider. And so when we get to the part where my cousin cannot comprehend what I can, we think that might be the end, because I am of the standard human intellect. But the moth is not capable of knowing, what he does not know. How can I be certain of what I myself can know? We humans. We have our science and we have followed it all the way through every realm conceivable. And then, in things like quantum physics, we begin to discover things outside of our grasp. Things like matter without mass. Particles that, quite literally, do not exist. And yet they effect our world. I cannot see myself ever comprehending such a thing. As far as the... (I am trying to avoid possibly offensive language) uninformed? Unquestioning? Laborer, I mean, there is a certain admirable aspect to simply never questioning things too far, in lieu of losing yourself in thought. Even if man did one day explain the entirety of the universe, he would still be human, and it would still behoove him to live life to the fullest, including participation in labor he can be proud of. But then again, this is how people also lose themselves in endeavors which may be harmful to them. Not long ago, I was taking a class on television. I was aghast at just how much of a science it was for the media to be controlling the masses. And this was a low tier media college class. What do they teach at the professor level, I wonder? Could it be that, at the top of this realm, men of higher comprehension are leading men of lower comprehension towards a destructive path? Perhaps having developed media into such a science, professors of this realm are able to lead men to do their bidding... as simply as a moth is led to a flame. That is mildly interesting, although I am wondering what this has to do with my post. Has the subject at the heart of the matter of my post eluded you? Aah. An offense. Apparently, the point of my post has in fact eluded you. Oh, the irony. I am so saturated with irony here, I am wondering if you are even capable of understanding why I am laughing.

Eeenteresting /roll moustache

Wait for night time, reader, and when the sky is dark, turn on an outside light. It may take a little while. But eventually, you will see bugs begin to fly towards your light source. It could be that you only see various bugs that you perhaps cannot identify. If you are lucky, you will see a moth. The moth is renown for flying towards light sources, up to and including, an open flame. In the presence of an open flame, a moth will follow its natural instincts to go towards it, and find itself burned to death as it dives right in. This is common for moths, and other bugs, which are simply following their natural biological programming. And therein lies the philosophical conundrum. The moth is too unintelligent to comprehend the concept of flame. You might say that bugs have barely the intellectual capacity of plants. The moth only comprehends that it sees something bright, and that it should fly towards it, despite its impending demise. It is the natural biological development of this form of life, that it should kill itself. The concept of flame is apparently too grand for the intellect of the moth. This concept... extrapolates into humanity. There are a lot of things I am fascinated by. Lately it has been banking and economics. I love to sit and read and watch as it operates on a global, geopolitical scale. I love to read about its history, and its effects. I like to see how this grand concept eventually works its way down to effect the individual. And then after it is all and said and done, when you finally arrive at the "end user" experience of it all, you often run into the abstract philosophy of the moth and the flame. You find people, going about living their lives within the parameters of these grand concepts, these great works of humanity, completely unaware of them, despite their everyday utilization of them. Many of them go so far as to accuse you of having somewhat lost your mind. It is apparent, these people cannot comprehend the world that goes on around them. There are many grand concepts that I do not know much about, but am aware of. The military industrial complex. The pharmaceutical industry. International business. Space exploration. Quantum physics. Higher tier mathematics. If I so chose, I could hunker down and really learn about them. They are not outside my ability to comprehend, or at least, have a general understanding of. But I often look at my fellow humans. I see how little they are able to comprehend. I know that I could attempt to bring to them one of the concepts I like to explore, and they would be lost, as oblivious to what they are seeing as would be a moth to a flame. I see this, and though I feel superior in some regard, I have to wonder, to what concepts am I, perhaps, like a moth to a flame.

Le sigh, very well. I would think his ungodly reputation would be a good indicator of his poor behavior. I cannot even pos or neg rep myself. But, if you absolutely have to learn the hard way. Now, I can certainly see the case for the idea that games scare away the good women. What I cant get onboard with, is this idea of waiting around for the unicorn. Have you heard of the case of the jogger who was killed by a plane? If not, allow me to TLDR for you; http://www.nbcnews.com/id/35911154/ns/us_news-life/#.VcezSflViko Once upon a time, a jogger was running on the road with his headphones in. Above him was a personal plane who was coming in on the road for an emergency landing. With his headphones in, there was no way the man could have been warned about the impending danger. The plane crushed him from behind, and the jogger never knew what hit him. And what of you, frosty? Right now, a jumbo jet could crash land into your room and kill you. There could be many reasons why you could die right now. This could be the last sentence you could ever read, and you might not even know what hit you. And if you were lucky enough for there to be an afterlife in which you could reflect on your life, how would you feel, knowing you had not lived your life to the fullest? Knowing that you wasted so much time searching for the unicorn, and never found it? That the most you ever realized was some self imposed allusions of morality? I have been with women so beautiful frosty, I cant believe I was actually with them. I have been with quite a few. I have these memories, these experiences with them that I will cherish to my grave. And if I were to die right now, and somehow look back on my life, I would certainly have some regrets, but certainly moreso would I be satisfied knowing the extents to which I lived. And what if you did find your unicorn frosty? What if you did find your perfect woman? If you found her, and she was yours, would there be anything you would not do for her? What crime, would you not commit? What man, would you not kill? What morality would you not give up, if but to be with the woman of your dreams? For the woman of my dreams, I can't think of anything I would not do. Thankfully, I still have plenty of time in life to figure out how to get to her.

Do you like, have a sister that is single or something? This is so rare, we sometimes call this being a unicorn. There are two answers I think, one is that the media is brainwashing people to see men as nothing as useless unintelligent fools who are responsible for all of people's problems. The second is that men are indeed loosing themselves in this modern world. It used to be that men were made for more of a survival of the fittest era. With such modern conveniences and controls, we are evolving beyond that, and the things that men were evolved for are becoming somewhat unnecessary. The baseline values of men are still important, however, even if we have modern conveniences to replace them. The issue arises when society thinks we can do without men completely, because we have modern conveniences to take care of us. People don't seem to realize, both society and modern conveniences are an illusion, and when they are taken away, individuals are left traumatized and dependent. They dont realize the value of men until its too late. I think this is true to an extent, for men who have had so little. But a lot of men have not yet had the chance to realize that sex is not all they want, that they actually do want a real relationship with quality women. Their lack of realization is a philosophical issue of society as a whole. There are a lot of lost people these days. And even more men who prudely deny they want sex, becoming frustrated when they realize what society tells them what makes them happy, actually does not. People in general need more philosophy. Hmm. Well I can somewhat understand, I have something like a relationship like this with my dad. He does not even know me, or care to know me. He does not know how to be a human though. I have long since given up on ever thinking he will be human enough for me to know what its like to have a father, but that's its own story. It sounds to me like there was a time you and your husband were great with each other, and something seems to have happened. I bet you can get there again, for sure. You should definitely see if you can call into the show and see what Stef has to say about it.

Steph absolutely has a hilarious side. And for the record I miss the intros to the "youtube comments" videos as they were pure gold.

According to russoft's chart I am the most balanced out of any of you, and we seem to have quite the congregation of right wingers trololololol I wonder if we will see any super authoritarians.

Ya know, this is one of my favorite philosophical subjects. On one hand, the non aggression principle, rational self interest, peaceful parenting and many other subjects discussed by Stephan and we on the forum, seem to me the pinnacle of what it means to be human. On the other hand, the validity of the philosophy of survival of the fittest is unassailable, as anyone capable of attempting to argue against it is only alive because of the validity of it. Human beings survive because we are the fittest of any creature that has ever lived, in the form of the strength of intelligence. Plain and simple. So strong is our intelligence, that we are capable of destroying the earth in its entirety, if we so chose. All other creatures, and all life in the universe as far as we know, is subject to our whims. We could remove all other creatures from the planet if they inconvenience us, and pollute the earth without regard to the welfare of the planet, or even each other. Arguably, we are doing so. And yet, because of our humanity, because of our advanced development, we strive to prevent such things from happening, for the welfare of lesser creatures, and each other. But you see, therein lies the conundrum. Our superiority developed only because of the validity of survival of the fittest. But also, we are superior only because of and as long as we avoid the principles of survival of the fittest, supposedly because as superior beings we are capable of rising above the philosophy that created us.

The problem here is that, in the eye of the statist bankers, you and everyone else is nothing more than a human resource. A commodity, to be bought, sold and traded like a piece of meat. Much of our economic problems happen because these people are successful at what they are doing. These people care nothing for your libertarian ideals. Indeed, they hope you indulge in ideals regardless of statist games, because those kinds of actions get you further into their trap. I wish I could just matrix style download everything I know about money into your head. You really should take a look at my condensed history of money. Go on being human, making mistakes and living outside your financial means. Just make sure to always sign on the dotted line, so we can keep a record of all your debts that will certainly come back to bite you in the ass while you're out fulfilling your humanity. Oh, and by the way, there are only three countries in the world not controlled by a private central bank, and those are Iran, North Korea, and Cuba. Very well, I can accept that what I might have actually been talking about is "nationalism". But if socialism is indeed "common control of the means of production" then I maintain that socialism is a technological eventuality, and cite the case of 3D printers as an example. The patent on 3D printers has expired, meaning the "common control of the means of production" is now available to anyone. Expired patents are an eventuality for any technology. Aah, how refreshing to see someone able to derive the philosophical predicaments from yet unfulfilled scenarios. On one side of the coin, you get everything you want, cheap or free, from a robotic work force. On the other hand, you can see the philosophical nightmare of never having to do anything for yourself. It is, at least, a good thing that we philosophers are considering the issue before it happens, because we will have the answers for the world when the world begins to run into these problems.

So am I, OP. I have been following the housing market for a while now. I have plenty of resources, but I think the most interesting for you would be these three; http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/realestate/housing-bubble-ahead-some-us-markets-might-be-ready-to-pop/ar-BBgv6CB?ocid=mailsignout http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/realestate/brace-for-a-flood-of-foreclosures-when-boom-era-helocs-turn-10/ar-AAbDeGu?ocid=mailsignout http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/realestate/housing-bubble-2-has-bloomed-into-full-magnificence/ar-AAdJCe0?ocid=mailsignout It used to be that only the "crazies" thought this was coming, now it's all over mainstream media. I had a lot of silver during the previous housing bubble. If you pull up a chart of the housing and silver index, you may notice there was a point at which silver peaked near 50 an ounce, and housing bottomed. My plan is to dump my silver next time it happens and put it into a house. Silver is very cheap right now. You may want to invest in some to slingshot your way into a house.

Don't forget the US. Remember the government shutdown? That was largely over the debt ceiling. We are running out of money again, and are going to run into the ceiling once again in October.