aviet

Would you be able to pin-point where you have gained the notion of homeschooling and having five children? The impression that I have got is that is not the sort of thing that you would find in Canada. I've never heard any girls from the UK mention homeschooling.

What are listeners thoughts on women who call themselves princesses? And say things like 'I am looking for a man who know how to treat me', 'I am looking for a man to sweep me off my feet'.

Several times in the past I've looked into bulk buying emergency food for surviving possible collapses in the food supply in the future. There is a heroic range or variously priced products available in the US and by proxy Canada, but the offerings in Europe are awful. What you can get in Europe is typically very expensive and when you look at the fine print grossly under-sufficient in terms of calorie. So I have done some research and found you can make international order from this company: http://www.survivalfood.com/one-year-supplies/ But instead I have plumped for buying three boxes of survival biscuits: https://evaq8.co.uk/24-Seven-Oceans-Long-Life-Survival-Biscuit-Rations-60-000-calories.html The reason being is that my main food supply is bulk bought anyway, but can run low. I just want something to make sure I always have a six+ month food supply. In the UK for bulk buying food I recommend: http://www.survivalwholefoods.co.uk/<- West Midlands and North Wales only https://www.buywholefoodsonline.co.uk/ http://www.premcrest.co.uk/ http://www.justingredients.co.uk/

Why do your FDR and DeviantArt profiles both say male, with the latter listing your name as Liam?

I've ran a few tests on the website POF.com. If that is anything to go by. And from that what was really working is: clean and very attractive; and fun, pleasure seeking profiles. Or at least that is what had the messages pouring in. Physical appearance was the most important and when combined with a fun, pleasure seeking profile, that is what gushed in the messages. I made a real profile for myself, though the photos could have been better. With a very FDR-esque profile it got about one message every other day. When I changed this to a fun, pleasure seeking profile that went up to about 6 messages a day. One of the pro-male model accounts with a fun profile got 14 messages on one day. Giving him an FDR-esque profile tanked that out. Then for not particularly attractive guys, you don't really get any messages, never mind what the profile said. Thus, I see physical attraction as the ice-breaker and fun/exciting as the relative deal-breaker. I didn't play much with occupation, but it didn't seem to make much difference. This was in the age bracket of about 27-30 in a town with about 50,000 people. Resources are probably an important factor with developing and more stable relationships, but it seems to me that game or confidence is a very important factor in opening the doorway. For me, I can attract women based on my appearance, but my colossal lack of game and status as an introvert personality outlier has made initiation very difficult. This also asks the question how should you communicate your resource-status? I am wary about doing this as I am worried about what women it may attract. This statement also stood out for me. It's an interesting notion. As anxiety is something that is felt, it is an emotion, but one that is probably tied up with a lot more memory than other emotions. Off the top of my head I don't think anxiety is a good thing in most cases, except as a marker of needing to explore the origins of the anxiety. I think maybe it was not the best use of words and that maybe 'Women who are looking for men with no humility are not good women'. It's probably good in some cases though, like if you are being asked to commit a heinous act. Like anger is a healthy response to abuse, anxiety is probably useful in some way in certain cases.

Sometimes I think the best scenario is for Sweden to fully collapse into a third world, failed, Islamic state to shock the rest of the continent into saving itself. The poster child for political correctness.

I will add a third ditto to that. There has been a mass realisation that The West is slowly becoming The Middle East, where elected politicians have decided to give up on assimilating migrants and instead assimilate us into radical/mainstream Islam: - banning Christian symbols so not to offend Muslims - telling women to keep an arm's length from men - blaming women for sexual assault - modifying dress so as not to offend Muslims - turning a blind eye to cultural practices like FGM, gender segregation and polygamy It's also very strange to see that leftists, who have a habit of spitting bile at men sitting with their legs open and black police officers shooting black criminals, have now fused themselves with what many would wrongly call the most conservative ideology in existence, radical Islam. Wanting to bring about an anarchist society in such a malestrom of anti-philosophical, pre-medieval and low IQ people is not viable. And I don't think this realisation has just spread by the work of say Stefan. I was in Serbia in 2015 during the fake refugee crisis with virtually no internet access and was able to piece together the trend via snippets from Serbian media and hearing from people who were collapsed into an Islamic state for 100s of years where every fifth child was taken off by the empire to be abused, killed, enslaved or stuffed in the army. It's like a collective alarm clock has gone off. If you look at articles in the London Guardian, a practically Communist mouthpiece covering what they call Islamophobia you will find the comments, left primarily by left liberals, overwhelmingly reject the notion of Islamaphobia and recognise the danger of Islam. The emphasis has moved away from centuries out philosophical idealism to preserving Western civilisation. I too came across Stefan in his anarcho-heavy days. Even he would say his ideas are generations out [for The West]. This idealism is still there. It's just on hold. I would say Stefan's ideas are only really suitable for serious consideration by cira 110+ IQ societies, which leaves you with Hong Kong and Singapore, where the overall tax burdens are 33% and 50% of what you will find in Western Europe, respectively. It's not feasible for countries like say Niger, where half the population is below the age of fifteen, where more than half the adult population have a sub-70 IQs and that are wracked with many forms of violence to comprehend Stefan's ideas, never mind put them into practice. One of my criticisms of anarcho-X is that anarcho-X needs to be enforced if people don't believe in anarcho-X. If you start with a society where 100% of the people believe in say Stefan's anarcho-capitalist model, but you allow people to enter the society who fundamentally disagree with this model to the point that only 30% of the people believe in the anarcho-capitalism model, then there is no chance of the anarcho-capitalism model continuing. Right now that is not a battle we have on our hands, but we do have a battle on our hands with the increasing number of people in The West who don't believe in separation of church and state, who believe in the supremacy of pre-Medieval law until the end times, who believe in draconian limits to free speech, who believe in the death penalty for simple life choices, who believe in Venezuela -style redistribution etc.

This reminds me so much of 1984. It's can't be too long until Stefan changes his name to Immy Goldstein. As for the torment of having your friends reject you, I would say its more exciting to be in the challenging wilderness. If you are worried about having no friends over the horizon of them not being able to accept you, then [insert you own logic]. It's more exciting to live in unpredictable wildernesses. A lot of people I know have not had any challenges. They don't want any challenges. They want to moan in place of challenges. Recently I was marooned with nothing in a foreign country. Finding a way out of this situation would make these fags melt down, but I treated it is an experiment in character building. Take an adventure into challenging these people and enjoy the tribulations of their irrational emotions. As for not eating meat, there is no better way to stop people from considering abstinence than stuff like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWXZVgvSps4

I think that preferences could also stem from emotional or cognitive makeup. For example, metalheads seeks other metalheads. You can insert your own reasoning, but I would argue, as I believe Stefan has, that metalhead-types are looking to connect with people from high-status/fertility partners from their own tribe, not Wall Street lawyers. I would argue that there are both practically inherent objective and specific individual trends that guide people's relationship choices. For example, as a strict, ultra-personal conservative if I have the choice between a wholesome Southern belle who is physically a 7/10, or a tattooed disaster of a bombshell 10, would my primordial drives be able to over-ride my philosophical drives? I was listening to Gad Saad on the Joe Rogan podcast last night and he presented a lot of studies that show there is a cross-cultural, cross-time-period preference for men to be hyper-attracted to women with hourglass figures. That's your practically objective model on to which you could pour your personal preferences.

I think its the gorilla that was shot dead to protect the boy who fell into an gorilla enclosure. This was quickly picked up by SJWs who said the gorilla was only shot because the boy who fell into the enclosure was white, even though the boy was black.

$2,000 required before it gets printed. https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/rise-of-the-republic-limited-edition-prints-painting-art#/

A lot of them were found via the hash-tag #peakguardian

The sort of people who think loud noises are a threat and who'd like to collapse on the government instead of just doing it themselves.

Do you have an opinion on game?

Another favourite:

Has this caused any triggerings?

If I understand this correctly, it has just added to some coalescence to something I had been pondering. This goes into the realm of the sub-conscious or barely conscious. That is that there is a large element of masochism among the emotionally unstable, throwing dolls out of the pram, cry-baby leftists; as well as other detachments of the left. SJWs are wrapped in negativity and one trait of people who are wrapped in negativity is they engage in various forms of self-destructive behaviour that make their lives worse (masochism). I think that SJWs want to be triggered as part of their cycle of personal self destruction. They want to meltdown, they want to be put in their place, they want to be dominated etc. Coppercab is a great example. He's someone who has been pushed into SJW-ing via bullying and his whole persona is about subjugating himself and making himself look ridiculous. It's a learned behaviour related to attention seeking. If you watch some of CopperCab's videos with radical feminists, these alleged heroes of virtue bully him, treat him as a joke and deliberatly "trigger" him, which is just him acting out for attention. What makes the SJWs different is that they are also engaging in societal destruction Gavin McInnes has said that when he is out in his hipster neighbourhood in NY, confidently walking about in his Trump gear, the hipsters will look at him and look down as if submitting as if to say, "OK. You gave us control. We've made a mess and you're now back to tell us what to do." I've had a similar experience when I was at a "youth hostel" in Croatia that was being set up by town hard-leftist dream-seekers. Naturally the place went under within one year because there is no room for things that are unsustainable in terms of substituting dreams for tangible goods. One of the girls asked me what I had thought having spent 5 months in south-east Europe and my reply was, "The main thing I have noticed is that the further you go south, the less intelligent people are." To which the girl replied something like, "That's not true. That's offensive." But I didn't back down and as a result I have never witnesses a girl more sexually aroused in my life. No one wants to be more dominated and told what to do by unrepentant dominators than these people. This author sounds interesting. My main philosophical train of thought (that I have not fully fleshed out) is that many people express one thing but are being another. For example a guy who is rejected by a girl may say, "I hate that girl." but their being is I hate that I was rejected by that girl. The dissonance between their being and their expression is all to do with manipulation, or as Berne would say 'games'. And I think a big part of the FDR ballpark is the rejection of games (people who have so little self knowledge that they do not understand the real motives behind their behaviour) and the supremacy of civilisation building.

From what I've experienced in life, for males it seems that the most important factor in attracting females (at least from a certain age bracket) is what is called game. This appears to be a projection of confidence in combination with reduced empathy for women. These two traits would appear to be affects of having a high social status and a bearer of above average resources. A man with high status and resources would be expected to be confident in himself and due to the reproductive options this gives him would allow him to show little empathy towards women. The display of game, of course, does not actually have to have any connection to having social status or even more so resources. As it currently is in The West, the detachment of young people from the necessity of resource gathering seems to have caused a situation where, particularly in the 18-30 age bracket, women are considerably unconcerned with a male's resources. If you don't have to worry about resources, you can have fun and go for the more exciting males who have game, but not necessarily any resources. This sort of leftist, unphilosophical behavior appears to come out when there is an abundance of resources. If people have a bit of leeway in the present, rather than building for even more and higher value in the future they will splurge in the now. A man's social status still seems to be important, but for different reasons that it has evolved to be important for. In past, resource-scarce times a man who may have been of economically low status, say a miner, may have been the village hero and thus he had a good support network within the community. But now, decoupled from having to worry so much about resources, a man's social status is nothing more than a trophy for his girl of the moment. It's exciting and intoxicating for her, but offers nothing of real substance. My question is - What do people think of game as a way of attracting females? To me it seems that it's the absolute worst thing a woman could fall for in choosing a man. At least if she chooses a man solely based on him being a ten, at least the genes are probably good. If she chooses a man solely because he has game and nothing else, all she has chosen is a mirage that probably shrouds recessive and manipulative drives. And from the male perspective, if you are using game to attract women I believe you are going to be attracting the lowest quality women who seek the most superficial and civilization destroying situations and traits. My second question is - What traits, particularly micro-traits that may be indicative of larger wholesome traits or could be used as the foundation thereof, do you think are good or bad to look for in a man or woman?

How would you describe yourself before you came across the material?

A good question. I only lived in that ballpark from the age of about 14-16. It was a useful experience and even more useful was that I got out of that ballpark when most people from my school were just going into it. It was useful to see what people who built their lives around things such as cannabis, getting hammered etc. lived like then and to see who left that world, how they turned out and how those have turned out who have essentially tied themselves to these lifestyles forever. I certainly have some good memories from those days, but it soon looses the novelty and excitement. You also have nothing productive to show for yourself after years of living like that. As Mr. Davis alludes to, as you grow older other things that do not result in such instant gratification (or really longing for the old days of instant gratification) become important. The sort of things that really gives value to your life and leave you feeling fulfilled are such things as building a business, raising children who are capable of independent thought, refining your philosophy etc. Things that fulfill you typically require persistence and time. Pressing the buttons of downing a shot, grabbing a mammary or bumping a line do not work. Conversely, a lot of people I knew never really reveled in the world of pleasure seeking and had their head screwed on from a young age. These people are now typically several years ahead of those who sought pleasure emphatically. These pleasure seekers change their ways in later life and have nothing to show for the pleasure. And there are many who have still not changed their way for whom it is probably too late. One guy I know blew his entire student loan during his first month of university. I am fairly sure it was to do trying to fit in as Mr. Cool and on the Edge. He got his degree in art and has subsequently gone into the world of living off government grants for artists and the welfare of art endowments. He's also taken a lot of drugs, womanised at the threat of what could have been a wholesome relationship. Now he's cleaned himself up a bit and for the last 2-3 years he has been contemplating becoming an architect, which I believe takes seven years of education. He's been in a very bad mental space for the last year or so, being displease with his position in life. If he wants to change course now, he's going to be almost 38 years old by the time he has his first real job, start saving for a pension, start paying off student loans for 10 years of university, start saving for a house, have a family... And that would be a good ending for someone who has sought pleasure for 14 years. With all that said you can skip ever having anything to do with pleasure seeking just by looking at the aged people who have made the mistake of instant gratification over long-term building.

The Guardian is a Tabloid

What country are you from? You say you had an appartment in high school. Sounds like Eastern Europe to me. First of all, this is just what comes to mind from your few paragraphs. It could be completely off. The first theme I get is that your parents want to punish themselves and I would guess your mother is the primary source of this situation from what you have written. When people are in a negative mental space, a common response is self-harm. Obvious forms are cutting and chronic drug use, but it goes much further and more subtle and nuanced than this. No one typically forces someone to stay in an abusive adult relationship, no one forces you to spend days in bed if your are depressed and no one forces you to live for years barely speaking in a house. They are there because they want to be in these negative spaces. You go on to say that your father loves the blame game, he needs attention. Both negative. I believe these are probably cravings, just like a drug addict craves heroine induced nightmares as their last veins are collapsing. From the sounds of it here and your other posts, it seems you have grown up in a nest of negativity. For yourself, you need to work to introduce some positivity into your life, which I know will not be easy. It's not your responsibility to fix your father. You'll do well if you can fix yourself. You could try telling him that if he doesn't want to rest of his life to be as miserable as it has been so far, go to therapy. Another observation is that your parents seemingly hate each other. Why? The way I see things there is no reason for a marriage to disintegrate if its between two people who negotiate. From what you have said I would guess your mother has used mind games to dominate your father and he resents this, but refuses to communicate that to your mother and caused a mountain of pent up resentment which will be expressed in passive aggressive behaviour and maybe the occasional meltdown or outburst.

Dobar dan, I am in Croatia at the moment, but will be leaving tomorrow. Interesting article. The outcome was predictable. When there are commons, people will not respect them and just expect them to work miraculously with no care on the mechanics of how that may happen. A good example is land that was for common grazing in England. This was a medieval relic and by the 1700s, the notion came of privatising the commons, as if it was privately owned the owner would take good care of it and turn it into productive farm-land and not an unmanaged shambles. Another would be the soiled child who does not know his mother picks up all his worn clothes and washes them. It's interesting that the people who would so rabidly defend such government programs are the same people who rant and rave about the poorest and most vulnerable people in society. Yet they want billions for the arts, sciences, humanities and frilly programs like this.

One thing I realised distinctly after taking the test at 16personalities.com is that adults are more or to a large extent hard-wired in how they approach and perceive things and how this can lead to misunderstandings due to radically different perspectives. Since the divide between regressives and lets say people who want to be left alone has made more sense. Since I have noticed how regressives go absolutely mental with emotional arguments due to things that do not even register with me. A month or so a go the UK Labour ledership candidate, Owen Smith, said he wanted to "smash Theresa May back on her heels." May is the UK Prime Minister. I saw the video and this line did not register with me at all, but within a short time the regressive media had puffed up and was having fits about it. Naturally if Theresa May was a man and Smith said he wanted to "smash May back on his brogues." it would have received little attention. And of course, no one even knew what reasoning or sub-conscious drives prompted the comment. That Smith is for banning men for running for office in some cases was seemingly not relevant. None of this mattered, all that mattered was that it was another opportunity for a grief fest. I'm not sure what video this is, but personally I don't think quoting the daughter would have registered with me as anything to take special attention of *Echo: ValueOfBrevity* I am reading emotional plea, not an argument. I think jokes about people who died in car crashes are mean, but just saying so is not an argument, its an emotional statement.