Search the Community

This is my argument The reason why people have a passion is because they believe that they can change something and that it is important. In fact, all emotions are true in such a way. Emotions are simply involuntary responses to our rational observations. A child observes what he is good at and that is how a passion develops. It is very obvious to a child. Everyone as a child had figured it out, but not many people actually followed their passion. Since all passions are rational, then if society is rational, following one’s passion will lead to prosperity. However, this is not the case with our current society. If I want to become a philosopher in North Korea, my prospects are very low or I will not make enough money to survive. This would never happen in a free society because passions are always valuable. However, state intervention prevents the pursuit of an individual’s rational self-interests. It subdues free will. There was a man who did a major in philosophy but who after regretted it because he hadn’t been able to make money from it. It as at this point that people break with their passions. He concluded that passions are not necessarily good and he implicitly accepted nihilism rather than recognising that evil was done unto him. It makes it hard for him to recognise it since sophism is state sponsored in philosophy departments. The majority of people share a similar story. Whether it is coercion from the state, or their parents, or their peers, an adult or child is in some way rejected for following their passions and the adult or child concludes that he cannot trust his emotions. This is the very essence of evil. It is why people did not trust the invisible hand of the free market for tens of thousands of years. Essentially, their self-esteem was so destroyed that they did not trust their own rational faculty. It is the greatest contradiction that ever existed. A virtuous man would find a work-around. He knows that his life is meaningless without passion. He knows that if he were to look back at his life without following his passion, he would regret it and wonder what could have been. There is no alternative for him. Every action we make is motivated by emotion. A person cannot simply think and do. They must think until they feel that they can do. An artificial line has been created between emotions and thoughts. Emotions simply are an expression of our deepest and truest thoughts that we may not even be conscious of. It is analogous to the arbitrary distinction between qualia and meaning. We see red because we associate it with everything else that is red. A person void of passion then, is a robot without free will, following the instructions of others without even being consciously aware of it. So, the virtuous man has no rational choice other than to find alternatives to the best of his ability. This does not mean that the virtuous man will be unsatisfied. The passion arises only from what can be done. If man finds that his passion is unreachable, his passion will naturally change. So, the virtuous man is a force that cannot be stopped by anyone or anything. It is as clear as sunlight what his objective is. A rock cannot turn into a tree, nor can man change his neurological predispositions, particularly once he becomes aware of them. Even if a man is destroyed for following his passions, he will never be the same. He will always be at ease, because he knows what must be done so he will inevitably build himself back up. He is the man who works. But if a man does not immerse into his passions, he will always live a shallow life not knowing what he could have been. “Nothing is softer or more flexible than water, yet nothing can resist it” – Lao Tzu.

Please make a video on this worthless shit stain. The videos speak for themselves

Like it or not, Stefan Molyneux has shifted his discourse to a more nationalist discourse lately, and he's routinely discussed in /pol/ when he posts new videos or he's listed in the diagrams of the Alt Right as a libertarian nationalist. So this topic is a way of opening a discussion on nationalism, the alt right, how it relates to Freedomain Radio, and how memes and propaganda are winning people over on the internet. In particular I'm posting videos that exemplify in broad terms what it happening with the movement. Walt Bismarck posts videos of Disney songs with altered lyrics. This one fits really well with the characters and how moving to the right is basically joining the dark side. This is the definitive Trump propaganda rock opera. The song wasn't meant to be about him, it's actually inspired by a videogame, but it doesn't matter now. NAZI! ANTISEMITE! WHITE SUPREEEEMIST! - ramzpaul is someone I've been listening for a while, and in this video he talks about how the cliche notion of white nationalism is for edgelords. In broad terms he advocates national identity for all people while making fun of neonazis. And while the unicorn ideal of a free society is still the final goal, what is ultimately going to take people there must first pass throught the ring of fire called "defeat the left" and "abandon democracy" and the only movement currently gaining any traction in this road is not the libertarians, but the alt right. I don't see it as the end game, but it can't hurt to realize nothing else has a chance of making a dent in the globalist's agenda so far.

This guy's position is left anarchism.

Just the media desperately trying to make the recent shooting fit a narrative. You know it's quality journalism when the sources listed, well actually the source listed is someone's tweet.

I thought I had seen (almost) everything, I thought nothing could beat the propaganda machine of the USSR, the nazis or similar immoral systems, but this EU propaganda is really really sickening... The ironically titled cartoon book for children... 'On the road to victory', can be bought or downloaded here. Some examples of this filthy surreal propaganda, spread in public schools over the heads of the most innocent: I'm speechless....

Saint Sarkeesian and The Root of All Evil: http://www.gameinformer.com/blogs/members/b/codenamecrono_blog/archive/2015/02/23/saint-sarkeesian-and-the-root-of-all-evil.aspx An interesting article that looks at Anita Sarkeesian through the lens of religious preaching. While many commentators here might think Sarkeeesian and GamerGate to be frivolous, the video game industry has surpassed Hollywood in revenue, and is a major cultural influence on boys and young men in particular. As such, overt attempts by propagandists such as Sarkeesian to alter the way video games are made and marketed are worth paying attention to.

Hi everyone! This is my first thread on FDR. Firstly, I hope this is the right place to address the topic of art in a free society. Art is, after all, educational. Many enter a gallery or museum without considering how everything got there. See, I find it difficult to enjoy art if it's acquired through force (or, with tax-payer funds, if you like). Logically, anything within the gallery's walls, or state-funded in its creation anywhere, becomes affiliated with the state: its implication changes and it becomes a political tool. This isn't obvious until the whole state concept is unpacked. It should be remembered that art directors are bought, like teachers. And a fantastic way to silence an artist is to own their work. For example, I find it hideously ironic that a Leon Golub should exist in a government's pocket. Now, some artists today play with these themes, but here I'm addressing the general practice. It seems to me that people criticizing the private galleries and "vanity spaces" forget or simply ignore the hypocrisy in their claims. A state collection, really, is hardly cleaner than a private one. Many artists would kill to have their work purchased by a state gallery. The consensus is that you're not historical or "permanent" otherwise. But think on it: would you want your work, with all of its concepts, to be attached to the oldest platform of evil, however glamorous? I've read literally no essays or crits on these issues (save for this). Any links or books definitely would be welcome! If I've made any mistakes on this subject, please excuse my naivete and do correct me.

What is a eurosceptic? The very word is overtly reminiscent of Newspeak. Hog-wash I say, the term is nothing less than pure EU-brainwashing terminology. The EU can define all the bla-bla-bla terminology they wish for between themselves, but they may not cook-up that which describes their dissenters. That's for me, and my like, to define. I am an EU dissenter, I am an EU atheist. I am NOT an EU agnostic. To describe anyone and everyone who is not just a lock, stock and barrel EU zombie (or grubby-fingered benefactor) by use of such a handy little catchall catchphrase terminology as 'skeptic' is more than just a lazy writer's falsehood. It is a contribution to the EU's PR brainwashing agenda. A cog in the grinding-wheel, consciously granted or not. The term 'skeptic' is a detractor devised to takeaway any depth of objection from those who call-out against the imposition of this undemocratic tyranny to which our so called political representatives fain nothing but the most feeble and tepid of stances. Skeptic - a person inclined to question or doubt accepted opinions Doubt - a feeling of uncertainty or lack of conviction - archaic fear; be afraid Rhetoric - the art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing, especially the exploitation of figures of speech and other compositional techniques - language designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect, but which is often regarded as lacking in sincerity or meaningful content

Stefan recently interviewed G. Edward Griffin (August 20th 2013). Great interview and in doing a little more digging (mind you I had come across G. Edward Griffin before in documentaries & lectures) I found he did some great work back in the 1980's. He is an author and lecturer, The most famous book he wrote and published in 1994 was "The Creature from Jekyll Island" about the Federal Reserve and how it was created. You must watch this interview G Edward Griffin did with an EX KGB defector in 1983, "Yuri Bezmenov": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3qkf3bajd4 There was a another lecture with Yuri in 1983 called "Subversion": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fQoGMtE0EY This information was way a head of its time. Unfortunately they never had the internet 30 years ago. All of what is happening around us with the state controllers tightening their grip was outlined by Yuri 3 decades ago; Politics, Media, Economics, are all flowing a doctrine in state control methodology. Save a little more of your time here is a Wiki page on Yuri: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_Bezmenov Kindest Regards, OX

After listening to the review of Fight Club and Seven Year Itch it donned on me that at a very early age I may have been tainted by the statist propaganda virus. I have started listening to the podcast from episode 1, currently in the lower 200's, and while I have had these thoughts my whole life it is great to have them shaken before me like breadcrumbs for pigeons. I was always a kid who would ask questions to the point of drawing anger from my "victim", teachers, parents and the like. If you told me not to do it, I wanted to do it even more just to see what would happen. This has gotten me in some trouble in my early life though I have come to understand it is best to just leave some stones unturned in certain circumstance. So I spend my work hours taking in the podcast and some leisure time picking random debates on the internet to hone my logic process to see what needs more clarification. This has gotten me to a point where I feel it would be good to help unwind the springs of my childhood to see what makes the clock of life tick. So I thought about Disney's; The Lion King. At first it seems like a very innocuous film for children to enjoy, but as Stefan says, art mirrors society. If first thought that it was a simple parallel of communism vs. monarchy, but under further scrutiny I found much more to the story. It seems that Scar represents Hitler/German Govt. Looking at the personality traits of Scar, he is smart and cunning yet also evil and physically weak. Much the same Germany was weak after WWI with reparations holding them down. It was only after he massed the hyenas behind him was he able to take down his powerful brother Mufasa. Simba would represent the United States, a young gun of sorts. The USA was just getting to its place as in the food chain of power, not sure that it wanted to get too involved in the war. So too Simba was not able to sense the danger Scar represented until it was too late to do anything. Mufasa could be said to draw on the likeness of France, just as France helped the USA in its early days to gain ground and get a feel for being a world power. Mufasa thus helped Simba grow and learn to be a king. Mufasa was killed by Scar while trying to save Simba, I view this as Frances complacency in allowing the appeasement to go on, which ultimately lead to their defeat because Germany got too close. Nala is the United Kingdom, while their spirit is crushed by Germany yet they continued to fight, so Nala remained in the pride, waiting to get rid of the evil Scar who held them at the precipice of death. Also to note the love story between Simba and Nala, who came to rule the pridelands, is a clear parable to the empire shared between the USA and UK.Timon and Pumbaa, I feel, are the USSR. They live outside the realm of the pridelands and according to their own rules. They have no specific allegiance to anyone, they just do what they have to do to get by. The USSR, being the only well established communist government at the time, also had no particular interest aside from keeping its power base. Timon and Pumbaa only join the fight against Scar when they find out, from Nala, that Simba is the rightful king. Here you see the USSR not quite willing to full out declare war on Germany. Rafiki is the character I have trouble placing perfectly, but I draw parallels from the Zionist movement, perhaps even David Ben-Gurion in particular. The physical likeness is quite striking as well! Rafiki is there to give moral support to a young Simba and give him further encouragement to press and attack against Scar. Zazu is the only character I can't really think of anything for perhaps Switzerland, but I don't really know much how they interacted within the context of WWII. The fight between Simba and Scar is also very telling of the end of WWII. Simba did not kill Scar he let Scar's own demons do the job. Clearly this shows likeness to the Nuremberg trials yet Hitler committed suicide to avoid the shame. In all the movie seems to be telling kids that fighting to get back what was birthed to you is a totally moral justification to tearing down an empire, disregarding the fact that universal suffering is the real evil. I hope you enjoyed reading this rather rough outline of a former childhood favorite of mine. It was fun for me to contemplate too! Throw some feedback my way and maybe we can work out some more of the details. Thanks!