Do you understand your own ideology or the times you live in, Conrad? What would Objectivism say about the state and the economy that the Boomers have created? Hm? It's not that far removed from what I'm saying(although I am not an Objectivist).
You might envy the young, Conrad, but there's no way on earth that the trillions of debt can blamed on those too young to either vote or work. And everybody knows who is to blame for this.
No, I won't blame anybody else. Anybody under 70/80 - including people my age - in the West has had it easy. And we've had it easy because we've not been doing enough and we've spending money we don't have for decades.
The blue-collar, reb, have gained the least from the fiat-fantasyland. Yet it was Boomer voters, Boomer politicians, Boomer ethics, Boomer consumers, Boomer business and Boomer welfare which has led us to where we are. They founded this joke of an economy and culture of victimhood and failure.
That rag-tag generation of hippies and yuppies has been the worst generation the West has ever known, this is not even up for debate anymore as proof is in the pudding. It's only hushed up now because Boomers are still in power, but you're aging, and with each passing day people are beginning to understand that we cannot carry in the way that we once did. We cannot follow the Boomer way.
It's a drastic scheme designed to achieve quick results by promoting an imbalanced diet. It's much akin to the Atkins diet.
People do not hold to these diets... Just eat less - whilst keeping your diet balanced - and do more and do this every single day and consider this to be normal. In fact, don't even consider it at all that's how subconscious it should be. That's how people keep the weight off.
The point is not to look at these fad diets as a quick fix. They're crafted to the very same psychology that makes people fat in the first place. Anyway, the sloth looking for the easy get-out will not keep off the weight for long. Being healthy should be entirely normal and not an exceptional scheme.
Nope. I have no active diet. "Active" being the key word here, since it is possible to "diet" by simply choosing certain lifestyles without a consciously pained effort to do so. If anything active dieting is grounds for disqualifying a woman: A woman whose past is laden with a detritus of planned diets is but one vulnerable moment away from turning into a post-blueberry Violet Beauregarde.
You've got two options pal, you either find some bait for that hook of yours or you turn gay. 'Looking for some steamy fun' is the kinda line that can only work on Grindr.
To the lizard part of a woman's brain a man who treats her poorly must have a potential abundance of other women so as to afford to treat her so poorly. Now if many other woman want him then she must be so desirable and special in order for him to pick her above these other women.
The above is the mechanism which makes the egotistical woman and the uncaring a**hole made for each other.
Now in addition to this you have the woman's natural submissiveness. Arousing a woman involves taking her down a peg or two, and arousing a man(visual stimulus aside)involves making him feel like he's king.
What you find is that the greater her ego the more she loves uncaring a**hole. Uncaring a**hole are not at all to be mixed up with caring a**hole. One is indifferent and the other is spiteful - two things which are worlds apart.
Yes, but we tend towards the opposite problem of strugglepreggers and women marrying after her prime beauty and fertility years.
I don't know if you've seen the film or read the book Logan's Run? Anyway, after 30 years of adult life you are terminated for the greater good of all. And I think this provides a good antidote for the aging populations of the West.
Now this will not be very nice. But maybe we can take some comfort from the brutal reality that the weak must make way for the strong. The old must submit to the youth. Evolution marches on. The scythe is remorseless. Let the scythe's remorseless swing be a comfort to you all.
You don't understand women, Track, simply because you choose not to. CS will not help free you from this ignorance because all of the women here are beta sheep. Go elsewhere and listen to the explanations from some of the hot women you see, you may then encounter something approaching the truth.
Pretty much all of business and finance knows it's a bad idea. We really do not need another layer of bureaucracy for such petty differences that exist between England and Scotland. The whole independence campaign is a spineless plea to emotion crafted for the ears of gilded idiots.
Health services are a good aspect of the welfare state both in principle and in practice. It's one thing to be angered at the number of people sponging a living on benefits or aimlessly employed in some useless govt department or regulated industry, it's quite another to think that the sick should die in the streets.
I think that line is Satanic. And I think it's just asking to get skinned and hung from an ivory tower. The fallout from Scotland leaving would be massive. It's too much damage to do to prove an ideological point. Surely there's a better way of weaning people off welfare.
I just hope they remember a few years from now when they can no longer afford a national health service, the country's bankrupt and they're in a remarkably similar position to you guys in Greece that they chose this future for themselves.
Those petty-minded, opportunistic morons - many from Aberdeen - may very well win the day and go independent.
I don't want Scotland to leave. But if they do this will both directly and indirectly strengthen my political viewpoint in England. In fact, the Scots with more than a few brain cells should take note of the fact that English politicians who will make electoral gains from Scotland leaving are still telling the Scots that leaving is a bad idea.
CS, and particularly the forums, are the perfect friendzone. On local sites she may worry about having to reject unwanted advances, but not here, the distance insures against this happening. On here emotional resources can be extracted and the ego stroke-athon can go on indefinitely without any consequence whatsoever. It's a victimless narcissism.
That's because we're still in the selfish age of unreal expectation. We so often hear women bemoan that 'there aren't any "good" men around' yet the concept of sharing the few that there are has not occurred.
Now either women will fully embrace their harem-nature or they will get real with their expectations. I know which one I'm banking on.
You do see those look-alike couples. I think my parents inverted this. My dad is severe/Serbian looking and he always said to me that one reason he chose my mum, who is the archetype Saxon round face, to balance out the features for the kids. And I am perfectly open to the idea that he made this up after the fact to make it sound like he was doing us a favour.
Nothing wrong with generalising so long as you respect the limits of that generalisation. And the sensitivity around generality, or how generality is assumed to be synonymous with ill-will, quite aptly demonstrates Wilde's 'optimism is terror, or, the more dramatic version from Spengler 'optimism is cowardice'. I.e. The incapacity for people to face up to the darkness in favour of an optimistic and comforting unreality - this is what children do.
Now not every White person is a gainsayer with an ego of glass, but I would say that enough them are to make our culture false and shallow, more false and shallow than it already is.
I'd also throw in that holier than thou Whiteness and our plastic optimism as causes. I think it was Oscar Wilde who said that the basis of optimism is terror. I think I get what he meant. People are too afraid to face the negative.
What I find, and truly like, about non-whites is when you talk to them you're actually having a conversation between mature adults. It's not a gainsaying battle of egos where the responses you get are perfectly crafted to suit some agenda or appease some narcissistic insecurity. You get the genuine sense that they're not just saying what they want people to hear. They don't present the false image. And they are this way, I think, because they have a spine. And I find their speakeasy ways really refreshing and maybe little things like this are what help them fend off the depression.
Then they're a different case. Western/White people are the most depressed and the most suicidal people in the world but no one in their right mind could claim that first world problems are the greatest of all problems or that our traumas in any way compare to traumas in other lands(which don't get so depressed).
I'd say it's a lack of positivity around and pride in our identity combined with lives that are too easy. It is because Whites are comparatively weak and self-effacing which makes them crumble and wallow when they have to face negative experiences.
The real solution to Western self-loathing is to end the self-flagellating culture - and it will end, it is perverse. I think depression rates will fall as our lives in the West become tougher and we're once again allowed to be Human like the other races.
A downside of the White obsession with self is depression. And it's also very White to throw drugs at the problem - to think that there is some material solution to problems of the soul - as this vaguely legitimises your own wallowing.
Obstinance_Works Forum Posts (3,514)
RE: USA, the greatest threat to world peace
Do you understand your own ideology or the times you live in, Conrad? What would Objectivism say about the state and the economy that the Boomers have created? Hm? It's not that far removed from what I'm saying(although I am not an Objectivist).You might envy the young, Conrad, but there's no way on earth that the trillions of debt can blamed on those too young to either vote or work. And everybody knows who is to blame for this.