A place for a


Free will is a double bind

You can do good and go to heaven or do bad and go to hell.

This obfuscates the true matter of question: If I do bad, do I go to hell? Do i have to suffer and lose self-love?

Thus to say you are free to choose in fact becomes you can not choose in conjunction with the biological imperative for love.

Thus, those who are good and made the choice to do so say they did it out of free will. While in reality, they did it as a result of a subconscious coercion.

In reality, what they call free will and virtue is the submission to shame and fear of not being loved and the belief of the lie that god will not love you if you do bad.

The absurdity of the regular free will statement lies in the claim that you are free to live a life without love – if you do bad. You obviously fail and drop into various addictions that replace love, however insufficiently. And eventually, depraved (of love), you come crawling back at the feet of the priests and they will say: See, a life of sin is not what you want. Here, come, embrace a virtuous life.

But you do not want a sinful life is a lie. The truth that has nothing to do with free will is: You can not choose to live a life without love.

So it was not the choice to sin that got you. It was the choice to believe that a sin will make you unworthy of love. And then follows the rebel’s even more tragic, yet logical conclusion: I will rather live without love than live as a slave.

If he chooses to obey, though, the will to submit feels automatic, since these thing happen subconsciously. since we do not consciously percieve the coercion, it seems to come out of nowhere. Thus we call it free will.

And thus virtue is born out of submission to cruelty. And since the man of free will is proud of his free will, he will happily exercise it whenever he has the opportunity to do so in order to win his oppressor’s – pardon, god’s – approval.

Thus the free man looks down on the man who follows his instincts to do what he wants and says: I am freer than you. I am freer than you to ignore my instincts and replace them with obedience.

His freedom to obey over his wish to disobey is what makes him free. How ironic.

He dissociates from his self and calls his earthly presence devil. Instead, he identifies with his oppressor, whom he conflates with god, and sees the parts that do not serve the oppressor as evil. He in fact comes to beg the oppressor to free him of his desire to be himself – the desire to sin. He – without knowing it – is hating life and begging for death, for the ultimate freedom. Of what does he wish to be free? Of life, of course, or life as he knows it. In church, he lowers his head and prays: Free me from this misery that is life.

Naturally, when you divorce your identity from your fleshly presence, paradise is a place of weightlessness and selflessness (literally) and a slave’s Stockholmy love.

Not only is he a slave. He also feels ashamed of his wish not to be a slave. He wishes not to wish to be free, in fact. He is proud of his status as a slave.

And this man claims free will for himself?

No. The only free man is he whose instincts are not conflicted and thus uninhibited. He reaches a free flow of life, a life in the moment. A life he can surrender to.

You can never be free of your nature. But you can strive to be free of forces that inhibit your nature.

And if you could be free of your nature, why would you want to? Of cpurse, to look good in somebody’s eyes. In your father’s. In your mother’s. In god’s.

But it is people who had the arrogance to talk in the name of god and claim that his love is conditional. And as they said it, you started to believe it. And as you started to believe it, you lost the ability to receive god’s love. Because you were ashamed to face him and show him your true nature. And if you do not show god your true nature, he can not give you love for it.

There is no free will. The concept does not make any sense, and subconsciously, you know it.

You have been tricked.

There is no free will. There is only the impossibility to live without love.

The man who exercises his free will in the Christian sense is no more free than the man who starves to free himself of hunger.

The Christian free will is an impossibility. It presents the choice to live life without love as free. But it is no choice, for it is impossible, thus no one can and will ever choose it.

The Christian must believe that every sinner – confident man – is devoid of love.

The christian free will makes you choose between obedience and love and disobedience and lovelessness. Since the latter is impossible to choose through the element of lovelessness, the statement in itself becomes a lie. The statement becomes: You can choose to disobey and you can not choose to disobey.

Take away the component about love and shame and hell and the choice becomes simpler: Obey or disobey. And why would you choose the former?

The free will is a double bind. The real free will is not a choice. It simply is. As Nietzsche pointed out, there is no difference between a lightning and the lightnings wish to thunder. Both are one. A free will is one that does not have to continuously doubt itself.

The free will is a double bind. An inescapable logical contradiction and impossibility.

The free will is a double bind. In fact, free will stops to be free every time it faces a choice where either of both sides is clearly preferrable. Then the free will is no longer a choice, but a biological obligation to choose the better. It is only the conflation of god’s love with obedience that makes obedience appealing.

Free will is a double bind. And a slave doctrine. The freer you become, the more obedient you are. Which is another angle of the contradiction. How does it make you more free to let others restrain you? And how are you free not to let them if the alternative is unlivable and thus impossible to choose?

Also, if that will is free, why do you need to invest conscious, unnatural effort to exercise it? How weird.

The smart man is not he who realizes that he prefers love over lovelessness. It is the man who realizes the cruelty of a parent that withholds love unless he is obedient.

But hey, it is your free choice to be obedient and let your kids get fucked by a horny sexually repressed priest.

Oh, did i just? A double bins, really? Oh, my.

1 vote

One Pingback/Trackback

  • Pingback: Free will is a double bind | Manosphere.com()

  • Smokingjacket

    However, if you abandon free will and act upon every single sensuous impulse that presents itself to you, do you not end up equally a slave, but, only of a different type. I’ve known people addicted to sex, to drugs and even to money and ultimately they all surrendered their innate selves or any sense of autonomous vigorous individuality to their instinctual urges. All of them ended up slaves even though they thought they were free to their desires which they fatally believed were setting them free. How ironic is this?

    Surely, the whole raison d’être of one’s existence in the world should relate to the capacity to love? Yet we all know this old whore of a world doesn’t work like that, and, the reason why has nothing to do with people restraining their free will, but, rather it has everything to do with fear. The fear that those whom we love will eventually depart and desert us, leaving us alone, more vulnerable and lonely than ever. This is the visceral fear we all feel. This is why so many people choose to be “loveless” rather than commit to another human being that will eventually through accident or design end up leaving them. Even the happiest marriages end in the desertion of death, do they not?

    • As I see it, addictions are not expressions of impulses. Rather, they are actually inhibitons from feeling impulses, leading to the need for distraction. Here is an article that pretty much shaped my view:

      Of course, the impulse to prohibit an impulse is an impulse in itself, no doubt.

      When a real urge or feeling must not be admitted, it must be compensated for with something else. The classical Chinese chi and chakra system also knows the concept that problems in the lower chakras can lead to addictive behavior. The lower chakras are in the pelvis and the next higher one is in the stomach. Firstly, this seems to be quite correct based on my meditations. Resolving these issues in those chakras pretty much solves the addiction. Secondly, emotions have locations and in hindsight, the need to act out addictive behavior was always rooted in my lower abdomen. That is where the impulse came from. So when you next meet someone addicted to sex, ask them where they feel that need. And also ask them whether they possibly feel shame along with that need, which is also what I always felt when I overate.

      The thing is, the real self really is a free will in the sense that everything we do really is a choice. But the mistake here is to confuse what free will means. Free will does not mean that we have the choice to suppress our need to act out our addiction. That is harmful in the long run, although it works in the short term. Free will really means that our need to act out our addiction WAS a choice in the first place, one we have merely not yet understood. So to regain the best kind of free will requires you to understand how that which seems imposed on you really was a choice. Meaning: Free will is not the freedom to fight an urge; instead, it is the freedom to realize why one is choosing to follow this urge and then possibly realizing that the underlying motivation is faulty. Which completely eliminates the addictive behavior – the opposite of suppression.

      • Smokingjacket

        “WAS a choice in the first place, one we have merely not yet understood” I don’t agree. A choice in your lexicon means that it was “freely chosen” which is not always the case with addictive personalities. What’s causing them to be addictive is not a CHOICE but a COMPULSION which is something very different as it’s predicated by factors below the waterline, deep in their unconscious or in events in their own personal history.

        The majority of my post was not about addictive behaviors directly, but, rather about the radical choice between fulfillment of desires and the consequential fact that such fulfillment in itself does not denote a state of confident autonomous freedom which I think your article appears to imply.

        • Yes, it is in their subconscious, but still a choice. Make it conscious and it becomes apparent how that is true. Then that stuff can be let go. Defense mechanisms and unhealed wounds are revealed and it becomes clear why one could not have acted any differently. In that sense, it is always free. Meaning it is always deterministic and logical. It is not some kind of inaccessible voodoo, although it sometimes seems that way.

          Another take: The fact that one could not have chosen differently does not mean it was not a choice. This stuff just happens. When we are conscious of doing it, we call it choice, because we believe we could have done it differently. And maybe that is true on a quantum level, allowing multiple realities. But in this reality, everything happened the only way it could.

          The only reason to discard immediate fulfillment of desire is when that path is blocked or causes too much pain. Thus, complications come into play. Workarounds. Sexual sublimination. Discipline. To equate self-restraint with virtue only makes sense if it is the best and most satisfactory way. Which in turn actually makes it the most immediate way.

          • Smokingjacket

            ” In that sense, it is always free. Meaning it is always deterministic and logical” This sounds contradictory, but, what you’re saying it that we think we act freely even when we don’t because it’s determined by factors at the unconscious level. Yes, there’s some validity to this idea I must admit.

            However, I would caution this by saying that we have absolutely no objective idea about what these factors actually amount to- let alone be able to say how they can determine every single choice we make in our lives. At a quantum level it’s plausible to imagine a superimposition of a number of different possibilities that could determine a particular outcome in our observable empirical world. Yet, logically if we deduce to the fissure where events of consequences occur, we’re, still talking about free possibilities from an array of choices, so I don’t ultimately agree with your deterministic viewpoint of either human nature or reality.

            I do nevertheless agree about your point regarding obstructions to one’s fulfillment . If you obey out of a sense of misplaced free will any restrictions on your desires because you believe God will punish you, then this is contrary in my mind to what God meant by his invention of free will, which obliviously meant the capacity to sin and know only through being a sinner the road that leds back to real virtue and perfection.

          • This sounds contradictory, but, what you’re saying it that we think we act freely even when we don’t because it’s determined by factors at the unconscious level. Yes, there’s some validity to this idea I must admit.

            Actually, it is not contradictory. What does free mean if not ‘free from outside influences and distractions’? What does free mean if not ‘the shortest and most immediate path to satisfaction’? I think that we sometimes make a big mistake in answering the following question: Free from what?

            If we want the will to be free from impulses and emotions, you have to wonder what exactly it is based on. If all your past conscious or subconscious events have absolutely no influence on your free will, how will you even be able to choose? Based on what? Why would you end up choosing anything at all? When I choose to do something, it always has a reason. But if the will is free from my emotions and impulses, it is free of reason. That would imply that will is completely random and directionless. And what would be the use of such a form of free will?

            However, I would caution this by saying that we have absolutely no objective idea about what these factors actually amount to

            Well, the word ‘objective’ makes it difficult. But meditation can take you to a place where you at least conceptionally are able to resolve your emotional conflicts. Believe it or not, this has by now taken my back into my past life and that before. Whether it is real, I am not sure. But I know that by resolving these imaginary or real issues, my problems actually diminish.

            As for deterministic, I was referring to this particular reality. See, if quantum stuff can have random outcomes, we can assume that it can have any particular outcome, but in this reality it has the one we could theoretically observe. Implying that there are parallel realities in which any other possibility happens. That implies that for each little quantum particle at any quantum bit of time, there are infinite realities created. Well, not infinite, of course, because quantum comes from ‘quantifiable’. Set let us just say that it is a hell of a lot for just a single particle. Multiply with the amount of particles in the universe and you have a near to infinite amount of parallel realities. In fact, if each and every single of those alternatives is possible, it is theoretically thinkable that there is a reality in which people can fly. Why? Because you also learn at school that theoretically, all the air in a room could gather in one single edge of the room. It is just very improbable.

            So what if one can reach a level of consciousness where one can interact with reality in a way where one chooses the particular parallel reality in which the most improbable becomes that which actually happened? Since it is theoretically possible, it definitely happened in some parallel reality. The question is just how to enter this particular reality. And maybe that could be an expression of free will. The dude Bashar implied something in that sense.

            Glad we agree about the obstruction of free will through misplaced free will. It is simply shame. Although, think a step farther. What if ‘sin’ is merely a concept we chose to believe in – a long time ago maybe – to have a particular emotional experience?

          • Smokingjacket

            “I think that we sometimes make a big mistake in answering the following question: Free from what?” Free from another possibility that gives affect to another possibility in our observable world and this is where consciousness in it’s act of freedom comes into play and the verb play which is not arbitrary choice such cases means everything.

            “Why would you end up choosing anything at all? When I choose to do something, it always has a reason” But does it? Do you never choose to act spontaneously without any definable reason informing why you decided to act or do a certain thing, in a particular way, at a certain time. It’s my contention that we all do things everyday in which we choose to act without there ever being any articulate or clear reason that we act in the decision making process. How does this happen you may ask? Well, because free will is precisely the act where we consciously decide to do something in contradistinction to “choices” made on the unconscious impulsive level.

            ” Since it is theoretically possible, it definitely happened in some parallel reality. The question is just how to enter this particular reality” But that’s it- what we do is a choice and and an act of free will in our universe- but in all possible universes- it’s simply an outcome that must happen given that all these sets contain the total possibilities of the entire universe. The particular reality you mention is namely all of us as conscious participants that determine particular outcomes and this is an act of free will within an array of possible outcomes and that’s where human beings come into play.

          • “But does it? Do you never choose to act spontaneously without any definable reason informing why you decided to act or do a certain thing, in a particular way, at a certain time.”

            It is exactly as you say. I will argue that you never really know why you choose it. Which is in my eyes a nice proof of determinism. Even in those instances where we imagine to know why we chose, it likely is not the real reason, because the subconscious is not that reflected.

          • Smokingjacket

            ” I will argue that you never really know why you choose it” But this is simply not true. If I go into a store in the morning and consciously choose to buy carrots because I like their taste instead of parsnips, well that’s a simple case of using your free will based upon your personal experiences of your unique existence in this world. I don’t see this has anything to do with our subconscious issues. These choices are conscious and are based on our free will that’s informed by our experiences in the world.

          • But is that true? Did you buy carrots because you like their taste or is that merely an association that your brain brought up? In other words: You may have chosen to buy them and your brain spit out the information that you like the taste. But was that the real cause? You always like carrots, but you do not buy them every day, right?

            Here is a video I would like you to watch the first 20 or 30 minutes of to see where I am coming from:

          • Smokingjacket

            The point about choosing to buy the carrots illustrates my point well. Every time I decide to buy carrots in the supermarket- this experience is unique to me at that moment and place in time and space. Yesterday’s experience of myself buying carrots might not have been an example of myself using my free will in a conscious manner. Perhaps I simply acted on some vague notion- I liked the way they looked and the way they were displayed- all shinny and orange in the aisles. I might not have been even thinking about “carrots” when I bought them. However I still made a choice even though I cannot now recall the rationale or the options behind it.

            Today, I might again go to exactly the same store and be “determined” to purchase carrots because I’m having a dinner party with rabbit friends of mine tonight. However, when I arrive at the supermarket, I discover that the carrots are very poor quality today. However, the Beetroots look excellent and I know my rabbit friends love them almost as much as carrots. So what will I do. In this case I’ve two options- buy the poor quality carrots and possibility disappoint my friends or buy the beetroot and possibility disappoint my friends. In other words, unlike when I bought carrots yesterday. Today, I consciously use my free will to make a choice between two different options that may disappoint to varying degrees.

            To contend that these states are determined is I think a failure for people to register the fact that they can have the power to choose an alternative route around the things we encounter on a daily basis. If you belief in a deterministic reality- you’re essentially a passive being- and are merely acted upon your whole life long. Free will on the other hand is active and when you use it- you act upon the world- In other words you’re not a mere pawn in the game of life.

          • Nice try. But saying that it is deterministic does not mean that your are not active. It just means that the choice what exactly you do is determined automatically.

            I am almost certain you did not make any logical deduction about what to buy, right? You may have become aware of the pros and cons of each decision, but the ultimate choice occurred exactly and the only way it could have occurred. That is, all those fixed factors (poor quality etc) finally were variables in an equation that your subconscious calculated. You may have the impression that you ‘just chose’, but in reality, it was your subconscious that used intuition to make a decision and then informed you of that decision, which you interpreted as having made a choice instead of merely having been informed of it.

            A deterministic person can be very active and dominant. A robot can, too. Why should that not be thinkable?

          • Smokingjacket

            “It just means that the choice what exactly you do is determined automatically” This is based on the assumption that there is something automatically determining our choices. This is a pretty big assumption to make. Who and what is doing this determining, God, the subconscious, the secret hand of fate? I think your endorsement of determinism is based on reasons that you subjectively find pleasing, which is of course fine, even if objectively false.

          • Well, how about the laws of physics? You can argue that god made them and let them free wheel from there on.

            Now, you can argue that there is a random component in it on the quantum level. But this random component is then just that: Random. At least that is what we can see and perceive, because we never really see the other parallel universes that other choices would have brought us to. We just see the current one, in which a choice simply manifests as a random automatic occurrence.

            But you could argue that there is some independent type of free will that kinda ‘guides’ these quantum abberations. Then again, what would it be based on?

            For instance, I started to meditate because I was in a lot of pain. Had my pain been merely tolerable, I may not have found it necessary to take any steps to deal with it. So that decision was not free. It was actually the really logical thing to do, based on the past. Which makes it plausible that it was deterministic. An equation. Suffer enough, poof, and suddenly the equation no longer resolves as ‘tolerate pain’, but as ‘resolve pain’

          • Micah Geni

            What is random in this, may be in order in the anti-universe

          • ??

          • Smokingjacket

            “But you could argue that there is some independent type of free will that kinda ‘guides’ these quantum abberations. Then again, what would it be based on?” Consciousness and intentionality determine the free choices we make. In these cases there is no difference between both terms which are only semantic labels for the way we descriptively perceive the causes and effects that we believe determine our choices.

          • Hm. Maybe there is something to it.

          • popi gander

            Again: perhaps.
            Until you take into account the constant subliminal messaging occuring in our world today via mass media, and cyber- programming of individuals.

            Case in point: from the time you read this, you will dispute what I am about to say, but eventually, you will not be able to avoud the truth of suggestion:

            The next time you are at the store, looking at root vegetsbles, you will “freely” in your paradigm, decide parsnips versus carrots as the root vegetable of your ” choice.”

            But I will say your choice is confined; limited now, and for some time to come: limited after you read this reply.

            Why? Because I say root vegetables. Your “chouce” is to argue carrots versus turnips. Root vegetables.

            And you will say” I didnt say ‘turnips’ I said ‘parsnips.”

            And I will say ” root vegetables.”

            Turnips. Parsnips, carrots.

            Root vegetables nonetheless.

            Now, next time you go to the store, to puck a root vegetable, you will unnavoidably meet this paradigm: root vegetables.

            And you will on some level realuze that your choice was, in some small way, influenced by having read this far. Your ” free will” was trolled- no matter what you choose, when you select a root vegetable- be it Parsnips, Turnips, or carrots- you will choose a “root vegetable” for your table.

          • Damn, that is fucked up. Another commenter remarked that I hate being predictable. It is true. I bet that the next time I go to the supermarket, I will think abotu root vegetables precisely because I do not want to do that.

    • popi gander

      Smokingjacket:The fear that those whom we love will eventually depart and desert us, leaving us alone, more vulnerable and lonely than ever.”


      But anyone who has ever truly been alone in freedom ( meaning not in solitary confinement, prison, or asylum but alone in the “glass cage” outside of it) knows one greater fear- the fear of being found by strangers who willingly violate you, or otherwise muscast you as a social blight.

      Case in point: homeless people who sleep on bus benches, there only waking nightmare the police who abuse them, set them on fire, jail them; or the packs if teenagers who would crush their headscwith rocks.

      These are the genuine fears of ‘aloneness’ in ‘freedom.’

      There simply is no protection from organized or hidden evil.

      • I live in solitude for over a year now. I enjoy it. But there are times when I feel what you say. Once I wanted to get some from a girl. I called her, but a friend of hers took the phone and told me some guy had just fucked the girl I wanted. She made fun of me and I became angry and told her to say that shit into my face. She said she would do it, of course. Then she hung up.

        So there I was, wanting to beat the bitch. I wrote a text message to her with my address. After I sent it, I immediately felt intense fear because I had completely disregarded the fact that she was at a party with many others. What would I do if a group of 4 young muscly boys came around to beat me up? You never feel like this shit is serious until it becomes a real possibility to happen to you.

        • popi gander

          There is no end of the sickness that young beta’s will perpetrate against a guy who gets it.

          I have been jumped by cops, little midwestern white men in packs, academics, and more- these types always jump you from behind.

          One time, a group of sexy strippers were buying me drinks. And these two short fat brown hairs were glaring me down the whole time.

          There faces were like little boys. Then outside the bar, they came up from behind, shouting ” faggot!” and one of them grabbed my hair and punched me from behind.
          I back pedaled into the streetstreet, and recov r red enough to yell” Im a faggot? Hey bitches- Im not the one on a date with my buttie in a strip bar”
          They came charging me like two fat bulls.

          I tossed one face first into a pothole with a tai qi move called ’round the platter’.

          Then flipped a kick in the face of the other. The look of terror in their faces was priceless.

          Then, two girls rescued me as they left another bar.

          In those days, I had lits of cops and cop recruits stalking me due to well, organized cowardice and limited vagina resiurces apparently….

          The cowardice of the conformists is nearly a requirement. Victory, at any cost- even if their hyena packs eat you from the ass, inwards.

          or, Syria, today.

          • popi gander

            Also, BTW, I found your blog through some otger bligs that are disinfo/ psyops blogs.

            I read you because they talked about you in a derogeratory manner- so I suspected you weren’t part of the herd.

            Like that coward Dan who was harassing you a month ago iver mommy issues- these cops are intensely fucked up cowards.

            Dans language was straight out of Americas speech polucing playbook.

            Between the fusion centers, FBI psyops, and JTRIGs dirty tricks, and all of those mommy centric social justice orgs sucking the public tits, like the feminists, the Jewish league, Abe Foxman’s hate speech troops, and more- it’s impossible to get a word out without their harassment.

            Dan was one of those cowards.

          • You know Dan? I figured he seemed kinda in denial of some own issues, so I did not mind.

            I watched the movie Watchmen today. In the beginning, there is a scene where hippies get shot by military. One of the hippies, a girl, smiles with love at one of the soldiers and puts a flower into his rifle, before he shoots her.

            It moved me deeply. Because I realized there is no need in the world to be sad for the hippies. They will be reborn and keep their free minds. There is really only a need to feel sad for those uniformed lost souls who have not even a remote sense of self or individuality. Who are so much in pain that they are completely blind to who really is friend or foe. Aside from their internalized ideological axioms, that is.

            Interesting, I was not aware that I was being mentioned anywhere else. What kinds of blogs are those? Links? I believe I have not seen any links pop up in my webmaster tools. On the other hand, I do not really give a shit. I guess it would have made me proud a few weeks back, but who really cares? What can they say that I can not easily anticipate them to say? All I can get out of seeing it is a little pride of being the villain. But then again, what kind of pride can you get from having idiots declare you that?

            As for herd, I think it is obvious that I am as much alienated from the herd as it is thinkable.

          • popi gander

            It would take some time to research it again, but try the vikingbitch blog, or bligs linked to them. They are faux- right blogs, and as usually happens, they slip some Nazi smears in to discourage people from reading you.

            Or just search again. I seem to remember that it was Roosh that was my start point.

            One of the things that is going on online is psyops blogs posing as legit commentary and then infiltrating dialogues. I was on some of those blogs after reading Roosh ( who I am still not convinced isn’t an act himself).

            Generally, the Agency ops have phrased the world Right and Left, and you were lumped in with right, as if that’s an absolute.

          • popi gander

            Alienated….yes, this is their goal.

            How did that home invasion turn out? That one where your boss allegedly claimed you had stolen code or sth?

            Around 2010, it became increasingly popular by progressives to invent phony narratives of fear, and call the authorities on enemies or dissenters.

            Your case sounded like one of those.

          • Nothing turned out yet. I have quietly accepted that my stuff is gone for good. You know, years of photographs, projects. Fuck it. I am too proud to keep chasing after it and making myself their bitch.

            My case, hm. No, my boss hardly has that kind of interest. He is just really stupid and knows nothing about computers, leading him to make phony accusations. I always felt guilty and ashamed of thinking that other people are stupid, but in hindsight, he most definitely was a hell of an idiot.

          • popi gander

            I urge you to not let it go. While I understand tbe trauma of these unwarranted invasions, I have been through many- and it is best if you collect your stuff. They WILL lose, steal, alter, and destroy much of it, but what’s left is still yours.

            And the necessary pain of collecting it makes you stronger.

            And really- if your country has such laws, sue that false accuser! You can win damages. And, put a dent in a cowards sense of security.

          • I already sued him. We will see what comes of it.

            The pain of getting it back, huh? Interesting. I will ponder that a little. I am not sure I want to go through it.

          • popi gander

            Well, there is no shame in giving you the basics: I lived in a socialist progressive place that propagandizes its sheep into fearing the big bad wolf, and creating bogeymen. I was that bogeyman.

            I became an even bigger bogeyman after suffering false criminal allegations- and without ever hiring the big city lawyers.

            As they say, the truth will set you free, and it did, and it will.

            So, I went to college to study sociology, psychology, literature and journalism- I studied the tools of war that had been used against me.

            A most curious human phenomenon ( also a component of PTSD) is that once we suffer trauma, we are compelled to relive it until we master the teauma in some way.

            For me, it was to study their corrupt narrative, and its systems of delivery- and especially, its messengers.

            And so, I became a messenger and it rankled lots of big birds whose nests and sense of safety depends upon the bones and crushed skulls underneath their nests never coming back to life again.

            And I began to write the wrongs in high places, and collect evidence of the crimes that they perpetrate behind the scenes in order to perpetuate the false narratives onstage.

            I started taking names, and making my own lists, and compiling secret records.

            There is no small irony that they came and stole those notes and records at many points in time.

            They stalked me on backstreets, Tased me in the back one night.

            Two years ago threatened me online that they can ” make automobile accidents happen.”

            Two months or so later U was Tboned by a random driver, and a cop pulled up less than seconds later- he was ” just driving by”. He spent his time counseling the woman at fault- told her ” I can guve you a referal for a good lawyer.”

            We live in a hidden police state, which is less and less hidden now. This is how it works, as any police state has ever.

            I went to college to stydy writing, thinking there was some trick to it- but really, I couldn’t write more predictable material than what reality has given me.

            And their very predictability only made my story more powerful, and taught me how to recognize others who might have been one of their silenced victims.

            There is no shame in exposing them, but great risk exists. Police states, their upholders, and and their narratives, especially depend on the dull ability of conformists to be able to recognize easily predictable mythology, and pass it off as truth.

            My reality shoots their predictable narrational mythology square in the face- and causes perceptive people to recognize the truth in what I write.

            Institutional narratives thrive in the vacuum of narratives that indict their stranglehold on brutal, yet effective lies.

          • popi gander

            I don’t advocate terror or mobsterism. However, I think it’s impirtant to form closed loop groups of like minded people to challenge systemic abuse.

            In as much as I like the idea, for instance, that I could anonymously kill your enemy for you, and you mine- to physically destroy those who have caused trauma to us, and to do it brutally in secret collusion-that is not a productive solution.

            What IS a productive solution is to do what they do: collect intelligence, and employ that intelligence against them, as they do to us.

            By like minded I mean that I could investigate your enemy, and you mine- and we can begin to wage the exact type of whisper campaigns and slanderous character assasinations against them

            These and many other techniques are what they do daily, under color of law and political rights.

            And this is a right that is mine to- and I excercise it frequently.

            And, as you once wrote- it is necessary to form our own secret alliances against them.

            You can accomplish more with a pen than a sword or gun. But it takes time, and proper alliances.

          • See, here is my today’s take on it:

            Some people do not like me. I do not like them, either, although I can empathize with their pain if they denounce me.

            I could fight them. But why should I? Why should I risk my life AGAINST something bad? Factually, I am sacrificing myself for the bad thing by fighting it.

            Because I can just as well avoid that kind of evil in my reality. Go out of its way. And live a peaceful life where these people just do not exist or matter.

          • popi gander

            If I wasn’t clear enough: you cannot escape them, or go away to avoid their evil.

            You can only find places less evil, and work with them to respect your obscurity, or ally against greater evil.

            Btw: do you read books? What?

          • That is what you say and what you need to believe for your own life. Not necessarily what I need to believe in my own life.

            I do not read as much as I could or should. But these sources were very important to me in this year:
            – No More Mr Nice Guy by Robert Glover
            – This website: gettinbetter.com
            – Language in Thought and Action by S. I. Hayakawa

            – The scartissue.us blog and the Danger & Play blog
            – Return of Kings blog

          • A most curious human phenomenon ( also a component of PTSD) is that once we suffer trauma, we are compelled to relive it until we master the teauma in some way.

            Yes. That is what the ’embracing pain’ thing means. One way to master it, of course, is to beat your oppressors. Another is to accept what happened, accept your helplessness, and then move on. Which is what I am starting to choose, because I do not want to live in pain for the sake of punishing people I do not want to spend any time thinking about.

            especially depend on the dull ability of conformists to be able to recognize easily predictable mythology, and pass it off as truth.

            Bravo, well said.

            Well, interesting story mate. Yes, the police state is kinda obvious. It came to me in a meditation today. Micah Geni here on the blog often talks about a ‘grid of bullshit’. It is just that.

            Police comes to take your stuff. Or take your money. Taxes, if you do not pay them. How can they justify it? I mean each single one of them? Do they know what the money is being used for? Whether that shit is fair? No, how could they. Who knows that stuff, anyway? The money just goes somewhere and a lot of it into the pockets of those talented agitators and demagogues.

            They follow orders. And that is the thing in which they find certainty and thus confidence. A clear set of rules is a set of rules that does not force you to make any difficult decisions. That does not leave any room for personal responsibility, but still all the power.

            As I wrote in my article, a normal compassionate human being would look at the situation at hand, look at my version, compare our stories, MAYBE look at my computer and then find some smart solution.

            But no. No room for that. It must all be official, averaged, quantified, done as the pieces of paper with rules dictate it. Of course forgetting that the people who wrote those rules were people too, but hey – who would want to question THEM, right? They are ‘authority’. Important monkeys with fat bellies. Yeah, I have one, too. We are all a bit fucked, right.

            So instead of sending one man to look at the situation and solve it within a day, you send three men to take away all your stuff, then spend two weeks of creating back ups of all the data, lots of manpower behind it. What for? For nothing. Whatever they find will not be of any worth in the sense of evidence. And there is not even evidence that the thing they accuse me of actually happened. And the damage done may be some 200 EUR. But my boss lied and said the damage was around 20.000 EUR. What a moronic asshole. He probably tricked his mind into actually believing that bullshit. To feel important. ‘Look what a victim I am’.

            Anyway, how much money is spent on the investigation? I bet it is a few thousand EUR. For NOTHING. And this likely happens all the time. Who pays for it? Right. I do. And if I do not, they come and take the money. So you end up paying for police work that actually solves nothing, but with its rules creates the illusion of proficiency and expertise and certainty. You pay them to come to your home and treat you badly, worse than necessary. I swear I would kill those guys if that was any viable option.

            And all the while, it would have sufficed to take a somewhat wise guy with intuition and go look at the case. Visit my boss, look at the ‘damage’ that does not even exist. Then visit me, talk to me. Maybe talk to us both. Talk to the new programmer of my old boss. Then come to the conclusion that it was a misunderstanding. Case fucking closed!

            This is not about conflict, about interpersonal problems. No. This is a psychopathic war. Zero empathy, zero concerns. You are just a number to them. And that is fine to them. Why? Because they are just numbers to someone else. Kiss somebody’s ass, kick someone else’s. That is ‘just how the world works’, as they keep telling you from the time you are small. And when you do not believe it, they beat you and say ‘You will understand one day. It is for your own good, son. Life is hard’

          • popi gander

            No, not a psychopath- quite the opposite in fact. I am an empath- I literally feel for your plight.

            It’s a curse indeed. But your response is interesting. You see, the rugged individualist falls, and falls again, thinking that is what learning is, that manliness is aloneness and all of its suffering; whereas others speed up the learning process by crowd sourcing their troubles.

            And you remind me now of the tale of the Little Eichmanns. Post 9/11, our cultures began a war on the old enemies if institutionalized psychopathology, and began to round up the usual suspects: non-conformists, individualists, freethinkers, libertarians and so on.

            The narrative of Eichmann was proposed by a fake Indian who nonetheless spoke up against secret agency mission creep, and he specifically noted Hannah Ahrendts thesis that Eichmann was a dull, flag saluting order following paper pusher- the very essence of human evil.

            And later, when this gained currency in the discourse a concerted attempt was made to change the description- academics and agencies flagged anyone who used this idea to describe the systemic abuses of these agencies that were about to occur! They pre-emptively sought to eviscerate their own analogy, in order to prevent insight into their methodology.

            So- back to your stance there, on that island: I learned in the first several instances of my encounters with these evil ‘just doin mah job’ types that only one thing is certain: they conform you through fear and slander and intimidation; or you continue to live in the fantasy that they wont come back- that you can go, be an island unto yourself.

            But brother, you missed the boat if you think that they wont also invade your island- because even as O write this, they are studying you likeca lab rat- studying me, extending condolensce and advice- because the enemy of the Little Eichmanns everywhere is inneficiency and worse than that perhaps, is their inability to comprehend empathy, and its associated altruism.

            So- these types of conversations between men are suspects themselves.

            And if you think you can go it alone, well, give me your address in prison when they finalize their assault on your character, which by your own count has been over ten years.

            First, they came for your father, and you said nothing because you were swaddled and smothered in the single motherland; then they came for your computer and all the traces- the bits and bytes that indicate you communicated without their approval, and to whom, when.

            Then, they came for them, too.

            Your desire to see a free offer of solidarity then, as corny, virtually hands them the victory they plotted before you were born- they essentially have erased you from the drive.

          • You have a very convincing style of writing. Will they invade my island? I wonder whether that is true. Is it true or is it something you want to believe and thus something you keep attracting into your own life?

            Even if I fight, where will I end up?

            You find my pain repulsive. Interesting, but somehow logical. But does that not mean that you have not yet found a way to deal with your own pain?

            What you are proposing here is that I live in fear of those who may want to harm me. But the truth is, they took nothing from me that I really need for personal happiness. And I doubt they ever will.

            I needed this rebellion and I attracted it. Because I wanted to reach the bottom and see where it leads me. But yeah, you know, I had this vision yesterday, where all bullshit peeled off reality. Told you a bit of it. And part of that vision was that those monsters who orchestrate the bullshit are real and fleshly, whether I imagine them far away in an official building or whether they stand right next to me.

            I had been having this idea and overwhelming sentiment to die for a cause that I find important. At the hands of a worthy foe. Maybe this is where my path will take me. I wonder if I need it. Time will tell.

            Yes, I find it corny. Because I am no saint myself. I did a lot of bad to people too. If you feel what I feel, you should know that. As I have received bad. It would feel dishonest to play the victim.

            And even if that gains me sympathies, where will I go from there? But yeah, it would be interesting to develop the self-esteem to stand publicly behind who I am and rock the boat a little. Then again, I do not feel that that is who I want to be. Not at this point in time.

            You say that the withered bones that are found do not help a greater good. Maybe not. But why should I care about greater good? I care about my life. And I attract into my life those who share my vision of what it should be.

          • popi gander

            Not live in fear: but in respect for your enemy. This will be hard to grasp- it took me years- but I will try to differentiate:

            First, a preface- out fathers are more complex than mothers dimply because the war on men forces men to live outside of the idealized mold, and to often stand alone as individuals.

            Which makes fathers of any actual caliber and moral fibre look….odd. Especially against these snakes that hide behind idealized motherhood and all of its social supports.

            My father- as schizophrenic/genius/alcoholic/child of unspeakable abuse himself/ philosopher once said: respect what is respectable.

            Sounds simple, right? But its an amazing leap of semantics, and terms of engagement! In our common hive minds we are taught that respectable is…being a lawyer, a doctor; a Mother Theresa or ” the best garbage man you can be” right? That respect is associated with superficial power, achieved or subscribed statuses, idealization of good will, and so on.

            But its all an act: Mother Theresa is said by some to be a ham handed cunt; doctors condoned torture, lawyers seldom work free.

            So respect then, must be termed differently.No, I clearly DONT advocate for living in fear- I accept that as a term of living amongst psycopaths who coopt meaning, and terminoligy.

            As I respect a pack of wolves, I respect them: respect is to walk slowly- to try to avoid these as I oiuld a cliff. To walk carefully- but clenching what tools I have in order to beat them one by one with my club of words, or my sword of truth- to pick my positions and fight them if I have to from the right angles.

            I respect their force, and build my own.

            This is noy fear; or if it is, it is informed fear, prepared for self defense, as time has shown it is clearly not me assailing them.

            It is respect- for my own life and safety, and it is more courageous.
            Now, you said:”
            I had been having this idea and overwhelming sentiment to die for a cause that I find important. At the hands of a worthy foe. Maybe this is where my path will take me. I wonder if I need it. Time will tell.”

            Let me caution you: I told you that I discovered your blog through a Psyop. That I was pointed to you by people whose official capacity is to subvert free speech and its speakers online.

            These are not ‘real’ bloggers, these are government, military, and private entities intent on crushing free speech in the proven-false cowardly disguises of “fighting terrorism” and “keeping the MOTHERLAND safe.”

            What you said up there is one example of why they flagged you: you willingly play into their hand and their profile. I have done it myself, just to discover their methods.

            And their methods are formidable, and consequences dire. I truly hope these types one day encounter a bullet in the face […no, I won’t be forced by them to abrogate my duty to free speech either], but I won’t pick up arms to do so. There are other ways.

            And respect cautions you to think through these types of comments, because yes, as you moted, you bring it on yourself the same way a girl in a slutty dress brings it upon herself(…).

            But the difference is that these wolves will kill you for it; and breed her to put another taxpayer into the herd.

          • Interesting stuff. Any more details about that psyops stuff? How come you have access to it? What is it exactly? Where to find it?

            Good point about the ‘respectable’. Respect is an emotion. Is it? It is intuitive. You either respect something or you do not. Nobody can tell you what you should respect. Very good observation. My grandmother always wanted me to be a fucking doc.

            Are they wolves? Or are they just afraid?

          • popi gander

            No- respect is NOT an emotion, nor intuitive. Respect is reason, applied to learning.

            The furst time I encountered wolves, I was preprogrammed by media and childhood learning to view them as cartoons- cute creatures that run through the snows, blissfully existing in nature.

            The second time I encountered wolves the pack was circling me for food.

            And every time after that I travelled with the knowledge of what wolves are; and gradually armed myself with tools to avoid or fight them if necessary, when they try to teach children how cuddly and cute and natyral is their pack.

            It is calculated caution, mixed with at times bold out maneuvering and staged battles- where I use the cluffs to my advantage, droping rocks on their heads as they slibber in pursuit. My advantage,  not theirs.

            In re: Revenge

            Nope, not seeking any fights. Self defense is not seeking a fight, nor is avoidance.

            However, it is interesting how often people who have assaulted me, or who assault others call it a “fight,” as if I or others sought it. This is what bullies do, in the real world.

            This is precisely what institutionalized psychopaths do; what they are.

            You missed where I noted self defense, and my personal approach to that. So, I will just assume that you didn’t understand that.

            As for how I know, this that or  etc., please contact me at my email which is posted in the about section of my blog.

            Your sites contact form is not a secure channel to have that conversation.

            But I will email you back.

          • Interesting stuff. Very nice metaphor with the wolves, very interesting indeed.

            As for bullies, I seriously wonder whether this type of stuff is not something that you as a person attract. I am a bit conflicted in my philosophy here. On one hand, there are definitely situations of oppressors and victims. On the other hand, I do not think that anything ever happens unless you somehow need and subconsciously want it to happen. Anticipation and law of attraction. See, I was never bullied, not in a sense that would make me feel extremely bad about myself. Aside from the rape, that is; but that was my last life. In this life, I am relatively tall and although I am not strong, people do not pick on me.

            Why do you assume my contact form is not secure? This is not an official WordPress.com page. It is a custom set up and the mail goes only to me. Nevertheless, I will get in touch.

          • popi gander

            BTW: no offense- but I personally steer clear of spiritual advisors; and especially ones that talk about ‘choosing pain.’

            And past lives….unless you are speaking in Buddhist terms, which account for transformation as you live- like your catharsis leaving your mother behind.

            Stay alive, buddy- this world needs you.

          • Nah, it is not a ‘choosing pain’ in that sense. It is a loving emrace of the pain that you still carry with you. Which makes it go away and evaporate, leaving you in joy.

            About past lives: I will rather not discuss this with you, as I know how I reacted to that suggestion just half a year ago. So let me just say that it is fine for me if you believe whatever you want to believe. You are free to think I am nuts and you are still welcome to comment.

          • popi gander

            I don’t think you are nuts, I think youve been damaged very badly.

            And I don’t challenge your belief in past lives one bit. In fact, any percieved disagreement is likely semantics.

            And I get this idea about embracing pain quite well- I am 50% disabled in every real sense. But that doesn’t mean I will open myself up to more without exacting a price on those who would seek another pound of flesh.

          • 50% disabled. Interesting. Maybe that is why the fight is what you seek. Revenge.

            Me, I know I can heal enough to live a peaceful life. So I ought to do that.

          • popi gander

            I would also offer to ‘go through it’ with you in some way. It helps to bring others into our pain- to share what can be shared.

            For instance, we could live tweet it or something.

            ” Innocent man live tweets recovery after false allegations” or something.

            Nothing shows the monstrous ill will and short sightedness of those who cower under jackboots more graphically than the look on the faces if pigs and beaureaucrats who least expect you to excercise your rights.

          • That is horribly corny. Do you happen to be a psychopath? Would explain why you find the thought appealing, as it is quite manipulative. Not necessarily bad in effect, perhaps, but I find myself sick to the stomach just reading that ‘innocent man’ thing. Too funny.

            You are already going through it with me by commenting and being in this exchange with me. That is always a cool thing. No need to force anything. Let us just keep writing. We can also start a more intimate email exchange, if you wish to.

          • By the way, I think I never wrote about it, but police in an earlier invasion – 10 years ago or so – took a video tape and some other stuff from me and my friend. 2 years later, I inquired to get it. Know what? The case file was in a big pile of files on the attorney’s desk. Far from getting worked on. Another year later, I inquired and they told me the case was closed and the assets eliminated. Fucking assholes. And then they wonder why people become terrorists or mobsters.

          • popi gander

            No, I dont know Dan. But he sounds like one of those cowardly cops or soldiers who are paid trolls, combing the nternet for any evidence that contradicts their God, Mother, and Hotdogs paradigm.

      • Smokingjacket

        “the fear of being found by strangers who willingly violate you, or otherwise muscast you as a social blight” I don’t understand this. If you’re alone and not lonesome when you’re in a state of freedom, then it’s not likely that you’ll be violated by strangers, besides this is more likely to occur to herd people, who obey instincts based on the principles of conformity and vulnerability.

        I’m not sure what you mean by protection? Surely this is a matter of introspection and judgement. This can be achieved outside of a religious belief system by developing your character through philosophies like Stoicism for example.

        • popi gander

          What you write indicates you have likely never been alone.

          No offense intended, but our societies demonize men who chose alone-ness/ solitude.

          But to explicate that would take a long time.

          Maybe, just go with a backpack into any city and spend acweek outdoors.

          You will learn.

          If you’re alone and not lonesome when you’re in a state of freedom, then it’s not likely that you’ll be violated by strangers, besides this is more likely to occur to herd people, ”

          Yeah. These points are philosophical posts, outside the gate of reality. Can you name a place on earth where the herd doesn’t go?

          A place on earth where the insanity of the human hive mind will not try to regulate you?

          • Smokingjacket

            I’ve been alone much of my life. Although of course I work and live with my fellow human beings on a daily basis, I don’t generally bond easily with the majority of them. When I was younger many of them I found not only emotionally and mentality repellent, but, almost physically so too. I’ve become more tolerant, even compassionate with many types, over the years. In many cases they’re trapped in their patterns by issues they don’t have the courage to face, so, I feel a degree of sympathy for them.

            I remember hiking by myself across Patagonia for sometime in 2006- the solitude and freedom from the hive mind was something I haven’t experienced since.

          • I always find it magical to be alone in a forest. There are so many things you do not do without even realizing it, simply because you feel ashamed, afraid that someone around your place / flat may hear you or see you. In the forest, you suddenly ‘remember’ all the things you REALLY meant to say to people.

          • popi gander

            That’s what I mean about freedom: the fact that they are ever present is itself a qualitative standard from which to explicate how much choices are not our own.

            In biology, they talk about selection pressures on a herd, and this is no different in humans- we are pressured by the herd, which is not freedom.

            And despite, for instance, a herd in a well watered field, there’s always the wolf weeding away at the weak.

            In this world, even when no wolf is present, they invent one, and then hunt it.

            Single men, solitary men, resistant or otherwise dissenting or discerning men are considered primary targets.

            It is impossible to be free in such a paradigm.

          • No offense intended, but you sound like you want to believe to be a victim of the hive mind. What keeps you from saving money, buying stuff, then spending a year or two in complete solitude and nature? Nothing.

          • popi gander

            Oetzi the Iceman.

          • I think he is dead by now. No need to fear him.

          • popi gander

            Yeah, but when you read the theories of his death they are striking.

            Was Oetzi a castaway? Ostracized? A shaman killed by old enemies?

            Humans are predators.

            And yes- I have very much been victimized by the hive mind. In fact, endured mayb ten of the intrusions you have endured.

            Words are powerful things, and at one point, I couldn’t shit without having one investigation or another into it. I was surrounded by community groups, cops, feminists who travel in hyena packs- surrounded by them literally; threatening me in sll manner of ways.

            However, yes, like all of us, I am plotting my escape. To a place where what I have learned about these wonderful mercenaries and their methods here in “freedom” is actually less enjoyable than being a foreigner in a communist country.

          • Yes, interesting contemplations.

            My spiritual mentor says we souls chose human existence to experience the most extreme kinds of pain there are.

            So, who or what exactly are you and what brought onto you the pleasure of being so hunted? I would like to hear more. If you wish, you can send me that through the contact form and I keep it to myself.

            If you are fatherless or with a fucked up father like me, consider writing a little guest article here.

          • popi gander

            I would consider it- be glad to contribute. What topuc would you like to cover?

            But we would have to email first.

            Lets just say that we are all caught in bastardized narratives beyond our control.

            Now- are you telling me that not only you reject your mother- but father too?

            If you don’t mind my asking: are you in your late twenties?

          • Anything relevant to men without fathers or men with fucked up fathers. You know, just that stuff for lost souls. Intense stuff. You know my articles. Stuff like that. Stories. Anger. Emotions. Whining. Maybe with your own twist on that theme. If you have an idea, propose it and I will tell you whether I want it on here and why.

            I am 26 years old. Yeah, I reject him. As he rejected me. He left me, although he did not have to leave me. It was not the state who forced him away. At least I doubt that my father would have any reason to lie about his intentions. I think he needed to flee his own family.

  • Micah Geni

    ..then a strange fear gripped me and I just couldnt ask… About a girl and a hotel.., Interesting lyrics:

  • Micah Geni

    You can do better, and you will get better.. free will, in that respect. And what is “do better”. To have all parts of yourself, work better as 1 unit. Less extreme. More round..ish.. One will even be rewarded already in this life.

    • I am already good. I just do not know it yet.

  • Micah Geni

    I disagree slightly with you. I say there is free will, but the option to use it on, are limited. Even if you only have 3 ingredients, there is still a free will to pick them in a certain amount and make “your own pie”. There is a way God prefer you do it, but he aint forcing you. Maybe one could say that some think that the supermarket kind of sucks.

    • Yeah, I am not absolutely certain about this stuff. But it is the most logical thing I can think of. In the least, the classical conception of free will is flawed in the way outlined in this article.

      • Micah Geni

        Im not on FB right now. Account was disabled. Know any good alternative to FB ? I think I have had it with that shit, at least until the next time

        • Mind reactivating it for a day? Your messages are gone. I would like to copy our dialogue. Then you can disable it again.

          Alternative? Well, not really. But for chat, you can use Skype for example.

          • Micah Geni

            I didn’t disable it. It was FB. They do not allow anonymous names, nick names and such. Which in itself is a limitation of the free speech. “its not what you say that counts, it is what your nick name is..”. It so fucking stupid that I think I’ve had enough of those sites.
            Dont know what happened. You post a comment, then maybe someone is pissed off, and they reported me for posting under nick name. I dont know.

          • Funny. I make a lot of enemies on Facebook, but was not yet removed. Once, they told me to correct my name. Do they give you that option? If yes, just invent another bullshit name.

            Also, maybe you did not have enough friends to seem real.

            Anyway, do not worry about free speech. That law is in itself a kind of brainwashing to make you believe in your ‘rights’ and whine around.

          • Micah Geni

            There is a thing about FB, that I dont really like.
            It was never really Zuckerberg who came up with the idea and concept. He stole the idea of those two brothers, and thereafter denied it all. Would not pay for the theft, until many years later. He was sentenced I think.

            It that “creativity” ? What person does those things and sleep well ?

            People change, but it does makes me wonder a bit. And the power, the true power, are within us consumers. We can either buy all the shit, or just leave it.

          • Well, meh. Those two brothers did not market it well. He did. Bad luck. The only reason why you find it unfair is because we have laws about intellectual property and learn that our ideas are so incredibly valuable and unique.

          • Micah Geni

            I dont relate it to the laws. I relate it to a personality trait. Lack of creativity + entitlement + lack of guilt. Narcissist ?

          • What if he did not want to work together with them? What if he felt they would be slowing him down?

            Why bother convincing others to do it your way when you can simply do it your way?

            It is called competition.

            Has every fruit stand on the world stolen the idea from the first fruit stand there ever was? Sure. So what. Does it make a difference whether it makes a living or a trillion?

          • Micah Geni

            And competition is always good ? Even when one part is not participating ?

            Maybe I should compete with Zuckerberg in the MMA ring :) He doesnt have to want too. :p Competitions is always good, as you and probably he says.. Cmon. It is way too simple

            Even the court settlement concluded that it was not a competition.. Then what is it ? Must then be a theft. Like “innocent guys assaulted by street thugh”.

            The last one their, everybody deems cruel. the first one, is just “competition”. Lol

          • Well, it was not really an attack in that sense. You presume that the two guys would have been equally successful if Zuckerberg had just stayed out of it all. Which is not believable.

            You can not really choose to not participate. It is like saying ‘I want to open up a business and be successful, but I do not want to be in competition’. So when competition comes, you play the victim. Meh.

            You can choose not to compete by not being on the market. As someone can refuse to play with you in the MMA ring.

          • Micah Geni

            I presume nothing, but a theft of intellectual property. And at best, that must be considered a lack of creativity + entitlement + lack of guilt. Which is pretty close to a full blown false ego, giving a shit about other but himself. And shall we trust such a guy with a lot of personal info ? I do not.

          • Hah! See, Micah, you are not such a noble person. You know why? Because to you, it is about guilt. What you do not realize is that you can eliminate that guilt through meditation.

            Know what happens then? You will think about ‘theft of intellectual property’ and have no emotional reaction to it. Will you then still care about it?

          • Micah Geni

            I dont have an emotional reacton. It is basically about freedom of speech and not to force “your” (his) will onto others, when they do no damage. On the contrary if his watchguard did read my comments, they were probably contributing.

            I am understanding why “he gives a shit about principals lke that” (apparently, but there may be other complex issues involved). And in that process, to understand him, I remembered where he came from :) Egotism.

          • If it pisses you off, you are having an emotional reaction. What is behind it?

          • Also ‘it is about freedom of speech’ indicates an emotional reaction. It is always an emotional decision. Everything is. But it is on you to understand or not understand it.

          • Micah Geni

            Whats the problem ?
            Emotional reaction and spirituality isn’t a separate process here on earth. Id reckon it is the reason we are on earth. To experience them. That said, I am not exactly shivering, nor surprised in regards to a big oligarch.

            I dont get your point. It is not like an reaction is bad per se. It is just a symptom. How do you relate that to the intentinos of Zuckerberg ? Beats me.

            But seriously, I think Zuckerberg himself gives quite a shit about most things apart from himself and “his”. So he is probably just a puppet doing as told.

          • Maybe he is a puppet. But why does it make you angry?

            Of course we are here to experience it. Your anger is totally okay. But as Smokingjacket remarked on one of my articles, anger has underlying components that it masks. It is a defense.

            I love anger. But I also like to understand it. My guess is that you see something in Zuckerberg that you maybe saw in your brother and thus you feel towards him the same kind of anger.

          • Micah Geni

            do you give a shit about it all ? The globe, the environment and the society. In the end, therefore even your own life ?
            Why doesnt it make you a bit emotional is the real question..

            Anyway. I have my thoughts about the guy, and have mentioned my concerns. Not much more to say about it right now.

          • Not really, truth be said. My own problems are more important right now. Besides, I am coming to believe that I can freely choose whether I want to live in a world where something bad will happen. Maybe I want to. But I am not one of the people who will be on the streets protesting.

          • Micah Geni

            Fair enough. We all have internal struggles and sometimes they take a lot of energy (which I guess is good for the people who seek power for the sake of power. Less resistance among the public then. They are self-“occupied”)

            There are other channels to “be in the streets protesting”, than being in the streets

            You’ll be back. Your blog is a protest by the way. Protest against the feminsim-bullshit, where the feminists are lazy and greedy, and too dumb to notice that some politicans play them out, to get a harder and stricter grip on their husbands, their ex-husbands and society in general

  • Micah Geni

    You remember this one Tom ? I head on the tube today, that supposively people dont really know (or will not tell) the symbollically meaning the the David star. So we get all these satanic theories and ideas.. (It is always the worst, that people to pick out.. Pessimistic life style and thinking pattern)…

  • Interesting concept given the fact that free will is often used to judge an action worthy/just/bad/immoral/etc… when it can be just another form of slavery. I really like this. But again, we both agree we do not have as much choice in the present as we think.

    • Exactly. The moral categorization is exactly that which makes it unfree. Nice paradoxon, huh.

      I am not so sure how much choice we have or how the underlying system of subconscious choices works exactly. But I know that anyone who tells you to ‘exercise your free will’ already alters your free will through his interaction with you.

      It is ironic that Chrisians insist that god gave us free will to be able to choose freely to follow him or not, and yet they condition their kids to follow god through painful indoctrination that is hard to shake of. To a point where you literally get headaches for thinking a ‘wrong’ thought.

      Right. If it really is absolute and objective – the morals I mean – why do you need to teach them? And if the will really is free, why force it? Lies and contradictions all over the place.

  • Micah Geni

    Now this is a real strong move from Zuckerberg. I think I was wrong in this comment section:

    • What a wuss. I bet his girl made him do it.

      • Micah Geni

        his kid maybe. One of those things, that do change “the perspectives”

        • I see. Well, I think a man should be strong enough to resist other people’s ideas unless they truly convince him. He should never give in to a child’s puppy eyes.

          My today’s meditation has made me realize that all approval from strangers is ultimately a waste of time and unnecessary. I am coming closer to understanding my purpose in life and it is a path I ultimately walk in absolute solitude. It will benefit others, but I do not need their understanding. Felt a bit sad letting myself feel that. Made me wonder what the hell I was searching for all my life in others.

          Part of it was that I was so much in pain that I could not take any information truly in. So it all stayed saved in my memory. In the pipeline. I never let myslef truly feel anything. Now the pipeline gets emptier and I come to the point where I can actually let myself feel everything. That is, a stranger approves of me. And instead of pushing the emotion away, I kinda ‘soak it up’, like drinking water. It actually feels a bit like that. Into my soul. And then, once the emotion is understood and appreciated, all my dependency on it vanishes.

          • Micah Geni

            He was probably never a bad guy per se. Rather “thoughtless” on inter-personal level. And now he has both a pretty wife, and a his firstborn. I would myself have been very motivated to improve the worlds condition in his shoes. Internal drive.

            About your point. There is bullshit (manipulation), but also honest compliments out there. But seriously, you know yourself what you are good at, like writing.

          • Yeah, I see. Problem is knowing what exactly will make the world good.

            I am currently contemplating going into the mountains, into solitude, for a few years. Meditate there. Wish we could chat a little, man.

          • Micah Geni

            Psychologist something for you ? I mean, to become one

          • Not in the classical sense, no. But some smart ass dark wizard cult leader perhaps. A king. And maybe an author, publishing a new kind of self-help book that will help people resolve their emotional problems without a psychologist. That would be awesome.

          • Micah Geni

            Yeah. Self-help books. A geat idea

          • But better than normal ones. Strictly logical. Emotional mathematics. So that you can kinda ‘logic’ your way out of your problems by tracing and understanding you emotional blockades and problems. It will explain why Christianity works, a lot of shame mechanics. Et cetera.

          • Micah Geni

            I think it is a good tool for some personality types. The “Ahrimanics” :)