Archive for January 2014

Fundamental Self Defense

January 31, 2014

I often mentioned to foreigners that certain Americans have more trust for our fellows than Europeans or Australians do for their fellow countrymen.

I also don’t like JJ’s definition of evil. By that logic, the Nazis were only evil and a problem when they started actually doing oven stuff. Before, when they were just being socialists and getting elected and planning a coup de tat of the Weimer Republic, that was “okay”. I don’t think one can entirely detach the consequences from the planning stages here. Being elected is democracy. Chancellor Hitler was thus, just playing the same game everyone else was playing. No problems there. That’s what people back then thought. And that’s what JJ’s logic affirms and justifies. But there was something fundamentally different about Hitler’s faction playing politics and the rest of the Weimar Republic’s factions playing politics. If you can’t even make corrections to judgment when you already know what happened in the historical past, I don’t think any future judgments of anyone else’s evil goals or what not, is going to hold much water. The future is much more nebulous and ambiguous than the past, even with historical rewriting based on Utopian ethics going on. It’s easy to say that people should have recognized the Nazis for being evil or crazy back when, because it is obvious to us now. But that’s not how humans work. Even now the US government is very vague and ambiguous about Al Qaeda vs Islam vs Islamic extremism (muslim brotherhood). So they can easily use JJ’s logic to say that since all of Islamic extremism hasn’t done anything bad to the US and is not at war with the US, just “some” factions like AQ… then only AQ is evil and the rest are just “doing business as usual”.

Moving to the next topic….

The fundamental principle behind the American experiment is of individual freedom, and free will does not exist without the ability of the individual to judge, by himself, for himself, what is or is not true.

Thus We Don’t Have to Do Anything of the sort when it comes to recognizing “evil” or “good” or whatever it is people say we should “recognize” about what we see as “evil”. That is an individual decision, that is not up to strangers, priests, governors, or anyone’s pet totalitarian government to make for other people.

If a person chooses to attempt to understand the viewpoint of their enemies, that is their choice to make. And the consequences, good or bad, will be for them to suffer. People in general or anyone else here, have no business talking about what choice people besides themselves should be making as part of some automatic exercise. This business, and that business, two different things. It is not the business of strangers to dictate the consciences of other people. Yet people feel free to do so all the time, and yet continue to speak of valuing freedom. Mutual annihilating contradictions are unseen.

There are no requirements, epistemologically or ethically, for a person to understand their enemies’ motivations. Putting morality on the table here in order to constrain people’s free will, isn’t going to convince anybody of anything. All it does is force people to obey, to do as they are told. And if they are told to do good, they do it. And if they are told to do evil, they’ll do that too. The idea that forcing people to obey by some rule, allows for personal virtue, individual ethics, and character strength to grow, is an untrue idea.-A comment I wrote in 2011

Before, when they were just being socialists and getting elected and planning a coup de tat of the Weimer Republic, that was “okay”.

Then I wrote that, I was directly thinking of the Obama Regime. In an effort to sound mainstream and reasonable, instead of crazy and easily picked up by the government goon squad (NSA scanners), I tried to only write about the primary topics at hand. But I was thinking of the Left in the US always.

The Leftist alliance in America isn’t doing normal things via their elections and planning. They weren’t normal in the past and it isn’t going to be normal from now on either. People now understand what those references are to, when it comes to totalitarian references and contexts.

The rather unfortunate stilted nature of my writing back then, was also an attempt to distance myself from my own emotions and strip away signs and clues that might otherwise be picked up. Without that cleansing, I might have started to rant in uncontrollable themes on Leftist totalitarianism. Given that this wasn’t the norm (yet) on blogs, I would have been filtered as an “outlier”. Now a days it is safer, though not really safe, since everyone and their monkey is talking about crazy stuff in the US.

One of the ancient lessons I learned from martial arts and Japanese culture is that the nail that sticks out is hammered down. Don’t be the guy in the crowd the mob can pick out, cause you’ll be stampeded first.

The gun article deals with fundamental self defense as it relates to evil, and I just wanted to write about some nostalgic past events.

Allow me, please, to add a second, related question: Does evil exist?

The answer to this question represents a fundamental dividing line between conservatives and socialists (for that is what the contemporary Democratic Party has sadly become). Socialists believe that human beings are inherently racist, sexist, and a variety of other ists, but are perfectible. This utopian perfection can be reached if only there is sufficient (absolute or near absolute) governmental power and the right kinds of taxes, redistribution of wealth, laws and regulations to make people behave in appropriate ways, to perfect them for their own good, a good they are unable to recognize or seek unaided. These laws and regulations will be composed and enforced by a small class of elite socialists who are already, by virtue of their education, sophistication, beliefs and highly attuned sense of social justice (generally best understood as whichever social and economic policies elite socialists prefer at the moment), perfected.

Therefore, for the socialist, the only true evil is resistance to the evolved social consciousness of the elite socialist.-Stately article blog post

Notice that “Life” is the first of the three Thomas Jefferson chose to make explicit. This is important in that if there is no unalienable right to life, your life is forfeit to any person, to any government that chooses to take it, for it is such a government’s whims that dictate who is worthy of continued existence. It should also be noted that even if the laws and legal traditions of the state do recognize a right to self defense, if the state denies citizens the most effective means to exercise that right, or so restricts its exercise as to make it impractical in application—as is currently the case in Washington D.C. (NOTE: Chicago and Illinois have been dragged, kicking and screaming, by the courts into recognition of the Second Amendment, though complete recognition is still very much in-process) and California–there is little difference to the individual between that state and one that recognizes no right at all.

If there is no right to self defense, no right to mere survival, your life is forfeit to the whims of those cruel and strong enough to take it. This may not be a concern if you are a young, strong, physically imposing male well schooled and practiced in the martial arts. However, even the strongest may be overcome by force of numbers or trickery (ask Samson about that), and no one is young forever, as Edmond Rostand made plain in Cyrano De Bergerac. If you are not young, strong and physically capable, things are rather different. In this understanding we can find the ultimate women’s issue, for women are quite simply and undeniably in trouble where physical size, strength and aggression are the primary determinants of mere survival.

Some–primarily Democrats–would have us believe that refusing to pay with tax dollars for every woman’s contraception–which is cheap and available at every pharmacy in the nation–constitutes a “war on women.” The real war on women is being imposed by those that continually seek to deny women the most effective means to preserve their very lives.

And if there is no right to self defense—no right that government may grant or rescind–can any other right, inalienable or otherwise, truly be said to matter? It may reasonably be argued that if a right is not inalienable, it is merely a privilege to be granted and rescinded by the state, but do we really want the state to treat our lives with the caring, efficiency and humanity employed by the EPA, the IRS and the TSA, as it body searches three-year old girls with spina bifida in wheelchairs (oh yes: they seized her stuffed animal too), or in the regulation of our privilege to drive?

One of the most important political understandings any free man can have is that government has no conscience; it cares nothing for any individual. No matter how much a given politician claims to care deeply for the welfare of “the people,” “the people” are at best an abstraction, as any one of “the people” may discover when they demand that government recognize and uphold their individual rights. This understanding is the necessary beginning of personal autonomy. Without it, one will always be a vassal of the state, the state the worth of whose vassals is measured always only in their utility to the transient goals of the state.-preceding topic

Those two sections phrases things in a way I might not have, but it is agreeable nonetheless.

Seirei no Moribito: Review

January 30, 2014

I finished re-watching this series for the 4th time at least: this Seirei no Moribito review is thus somewhat belated.

It’s still very entertaining, especially the realistic fight scenes. There were times when I wanted to fast forward through an episode because I already knew what was going to happen, but once the episode began I just watched it normally because it was good.

When I read the wiki article about it, I was surprised it came from a novel. Generally novel adaptations are tricky to do, although at least they are given more freedom than light novels (demographic limitations). Originally written as a fantasy novel for children, it is said to appeal to adults. Later it was adapted to a manga and then the anime which we see today. The anime was so well constructed I thought for sure it had to be an original script and character design work.

Single parent raising a child is one of the themes in the anime, but the material isn’t about the themes so much as it uses plot development to illustrate realistic characters living in a realistic setting. It reminds me of another anime adapted from a novel: The world is a fantasy construct similar to Japanese legends about demons and spirits; yet the culture of the world would be very familiar to a feudal history buff.

Warrior virtues were featured, which appeals to me given my interests and hobbies. It is certainly easier to use killing techniques vs non-lethal ones, as non-lethal techniques have a higher chance of getting the user killed and is not particularly easy to apply either. But that just means for a warrior, there is a higher level that can be achieved even if you can win all life and death duels. The 1 on multiple enemies tactic is also applicable, in both the anime as well as physical life scenarios. The sheer maneuverability of the spear users, usage of leg attacks in combination with weapon attacks, is also consistent with Ancient Chinese and Asian martial techniques designed for the battlefield. When students like me learned the bo and bojutsu (long staff techniques), I always did wonder how long it would take to predict which part of the staff a blocked sword would slide off into, thus allowing me to extract from fingers from that area. Since a long staff is held with both hands at the 1/3rd mark on both ends, there are no metal guards protecting the hands from enemy objects. One reason I prefer the sword over the staff is because even though the staff has more range, it is more difficult to learn how to use at all ranges. The staff and spear is very easy for beginners to learn how to use, at its maximum distance (in Eve we might call that kiting range). But in brawling range, where the enemy is right in front of you in arm distance, the number of tricks you need to pull off in staff techniques are no joke. The spear or staff is considered a peasant or lowly infantry’s weapon, not something aristocrats or cavalry used. Mostly because it is made of wood and thus can be more easily crafted than a pure bar of metal that a sword requires. Although the war naginatas used by the Chinese and the women samurai, were probably partially or fully metal.

The Japanese artistic usage of women as weapons of mass destruction, both on a serious and joking manner, may be from their feudal era where samurai were expected to fight, male or women. In the Western or US sphere, the frontiers woman utilizing a gun for home defense would be the closest approximation. Something so far from our mainstream Hollywood culture, that it takes effort to recall or apply for those that were not born or raised in that kind of atmosphere.

The characters and character construction doesn’t feel designed for larger than life people. It’s not about the greatest soldier or warrior, nor is it about an Emperor, nor is it about the Emperor’s son that is brought up on the streets as a peasant. The themes are prismatic and flare like a fractal design. They support strong human emotions, but I don’t get the feeling it has a specific message other than the title itself. One may take each individual character and build a story on it, but as you see more and more characters the stories begin to interweave and support each other. In that sense, it feels a lot more like a family drama or slice of life production.

A close Western comparison would be the Croods movie. American popular concepts for raising children is a little bit strange. I’ve seen it in the mainstream enough times that I’m getting suspicious. Of course not everyone behaves like that, just as not everyone behaves like Moribito’s parents in Japan. However, mainstream art and communication tends to influence people more than democracies wish to accept.

P.S. One extra thing in the anime I considered an omake, was the howl or yell the primary protagonist and warrior did in calling out an enemy above. It really felt like a kiai or a sonic projection using chi gong: manipulation of air and energy production in the body. It’s things like that that make me want to read the novel, to see if any additional details or instructions were given.

Western civilization is more like a religious cult

January 28, 2014

It really is more like a religious cult than a rational society.

Want to know a sure way to be seen as immoral, unethical and unlikable? Raise $1 million for charity. Want to know how to have people think a lot more favorably of you? Raise nothing at all. If you think that’s entirely irrational, you’re right. Welcome to the human condition.

The key to being thought of as a louse for helping the sick or the poor is not the act of giving by itself, but the act of benefiting from it. That million dollars looks a little less princely if, for your troubles, you kept 10% of it—even if you made that intention clear from the start and even if $900,000 still went to the folks who need it most. Fork it all over or don’t expect any applause.

This has the effect of either making sure people can’t sustain their economic life via doing jobs for donation drives, or it will actually draw in con artists that look like they aren’t benefiting but are taking 90% of the pot. Such as Arafat + terrorist charities or union organizations + 501s in the US.

Christian reaction to Roman social morality

January 27, 2014

If one wonders why certain practices were condemned, I agree with some scholars in that the most likely explanation is a Christian reaction to Roman morality on the subject of sex.

The Latin verb for “to penetrate anally, bugger” is pedicare. The object was usually but not always male. Pedicare was a blunt and non-euphemistic word, and can be used in a threatening manner, as notoriously by Catullus in Carmen 16, or in general to mean “fuck you.”[532] The etymology of pedicare is unclear, but some have thought it derived from Greek paidika, having to do with pederasty.[533] The basic word for “anus” was culus. Common metaphors are ficus, “fig,” and anus, “ring,” which was considered a decorous term and was standard in medical texts.[534]

Men were said to “take it like a woman” (muliebria pati, “to undergo womanly things”) when they were anally penetrated, but when a man performed anal sex on a woman, she was thought of as playing the boy’s role.[535] Martial, for instance, is emphatic that anal sex is better with boys than with women; when his wife objects that she provides him with anal sex in an effort to preserve his fidelity, he taunts her with the inferiority of her anus compared to a boy’s.[536]

The figura veneris in which the woman crouches to lift her buttocks, called “the lioness”, may be intended for anal penetration, since boys in Greek art can be portrayed in the same position; with a female partner, it may be difficult to distinguish in art from a tergo (rear entry).[537] Culibonia (“good anal”) was a humorous term for a prostitute with this speciality.[538] Avoiding pregnancy may have been one motive for female prostitutes to offer anal intercourse,[539] since literary sources indicate that boys were preferred.

Os impurum, “filthy mouth” or “impure mouth”, was a term of abuse especially for those who provided oral sex.[540] “Oral turpitude”[541] was a favorite form of invective for Catullus,[542] Horace, and Martial.[541] An accusation of having an os impurum is an “extreme obscenity,”[543] so vile that Cicero reserved it for men of lower standing than himself,[544] only implying that their debasement tainted their more powerful patrons who were his real targets.[545]

Wall painting from Pompeii depicting cunnilingus

It was a convention of obscenely comic verse that oral sex caused bad breath that was nearly toxic.[546] “Whores of the alleyways” are contaminated from giving oral sex; Catullus refers to “the foul saliva of a pissed-over whore.”[547] The urinary function of the penis makes oral sex particularly repulsive to Catullus, who elsewhere reviles a Celtiberian for brushing his teeth in urine.[548] Martial jokes that a fine perfume turned to garum, fish sauce, when it was sniffed by a man whose breath was putrid from oral sex.[549] In another of Martial’s epigrams, a fellator breathes on a hot cake to cool it down and turns it to excrement.[550] The bad breath and rotten teeth that are attributed to performing oral sex represent moral decay and a general corruption of the mouth’s positive functions as the organ of a citizen’s persuasive speech.[551]

Because of the stigma attached to providing physical pleasure, a man who performed oral sex on a woman was subject to mockery. Cunnilingus typically appears in Roman art only as part of a reciprocal act, with the woman fellating her male partner in some variation of the “69” position.[552] A wall painting from Pompeii, however, represents a virtually unique role reversal in the giving of oral sex. The woman who receives cunnilingus is tall and shapely, well-groomed, and brazenly nude except for jewelry. The male figure is relatively small, crouching subserviently, and fully clothed; he has an anxious or furtive look.[553] The situation is so extreme that it was probably meant to be humorous as well as titillating; other paintings in this group show a series of sex acts, at least some of which could be seen as transgressive or parodic.[554]

There is some evidence that women could hire male prostitutes to provide cunnilingus. Graffiti at Pompeii advertise the prices male prostitutes charged for cunnilingus, in the same price range as females performing fellatio; however, the graffiti could be intended as insults to the men named, and not as actual advertisements.[555] One graffito is perhaps intended as political invective: “Vote Isidore for aedile; he’s the best at licking cunt!”[556]

Woman fellating a man on an oil lamp

The Latin verb fellare is usually used for a woman performing oral sex on a man.[557] Accusing a man of fellating another man was possibly the worst insult in all Roman invective.[558] It was an act that might be requested from women who were infames,[559] and not something a husband in a respectable household would have expected from his wife.[560] Fellatio was seen as a “somewhat laughable” preference for older men who have trouble maintaining an erection,[561] but graffiti show that the skills of a good fellatrix were enthusiastically utilized.[562] Fellatio was a fairly uncommon subject in Roman art.[560]

Irrumatio is a forced form of fellatio, almost always against another man. Forcing someone to be a receptacle for oral sex was proof of virility, something to boast about, as indicated by the Priapeia and the poems of Catullus and Martial. It was also threatened as a punishment,[563] particularly for adulterers.[564] Martial urges a wronged husband who has already cut off the adulterous man’s ears and nose to complete the humiliation by befouling his mouth with oral rape.[565]

2012 Era Predictions

January 26, 2014

Yea, that stuff was probably funny paranoid to many in 2012, before the elections. But when I started thinking of similar things in 2007, many people were even less likely to believe. When I read articles like that, I realized my self appointed hibernation period was about to end.

Obama is evil and Americans are turning into slaves

January 24, 2014

Those two sentiments I’ve heard more than once in print online now.

I find that a mixed bag really. I mean, what am I supposed to do now that everyone and their pet donkey has stolen these message lines? If I repeat them, I end up looking like I’m attached to somebody’s band wagon. I hate that.

So I have to find something new and something crazy, that people aren’t willing to say or write out, and also ensure the prophetic announcement comes true… that’s a hard thing to do in this day and age. (it was easier when people were uneducated and you could bamboozle them with some words of wisdom, oh wait that ain’t much different now for ObaMao).

I’ve settled on “mind control” and “American dissolution”. That’s after the 2nd US Civil War too, btw, for the second option. Even if the TP wins the US Civil War or we win it, America will still dissolve due to certain internal and external issues. Israel, Japan, South Korea…. those people are on their own now and forever. Better get working on those giant robot mecha super weapons, btw.

Well, Pax Americana was good as a Golden Age while it lasted. I don’t foresee or predict it lasting beyond this century at least. In some ways, that is a good thing for Americans and foreigners. This co-dependent relationship does not breed national vitality and independence. It was good while it lasted, but America can no longer protect the world. We can’t even protect America from Americans.

To Change Yourself

January 23, 2014

There’s been some interesting articles recently on this topic of personal happiness and the pursuit thereof.

I think there’s two options people have: change themselves or change the world (other people). Leaders are mostly about taking up a position of authority to change the world and its people for some goal or purpose. Psychologists often tell you to change yourself, but that’s more to fit in with society’s rules than for any personal benefit to you.

When I speak of changing myself, I am speaking of making myself more resistant to evil and more resistant to mind control (propaganda). In so far as you should pursue your strengths instead of shoring up your weaknesses, try to pursue activities that improve your spine, your courage, your independence abilities, etc. Virtues come from personal experience and accomplishment. If you want to fix your weaknesses while doing good things, find a way to make your own self the goal of your projects. Instead of looking at society and considering how best to conform to the rules of Authorities, think about how to self direct your own evolution and adaptation instincts.

If you like this topic of self change, read the 3 articles linked here, they are very interesting background related to the central issue.