First O.J. Simpson is freed even though everyone knew he was guilty of killing a white woman. Why? Because he's black.
Jose Zarate kills Kate Steinle, confesses, and is found not guilty.
Jussy Smollett tries to start a race war with his hate crime hoax, and all 16 felony charges are dropped.
There's more. A lot more.
There's no law and order in America anymore.
Tuesday, March 26, 2019
Thursday, March 21, 2019
Israel First
No, it's been longer than that since the United States has been unable to assert it's own Sovereignty over its border and immigration policy, which is of critical strategic and security importance to the United States and Regional Stability.After 52 years it is time for the United States to fully recognize Israel’s Sovereignty over the Golan Heights, which is of critical strategic and security importance to the State of Israel and Regional Stability!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 21, 2019
Agh! What happened to America First? I mean, I know the answer to that, but it's about time that some more Americans, particularly the notoriously dim-witted BoomerCon types actually start to wonder why in the world we're bending over backwards to make sure that Israel has what we are not allowed to have ourselves.
Mostly because of the influence of Jews in our own political and legal caste.
Israel is not our friend. Isaiah Chapter 11 (and 2 Nephi Chapter 21):
11 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.
12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.
13 The envy also of Ephraim shall depart, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off: Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim.Can't wait for Judah to quit vexing us, and for the rest of my Ephraimic brothers to stop envying them. It's not a pretty look. When I was younger, I used to believe that the prophecy that every nation would stand against Israel at the very Last Day was poetic license and it didn't literally mean every nation. Now, I'm not so sure.
Some more stuff, while I'm quoting.
https://archive.fo/lhoDG
In May 2017, the FBI and Department of Homeland Security released a joint intelligence bulletin designed to help law enforcement combat the White Extremist Movement. Let's look at the implications of this report.
The report indicates that between 2000 and 2016, white supremacist extremists (WSE) accounted for the most fatalities of any domestic extremist group with 49. So clearly, WSE groups are the biggest threat to safety of US citizens. But upon closer inspection, there are some inconsistencies with the report. For instance, the report fails to mention that it includes murders committed by incarcerated whites. However, per capita, incarcerated whites commit less homicides than other ethnoracial groups. Further, incarcerated white people are actually murdered more than any other incarcerated ethnoracial group per capita.
You're probably wondering, "the Pulse Nightclub shooter alone killed 49 people in one night, shouldn't domestic Islamic extremists be ranked the highest for murder?" Well, the FBI has defined "domestic extremists" as those without direction of foreign extremists. Convenient. This definition of "domestic extremist" is different from the statutory definition of "domestic terrorist" in that a domestic terrorist CAN be directed by a foreign terrorist group. Thus, "domestic extremist" was likely a term politically devised to indict right-wingers.
So why does this joint bulletin from the FBI and Department of Homeland Security matter? Well, it's fodder that the Jewish media uses to manufacture public fear about dissident voices and right-wing ideology. It's also used by US politicians like Chicago Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi who recently introduced a bill to prevent hate crimes and quoted the report. Most "prevention" comes by way of suppressing speech and the exchanging of ideas, if you haven't noticed.
To be fair, the FBI & DHS bulletin is far more benign than the ADL report about white extremism. The ADL's report not only includes inmates, it also attributes murders to white extremism irrespective of motive; the perpetrator must simply be affiliated with an extremist group. So the ADL attributes many superfluous murders to white extremism in their report. If someone has an image of the German "SS" rune saved on their phone and they commit a murder, the ADL would tally that as a white extremist murder. And again, just like the FBI & DHS bulletin, the ADL report is used by the Jewish media to indict any right-wingers that promote nationalism. Here is a prominent black news outlet that cites the ADL report (created and owned by a Jew).
So how can we accurately parse the data to truly understand the hate crimes attributed white extremists? We can't. But as we can see from FBI data, whites under-index for hate crimes per capita (62% of population, 46% of hate crimes). But 46% is actually over-indexing for white hate crimes because the FBI counts ethnic Hispanics as white. In reality, it's closer to 38%. Thus, whites are 62% of the US population and account for approximately 38% of the nation's hate crimes.
Going forward, be cognizant of how organizations manufacture support for their causes by creating very specific definitions of words and omitting relevant facts about the statistics they present. Reject their definitions and know that omission is a liar's best friend.The Secret Combinations have already taken over the government. They did it a long time ago, actually. This is not meant to be exhaustive, it's just one example of how this works. Once you're aware of them, you see them everywhere.
They're still careful to disguise the fact that they have maliciously enslaved you and are working non-stop to dispossess and disinherit you even as they mine your blood, sweat and tears for their own enrichment, because they know that they can still be thrown for a loop if America ever wakes up and realizes what's been going on. But it looks increasingly like the chances of that happening soon enough to enable a relatively benign reset are very low; so the much more malign reset of violent ethnic cleansing and a Second Revolution seems to be inevitable at this point.
As Camillus said after chasing off Brennus and his Gauls who had sacked Rome, "Non auro, sed ferro, recuperanda est patria." Indeed. Sadly. The Nephites showed this often enough, though, if you read the Book of Mormon with an eye for looking at this particular question.
Monday, March 18, 2019
Evolution
The science of evolution is bad science. I've said it before. Here's some specific references that are fairly new.
Human-Chimp DNA comparison; similarity is much less than previously reported; the 98-99% common claim which has been casually tossed around for years is completely debunked.
https://www.icr.org/article/human-chimp-dna-comparison
Granted, the source is a creation science institute, but as the author says, nobody is making any attempt to tear apart his work seriously, because they know his methodology is sound science and they'll only get the same results he does. But the midwitted (or less) will no doubt engage in the genetic fallacy and attempt to dismiss his data just based on who's reporting it.
Which is why the next link is nice, because it is from a "normal" secular-evolutionary science source, and says pretty much the exact same thing; the human-chimp genomes are much more different from each other than the theory of evolution models that they can possibly be. Why are they so different if the split is so few generations? There's no accounting for it in any model of evolution that makes any sense.
http://richardbuggs.com/index.php/2018/07/14/how-similar-are-human-and-chimpanzee-genomes/
And then we have the statistical modeling, done before that was something the modeler was aware of, which proves that even at 98-99% common, it is mathematically impossible for the differences to have grown even that much in the time frame posited by the theory of evolution. Not only mathematically impossible, but comically so. (As an aside, don't believe the propaganda. Scientists aren't necessarily all that smart, and certainly very few of them have any understanding of statistics, which means that when they're making up claims based on the likelihood of something happening, they literally are just making it up, because they have no idea what they're talking about.)
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2019/02/maximum-mutations.html
If your faith is challenged by the science of evolution, take comfort! The science of evolution is not nearly so settled as we are usually taught that it is; in fact, the theory of evolution is on the verge of being completely discredited. It actually already has been, honestly, but it has too much inertia to work its way through the system yet, and of course, there isn't another model waiting in the wings to replace it. It will be many years before scientists are really willing to admit its failure in general. But it has failed nonetheless, according to the very processes of the scientific method that were supposed to have enshrined it.
And don't base your faith on that kind of stuff anyway. 2 Nephi 9:28: "O that cunning plan of the evil one! O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish."
Human-Chimp DNA comparison; similarity is much less than previously reported; the 98-99% common claim which has been casually tossed around for years is completely debunked.
https://www.icr.org/article/human-chimp-dna-comparison
Granted, the source is a creation science institute, but as the author says, nobody is making any attempt to tear apart his work seriously, because they know his methodology is sound science and they'll only get the same results he does. But the midwitted (or less) will no doubt engage in the genetic fallacy and attempt to dismiss his data just based on who's reporting it.
Which is why the next link is nice, because it is from a "normal" secular-evolutionary science source, and says pretty much the exact same thing; the human-chimp genomes are much more different from each other than the theory of evolution models that they can possibly be. Why are they so different if the split is so few generations? There's no accounting for it in any model of evolution that makes any sense.
http://richardbuggs.com/index.php/2018/07/14/how-similar-are-human-and-chimpanzee-genomes/
And then we have the statistical modeling, done before that was something the modeler was aware of, which proves that even at 98-99% common, it is mathematically impossible for the differences to have grown even that much in the time frame posited by the theory of evolution. Not only mathematically impossible, but comically so. (As an aside, don't believe the propaganda. Scientists aren't necessarily all that smart, and certainly very few of them have any understanding of statistics, which means that when they're making up claims based on the likelihood of something happening, they literally are just making it up, because they have no idea what they're talking about.)
Or, to put it more simply, there have been 450,000 chimp and human generations since the CHLCA (Chimp/Human Last Common Ancestor). Based on the number of mutations observed fixing in parallel in the Nature study, that would permit 562 total fixed mutations in that time frame. Which is only 29,999,438 short of the approximate number observed.Of course, now that the gap is not 1-2% but well into double digits, the math just becomes even more absurdly impossible.
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2019/02/maximum-mutations.html
If your faith is challenged by the science of evolution, take comfort! The science of evolution is not nearly so settled as we are usually taught that it is; in fact, the theory of evolution is on the verge of being completely discredited. It actually already has been, honestly, but it has too much inertia to work its way through the system yet, and of course, there isn't another model waiting in the wings to replace it. It will be many years before scientists are really willing to admit its failure in general. But it has failed nonetheless, according to the very processes of the scientific method that were supposed to have enshrined it.
And don't base your faith on that kind of stuff anyway. 2 Nephi 9:28: "O that cunning plan of the evil one! O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish."
Quote of the day
America is not, and has never been, an idea. America is a nation, which means, by definition, that Americans are an actual and distinct living people. The claim that America is an idea or a creed is not merely an insult, it is an existential attack on the genetic Posterity of the American Revolution, a nation that has been invaded, adulterated, betrayed, confused, and demoralized to the point that it doesn't recognize itself or even know what it is.
If you want to know why the military doesn't defend the borders, and why the people don't defend their lands, their neighborhoods, or their families, it is because the American nation has been literally robbed of its identity. And that is why the charlatans and gatekeepers of the Right condemn identity politics, identity, and nationalism so vehemently, because they are alien usurpers who are desperate to keep the rightful heirs of the Revolution from claiming the very country their forefathers founded.
-- Vox Day
If you want to know why the military doesn't defend the borders, and why the people don't defend their lands, their neighborhoods, or their families, it is because the American nation has been literally robbed of its identity. And that is why the charlatans and gatekeepers of the Right condemn identity politics, identity, and nationalism so vehemently, because they are alien usurpers who are desperate to keep the rightful heirs of the Revolution from claiming the very country their forefathers founded.
-- Vox Day
Friday, March 15, 2019
New Zealand mosque shooting
Very true. Of course, Steve King says only half of that and gets condemned by the entire Senate.
Maybe if he'd said the whole thing and refused to back down or apologize, they'd be afraid of him enough to leave him alone. But they know the score on the Left. Call some names, defamation, point and shriek—it always seems to work on the cowards and fools of the "right."
Maybe if he'd said the whole thing and refused to back down or apologize, they'd be afraid of him enough to leave him alone. But they know the score on the Left. Call some names, defamation, point and shriek—it always seems to work on the cowards and fools of the "right."
Thursday, March 14, 2019
Salvini is what Trump should have been
Granted, without Trump going there first, we probably wouldn't have had Salvini either. But now, it's Salvini showing Trump what he should have done, and Trump who's falling way behind.
http://www.unz.com/gdurocher/how-to-win-on-immigration-italys-salvini-shows-the-way/
To the folks who hate Trump, I continue to tell them that if they don't like Trump, the other option if he isn't successful is going to be something like Oliver Cromwell of Augosto Pinochet. Nobody wants that, so it's in all of our best interests for Trumpism to be successful.
Sadly, it looks like the MAGA agenda is stalling, which means American Cromwell or American Pinochet gets more and more likely.
http://www.unz.com/gdurocher/how-to-win-on-immigration-italys-salvini-shows-the-way/
To the folks who hate Trump, I continue to tell them that if they don't like Trump, the other option if he isn't successful is going to be something like Oliver Cromwell of Augosto Pinochet. Nobody wants that, so it's in all of our best interests for Trumpism to be successful.
Sadly, it looks like the MAGA agenda is stalling, which means American Cromwell or American Pinochet gets more and more likely.
Monday, March 11, 2019
Jewish gaffe
Hilarious. Link and commentary courtesy of Vox Day at http://voxday.blogspot.com/.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-lawmaker-lauds-supremacy-of-jewish-race/
Israeli lawmaker proclaims supremacy of ‘Jewish race’
A lawmaker from the ruling Likud party said Wednesday that the “Jewish race” is the smartest in the world and possessing of the “highest human capital,” which is why, he said, the Israeli public did not buy into the allegations of wrongdoing by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “I can tell you something very basic,” Zohar said during the Radio 103FM debate. “You can’t fool the Jews, no matter what is the media writes. The public in Israel is a public that belongs to the Jewish race, and the entire Jewish race is the highest human capital, the smartest, the most comprehending. The public knows what the prime minister is doing for the country and how excellent he is at his job.”
In a follow-up interview with Hadashot TV news, Zohar at first denied that he had spoken about the supremacy of the “Jewish race,” but, presented with a recording of his earlier comments, doubled down and reiterated: “The Jewish people and the Jewish race are of the highest human capital that exists.”
“What can you do? We were blessed by God… and I will continue to say that at every opportunity,” he said. “I don’t have to be ashamed about the Jewish people being the Chosen People; the smartest, most special people in the world.”
A gaffe, as they say, is when one accidentally speaks the truth.
And yet, the average Jewish IQ in Israel is 98.7. The average GDP per capita in Israel is 53.4 percent that of Norway, despite the fact that the Norwegians do not receive $3.8 billion in annual handouts from the USA.
As Mr. Zohar demonstrates, whatever their racial genius may be, it does not appear to be in public relations.Here's some more from Mr. Day. (Not his real name, although it is a pun, if you're familiar with some Latin, some Greek, and some etymology.)
You see this napkin? In 24 hours, we could have the signatures of 70 Senators on this napkin.
–Steven Rosen, AIPAC
Questioning support for the U.S.-Israel relationship is unacceptable.
–Rep. Juan Vargas, D-CA
If this capitol crumbled to the ground, the one thing that would remain would be our commitment to aid — I won’t even call it aid — our cooperation with Israel.
–Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-CA
AIPAC now seems acutely sensitive to the appearance of dual loyalty. The theme of this year’s AIPAC conference was “Israel, an American Value”.
–Jeffrey Goldberg, The New Yorker
How reassuring is it that the only American who upholds the core values of liberty, patriotism and freedom is a black Muslim and an immigrant…
–Gilad Atzmon
Those who refuse to learn from history are condemned to repeat it. The level of unmitigated stupidity and total lack of foresight on every side is simply astonishing.
Even if you don't believe in God, you'd do well to pray, because neither science nor politics is going to get anyone out of this.An interesting analogy from the comments:
The Jewish century of the 20th century mimics the Dutch century; the 17th.
When we look back at the 20th century from roughly 1920 to 2020 it will be known as the Jewish century, which followed the Anglo century of 1820 to 1920. When comparing different ethnic groups strategic methodologies of dominance the Jewish method can be most aptly compared to the Dutch methods of the 1600's. The Dutch dominated the spice trades of Indochina and at one point had seized much of Brazil and other Portuguese holdings throughout the Caribbean and and at its peak, through the Dutch East India company controlled 7 trillion dollars in world trade and assets.
However unlike the fecund English or miscegenatious Spanish they left little genetic or cultural impact on the possessions they controlled. Although the Dutch conquered much of Brazil from the Portuguese, the conquered Portuguese colonists and their slave holdings were racially or culturally Portuguese and the indifference of the Dutch to this fact made long term dominance impossible. Even New Netherlands, which was 50 to 60% ethnically Dutch at the time of handover to the British Empire didn't fire a shot of resistance due to the refusal of the Dutch Empire to protect the colony's borders from marauding Indians. The Dutch strategy was a minimalist approach: small outposts to strategically control distinct choke points in global trade in order to extract maximum profits for the VOC.
Jewish domination of the Anglo-American empire after 1920 was based on a similar strategy of controlling specific choke points in global trade and finance. Namely the dominance of central banks, media outlets, Ivy League institutions, intellectual movements, cultural milieus, and the push for cultural Marxism, multiculturalism and white European dispossession under their guidance and control. With the advent of the internet and and emerging technologies that can circumvent said choke points the Jewish century will inevitably fall due to the lack of concern for its constituents and its relatively low genetic and cultural impact.
Friday, March 8, 2019
A new take on the sexes, part II
Continued from the series on getting rid of toxic beta behavior in men and boys, and How To Be the Kind of Man that Will Attract the Kind of Woman You Actually Want.
This second half is about emotional and mental fitness, and as with the first one, is about how to replace toxic beta behavior with healthy behavior. Not necessarily super-duper Alpha behavior, but at least behavior that isn't toxic, that isn't going to actively repel women (and men, for that matter). The remainder of this post is quoted in full, with only very light editing by me (mostly to remove jargon and replace it with words that are in more common usage, or the removal of the occasional rude word.) Because of that, I'm not marking them in italics or blockquotes for the remainder of this post; it's just all quoted.
The toxic beta lives on an emotional roller coaster which goes from anxious repression to emotional outbursts which can accumulate into rage and then despair. A toxic beta is effectively out of balance emotionally and which is why they are so obnoxious to people around them and especially to women.
I have a couple of ideas of why this is so, and my guess is that a toxic beta was a boy who was just a little more emotionally sensitive and a bit smarter than the average boy, then experienced some combination of the following factors: an equally toxic beta father or father figure, raised by women alone, bullied rather heavily, socially awkward and had trouble knowing how to act, overweight or possessed some other physical trait that made him overly self-conscious. I don't think it is any one thing, but rather a combination of several influences and events beyond which slowly turns a boy who might have some tendencies towards being toxic into a full-blown worst kind of beta in adulthood. If you suspect you are a toxic beta you'll probably find this list or events like this to be still painful in your memory. Take that same boy and surround him with strong, but patient men, and have him enter into a masculine profession or the military, and he'd probably turn out ... well, at least a mostly nice-guy beta, which is orders of magnitude better than the toxic kind.
After a lifetime of toxic reinforcement how does a man turn things around? I suggest for one month swinging the pendulum far in the opposite direction. Almost like an emotional detox, the beta needs to completely turn around for a time and get off the emotional roller coaster. I suggest one month of practicing the ancient philosophy of Stoicism. The first step is to get yourself a copy of Marcus Aurelius' Meditations. This is the place to start because it isn’t a philosophical abstract but instead a portrait of an Emperor and how he lives out the philosophy in his daily life. It’s also a good read.
As for a definition of Stoicism I’m going straight to the dictionary: the endurance of pain or hardship without a display of feelings and without complaint.
From dictionary.com: a philosophy that flourished in ancient Greece and Rome. Stoics believed that people should strictly restrain their emotions in order to attain happiness and wisdom; hence, they refused to demonstrate either joy or sorrow.
What are the practical applications of this for today's world?
If after one month you feel you need to continue in stoicism and introspection then go ahead and do it for up to six months. Sometimes you need a reset to get yourself out of a behavioral pattern. I stopped trying to date, and concentrated on working out and just thinking about life for several months before I got back into it and found success. Sometimes a man just has to step back for a while and re-evaluate his life in order to improve his actions. It can take time.
On the other hand, if after a time of introspection you find that you are becoming more upset, emotional, depressed, or even suicidal, then please seek professional help. Sometimes the shock of leaving trying to leave this toxic behavior behind, especially if there has been childhood abuse, can be overwhelming for a man, and in that case he will need more that just a good friend and introspection. It's not a statistical quirk that causes suicide rates for men to be higher than for women and you need to take care of yourself.
I think Stoicism is one of the greatest philosophies of Man, and it can be especially helpful for men when they get out of balance, but the point to this post isn't to create philosophers or hermits. And I don't think that repressing joy in vain hopes of philosophical happiness is a good idea. A man should be able to have a good belly laugh with his friends, be of cheerful spirit, and show deep love and affection for his children and wife. Don't think at a funeral of a friend or family member you can't cry, even Jesus wept at the grave of his friend. Stoicism is a tool, not a straightjacket to use to turn you into Spock. After practicing it this month, take the positive elements from it and work them into your life. Wouldn't you like to be known as the guy who is cool under pressure? The man in the extended family who can be relied upon to be sober-minded and reliable when there's an emergency? An employee or businessman known to be fair and evenhanded even when chaos swirls around him?
The anti-beta conclusion on Emotional aspect of life: You can't stop yourself from having emotions, but you can control your actions in response to them.
There is no man on the planet more intellectually dishonest than a toxic beta, as even an Omega has enough self-awareness to avoid being a buffoon at social event and will instead stay at home and play computer games. Everything from a toxic beta is a con or a presented image because behind that shell is a scared, miserable boy who uses whatever tools are at his disposal to build the Beta Delusion Bubble. The Gamma Delusion Bubble shields the Gamma from somehow and some way ever being wrong about anything, as there is no being wrong about "something", there is only being a wrong "person". His identity is so tied up in his opinions about everything, including himself, that any slip-up is a catastrophe which must be avoided at all costs.
The second-most terrifying statement for a toxic beta is to admit that he doesn’t know something. He constantly speaks of having knowledge in areas he most certainly does not. Being ignorant for a beta is being discredited as a person, so they will do what is in their power to bluff, obfuscate, and redirect people so others don't see their ignorance. If you wish to escape the life of a toxic beta you must learn the statement, "I don;'t know" and use it when it is appropriate.
I must unfortunately take a moment to explain to the binary-thinking betas that no, you do not go from being a know-it-all to blurting out "I don't know" at the start of nearly every conversation, feel the need to explain all of the time now about how you don't know something, and talk about how proud you are about not to knowing things. You may laugh at this, but I know this behavior pattern well, and there are some out there who will do this exact thing thinking they are improving their situation, until it obviously doesn't work and they blame this post for their failures.
In simple practice you say this when needed and you honestly don't know about the topic at hand. While at first glance it seems easy enough if you are a beta, it is difficult in reality. It's challenging because typically you've already hung yourself on your own ignorance in a conversation by saying way more than you should have, and by the time you are challenged on a point, having to say you don't know part of it means your entire argument might collapse. Think about this for a moment. If you are saying so much that if someone challenges a point, and by admitting that you don't know about something in which you are pontificating about, it destroys what you are saying, where was your first error? It was BSing in the first place. Stop making definitive statements about things if you can't back them up with logic or evidence, unless it is clearly a subjective opinion of little matter.
Examples of subjective opinions of little matter: favorite color, sports teams, movies you like, the hottest actress. You don't have to know why you have a favorite sports team or why you like green over blue, it doesn't matter. On the other hand if you think we should use gold as a currency rather than fiat, you'd better know all about the subject before trying to tell people how the monetary system should be run. Gammas do not want to admit ignorance, they want to appear intelligent, so they overreach their arguments and then feel they can't backtrack an inch.
The most terrifying statement for a toxic beta is admitting he is wrong about something. You must start to take responsibility for your words and actions if you want to stop being beta. Once again, this is exceedingly difficult if you are not used to doing it. Do you realize the power there is in the words: "I am wrong"? These aren’t words of weakness but of power, first, because you speak the truth, and second, because this truth allows you room for correction. In other words, if you never admit you are wrong, you can never correct your thinking.
Instead of trying to bluff when asked if you know something about what you've stated, say this instead: "You make a good point, I don't know." They may leave it at that and let it go, which means you just got off easy. If they push the point and destroy your shoddy argument, you now have to take the beating like a man. Don't whine, don't ask for mercy, do'’t lie, don't get snarky, and don't disappear, TAKE IT. Then, when they are finished demolishing your ill-conceived statements, you should reply: "I was wrong. I didn't think that through very well and it turns out you were right." Sucks doesn't it? Think of it this way, you picked a fight with someone tougher than you and you got a bloody nose. Now, are you going to go run home to mommy crying or are you going to train harder for the next fight? If you want to know what separates a toxic beta from a healthy regular guy in the mental aspect of life it is this response right here. A normal knows when he is beaten and will submit, but a beta knows he is beaten and then lies incessantly to himself and others about the loss because he cannot admit defeat.
This is why toxic betas hate and fear Alphas so much, as an Alpha will not relent and will keep beating someone (in a physical fight, rhetoric, or dialectic) until the other submits or it is clear to everyone that he has defeated the opponent. Everyone else in the hierarchy will submit or be destroyed, but the toxic beta will never admit defeat and so the Alpha will keep throwing punches until onlookers literally start to beg the poor beta to stop making a fool of himself. His appeals will get more hysterical, more emotional and the Alpha will take the hysteria, form it into a club, and splatter the beta's proverbial brains all over the pavement to the eventual horror (or in some cases, snickers), of the crowd.
In an online environment, he can act like a buffoon forever until he disappears or is banned from a site for his actions; in real life eventually the he is socked in the nose or worse when he plays this sort of game with an Alpha one too many times. I think all boys have witnessed this at least once: some little twerp mouths off to the leader of the group of boys (not a bully, but the de facto leader), and the next thing the twerp knows is he has a black eye and is running to women for protection from the "bully". Don't mistake this for defending bullies, I hate bullies, this is a kid being a smart-aleck towards another boy in an attempt to undermine his status, who pays for it, but then won't accept his status after being put in his place. Since most adults never get into any physical confrontation the most common scenario you'll see is the toxic beta mouth off to a man of higher status, the higher-status man turns around, looks them in the eye, and challenges them. The beta will generally turn pale and try to leave the situation, or he will lie about the challenge in the first place.
Let me clarify the challenge in the male hierarchy. It goes on all the time and is a natural part of life as a man. In fact, it’s healthy, as men are much more efficient as a group when the order is more or less defined. If a regular Joe challenges the Alpha, he gets smacked around a little, then gets back in line. The toxic beta challenges the Alpha and doesn't get back in line, instead he lies about the challenge, insults the Alpha's character, tries to humor his way out of it, whines when he gets smacked, swears hatred towards the Alpha, and derides anyone who makes him feel bad or sides with the Alpha. He does anything and everything to lie about not being beaten. This is why in Bizarro Beta World they will sometimes claim to be Alphas, because in their minds they are never beaten when everyone else sees a sorry sack of a man who is thoroughly and completed beaten, but won't admit defeat. This isn't a Rocky Balboa-type desire to never quit, which would be admirable, but rather, it would be like Rocky, after being beaten senseless by Clubber Lang then running around the ring talking about his gloves not being on right, he didn't hear the bell, Lang being a hateful and racist fighter, then pretending the fight never happened while cracking lame jokes about boxing being a stupid sport. That Rocky would be loathsome and worthy of no respect.
This is it, this is the pivot point in which you can go from the toxic mentality to the healthy mentality and perhaps even eventually beyond, which is admitting you are wrong and that you don't know things. Once again, don't just breeze through this point, but live it. Accept it. It is much more difficult than the average beta can even imagine and it will be terribly painful adjustment. It is shedding the skin of protective dishonesty, without which you will be more vulnerable to start with, but eventually much stronger. Some of you reading this post won't be able to make this journey with us. I can hear the wheels spinning now: "I’m not really like that… he's full of crap and wishes he was an Alpha… I don't agree with something he wrote so it's all invalid… this is just out-of-control masculinity… he's not being Christ like in his attitude…", and so on. To you I offer no consolation, only this advice: Enjoy your life as a beta. I don't mean this as an insult, but rather don't obsess over your inability to go beyond what you are, and let it ruin you completely. Don't let "what could have been" be a cloud over your existence, but rather take what you've been given and make the most of it.
I have sympathy here for the beta attempting to cross this chasm on what looks like a frayed rope bridge, but it must be done, and it will be painful at times. Be prepared for the other betas you meet online and in person to pounce on your admittance to not knowing something, or to being wrong. Some of them will try to shout it like headline news. They will seize upon it, they will remember it, and they will try to use it against you, possibly forever. They are contemptible and you will find, as you leave being toxic, that you will have to leave your toxic friends and acquaintances behind. A very righteous anger will grow in you against men who cannot forgive, cannot forget, and lie all of the time about themselves while always being ready to point out the slightest flaws in others. The fists that ball up in your hands at this behavior are normal, and good. Men should be outraged at this conduct; you should be furious that a liar uses good (admittance of wrong) to do evil in order to make themselves look better.
The good news is that everyone but other toxic betas understands this and will respect you more for taking this step. Women will admire you much more, and even a low status everyman will silently nod his head, be your friend, and have respect for you when you own up to your intellectual shortcomings. This is normal behavior for men who are not toxic betas. Don't expect a parade for this behavior, though, or even a pat on the back very often, just don't be surprised when someone appreciates your candor and gives you respect for it. What you are doing is moving from a world of darkness and lies into the light of truth. Believe me, it is a much better world. It is so much better that you cannot imagine it while you are still a beta.
If you are ready to make this leap, then don't just think about it, act upon it. Look for the next legitimate opportunity to admit you don't know something when asked, admit that you are truly ignorant about the subject, and admit that you are wrong (using those very words!) when shown to be so. It probably won't take very long to find the opportunity.
This second half is about emotional and mental fitness, and as with the first one, is about how to replace toxic beta behavior with healthy behavior. Not necessarily super-duper Alpha behavior, but at least behavior that isn't toxic, that isn't going to actively repel women (and men, for that matter). The remainder of this post is quoted in full, with only very light editing by me (mostly to remove jargon and replace it with words that are in more common usage, or the removal of the occasional rude word.) Because of that, I'm not marking them in italics or blockquotes for the remainder of this post; it's just all quoted.
The toxic beta lives on an emotional roller coaster which goes from anxious repression to emotional outbursts which can accumulate into rage and then despair. A toxic beta is effectively out of balance emotionally and which is why they are so obnoxious to people around them and especially to women.
I have a couple of ideas of why this is so, and my guess is that a toxic beta was a boy who was just a little more emotionally sensitive and a bit smarter than the average boy, then experienced some combination of the following factors: an equally toxic beta father or father figure, raised by women alone, bullied rather heavily, socially awkward and had trouble knowing how to act, overweight or possessed some other physical trait that made him overly self-conscious. I don't think it is any one thing, but rather a combination of several influences and events beyond which slowly turns a boy who might have some tendencies towards being toxic into a full-blown worst kind of beta in adulthood. If you suspect you are a toxic beta you'll probably find this list or events like this to be still painful in your memory. Take that same boy and surround him with strong, but patient men, and have him enter into a masculine profession or the military, and he'd probably turn out ... well, at least a mostly nice-guy beta, which is orders of magnitude better than the toxic kind.
After a lifetime of toxic reinforcement how does a man turn things around? I suggest for one month swinging the pendulum far in the opposite direction. Almost like an emotional detox, the beta needs to completely turn around for a time and get off the emotional roller coaster. I suggest one month of practicing the ancient philosophy of Stoicism. The first step is to get yourself a copy of Marcus Aurelius' Meditations. This is the place to start because it isn’t a philosophical abstract but instead a portrait of an Emperor and how he lives out the philosophy in his daily life. It’s also a good read.
As for a definition of Stoicism I’m going straight to the dictionary: the endurance of pain or hardship without a display of feelings and without complaint.
From dictionary.com: a philosophy that flourished in ancient Greece and Rome. Stoics believed that people should strictly restrain their emotions in order to attain happiness and wisdom; hence, they refused to demonstrate either joy or sorrow.
What are the practical applications of this for today's world?
- Drop all snarky, flippant, and silly comments and voices about people and things. Its fine to tell an actually joke, but stop trying to be cute and funny all of the darn time. Witty remarks are useful, but you need to take a break for a bit.
- This month drop all online forum debates, especially when you are really emotionally invested. Go silent in your profiles unless it’s reassuring a community you are OK, ONLY if they ask.
- Stay away from social media unless you have to get on it for a specific reason. Social media is a hotbed of emotional flame wars.
- When in groups of friends and families and a hot-button topic comes up in which you'd typically dive into (and of course wow the ladies with your stellar command of minutia!) keep your mouth shut and simply watch and listen to the participants instead.
- Stop watching any and all reality TV shows in which there's a lot of screaming and emotional manipulation going on to get a rise out of the audience.
- Stay away from news stories which you know act as a trigger for you to instantly get upset about.
- Try to schedule some time, even if it's just most of a single day to go somewhere solitary and quiet in the outdoors. When there make an effort to quiet your mind, drop the internal debates about politics, religion, etc., going on in there and instead focus on good things in life that you’ve been blessed with. This can be done multiple times if needed.
- If you have a wife or girlfriend don't be baited by the typical arguments you two have this month, and be aware of what you say before you say it if things get heated. Instead show them love as it covers a multitude of sins, and patience as you realize you have probably been just as guilty as them in emotional manipulation.
- Kindly tell your female friends (especially that one you really want to date) to unburden their emotions on someone else. Don't be rude, but be firm.
- If someone emotionally vomits all over you, tries to get an emotional rise out of you, engage you in a rhetorical argument, or tells stupid and silly jokes, simply grunt in reply. I'm serious here, grunt. Don't get baited in; don't tell them all about how you are now a quiet Stoic. The responses you get from this will be eye opening to say the least, and are sometimes quite funny. Just be sure to keep a straight face. Please practice your grunt now.
If after one month you feel you need to continue in stoicism and introspection then go ahead and do it for up to six months. Sometimes you need a reset to get yourself out of a behavioral pattern. I stopped trying to date, and concentrated on working out and just thinking about life for several months before I got back into it and found success. Sometimes a man just has to step back for a while and re-evaluate his life in order to improve his actions. It can take time.
On the other hand, if after a time of introspection you find that you are becoming more upset, emotional, depressed, or even suicidal, then please seek professional help. Sometimes the shock of leaving trying to leave this toxic behavior behind, especially if there has been childhood abuse, can be overwhelming for a man, and in that case he will need more that just a good friend and introspection. It's not a statistical quirk that causes suicide rates for men to be higher than for women and you need to take care of yourself.
I think Stoicism is one of the greatest philosophies of Man, and it can be especially helpful for men when they get out of balance, but the point to this post isn't to create philosophers or hermits. And I don't think that repressing joy in vain hopes of philosophical happiness is a good idea. A man should be able to have a good belly laugh with his friends, be of cheerful spirit, and show deep love and affection for his children and wife. Don't think at a funeral of a friend or family member you can't cry, even Jesus wept at the grave of his friend. Stoicism is a tool, not a straightjacket to use to turn you into Spock. After practicing it this month, take the positive elements from it and work them into your life. Wouldn't you like to be known as the guy who is cool under pressure? The man in the extended family who can be relied upon to be sober-minded and reliable when there's an emergency? An employee or businessman known to be fair and evenhanded even when chaos swirls around him?
The anti-beta conclusion on Emotional aspect of life: You can't stop yourself from having emotions, but you can control your actions in response to them.
There is no man on the planet more intellectually dishonest than a toxic beta, as even an Omega has enough self-awareness to avoid being a buffoon at social event and will instead stay at home and play computer games. Everything from a toxic beta is a con or a presented image because behind that shell is a scared, miserable boy who uses whatever tools are at his disposal to build the Beta Delusion Bubble. The Gamma Delusion Bubble shields the Gamma from somehow and some way ever being wrong about anything, as there is no being wrong about "something", there is only being a wrong "person". His identity is so tied up in his opinions about everything, including himself, that any slip-up is a catastrophe which must be avoided at all costs.
The second-most terrifying statement for a toxic beta is to admit that he doesn’t know something. He constantly speaks of having knowledge in areas he most certainly does not. Being ignorant for a beta is being discredited as a person, so they will do what is in their power to bluff, obfuscate, and redirect people so others don't see their ignorance. If you wish to escape the life of a toxic beta you must learn the statement, "I don;'t know" and use it when it is appropriate.
I must unfortunately take a moment to explain to the binary-thinking betas that no, you do not go from being a know-it-all to blurting out "I don't know" at the start of nearly every conversation, feel the need to explain all of the time now about how you don't know something, and talk about how proud you are about not to knowing things. You may laugh at this, but I know this behavior pattern well, and there are some out there who will do this exact thing thinking they are improving their situation, until it obviously doesn't work and they blame this post for their failures.
In simple practice you say this when needed and you honestly don't know about the topic at hand. While at first glance it seems easy enough if you are a beta, it is difficult in reality. It's challenging because typically you've already hung yourself on your own ignorance in a conversation by saying way more than you should have, and by the time you are challenged on a point, having to say you don't know part of it means your entire argument might collapse. Think about this for a moment. If you are saying so much that if someone challenges a point, and by admitting that you don't know about something in which you are pontificating about, it destroys what you are saying, where was your first error? It was BSing in the first place. Stop making definitive statements about things if you can't back them up with logic or evidence, unless it is clearly a subjective opinion of little matter.
Examples of subjective opinions of little matter: favorite color, sports teams, movies you like, the hottest actress. You don't have to know why you have a favorite sports team or why you like green over blue, it doesn't matter. On the other hand if you think we should use gold as a currency rather than fiat, you'd better know all about the subject before trying to tell people how the monetary system should be run. Gammas do not want to admit ignorance, they want to appear intelligent, so they overreach their arguments and then feel they can't backtrack an inch.
The most terrifying statement for a toxic beta is admitting he is wrong about something. You must start to take responsibility for your words and actions if you want to stop being beta. Once again, this is exceedingly difficult if you are not used to doing it. Do you realize the power there is in the words: "I am wrong"? These aren’t words of weakness but of power, first, because you speak the truth, and second, because this truth allows you room for correction. In other words, if you never admit you are wrong, you can never correct your thinking.
Instead of trying to bluff when asked if you know something about what you've stated, say this instead: "You make a good point, I don't know." They may leave it at that and let it go, which means you just got off easy. If they push the point and destroy your shoddy argument, you now have to take the beating like a man. Don't whine, don't ask for mercy, do'’t lie, don't get snarky, and don't disappear, TAKE IT. Then, when they are finished demolishing your ill-conceived statements, you should reply: "I was wrong. I didn't think that through very well and it turns out you were right." Sucks doesn't it? Think of it this way, you picked a fight with someone tougher than you and you got a bloody nose. Now, are you going to go run home to mommy crying or are you going to train harder for the next fight? If you want to know what separates a toxic beta from a healthy regular guy in the mental aspect of life it is this response right here. A normal knows when he is beaten and will submit, but a beta knows he is beaten and then lies incessantly to himself and others about the loss because he cannot admit defeat.
This is why toxic betas hate and fear Alphas so much, as an Alpha will not relent and will keep beating someone (in a physical fight, rhetoric, or dialectic) until the other submits or it is clear to everyone that he has defeated the opponent. Everyone else in the hierarchy will submit or be destroyed, but the toxic beta will never admit defeat and so the Alpha will keep throwing punches until onlookers literally start to beg the poor beta to stop making a fool of himself. His appeals will get more hysterical, more emotional and the Alpha will take the hysteria, form it into a club, and splatter the beta's proverbial brains all over the pavement to the eventual horror (or in some cases, snickers), of the crowd.
In an online environment, he can act like a buffoon forever until he disappears or is banned from a site for his actions; in real life eventually the he is socked in the nose or worse when he plays this sort of game with an Alpha one too many times. I think all boys have witnessed this at least once: some little twerp mouths off to the leader of the group of boys (not a bully, but the de facto leader), and the next thing the twerp knows is he has a black eye and is running to women for protection from the "bully". Don't mistake this for defending bullies, I hate bullies, this is a kid being a smart-aleck towards another boy in an attempt to undermine his status, who pays for it, but then won't accept his status after being put in his place. Since most adults never get into any physical confrontation the most common scenario you'll see is the toxic beta mouth off to a man of higher status, the higher-status man turns around, looks them in the eye, and challenges them. The beta will generally turn pale and try to leave the situation, or he will lie about the challenge in the first place.
Let me clarify the challenge in the male hierarchy. It goes on all the time and is a natural part of life as a man. In fact, it’s healthy, as men are much more efficient as a group when the order is more or less defined. If a regular Joe challenges the Alpha, he gets smacked around a little, then gets back in line. The toxic beta challenges the Alpha and doesn't get back in line, instead he lies about the challenge, insults the Alpha's character, tries to humor his way out of it, whines when he gets smacked, swears hatred towards the Alpha, and derides anyone who makes him feel bad or sides with the Alpha. He does anything and everything to lie about not being beaten. This is why in Bizarro Beta World they will sometimes claim to be Alphas, because in their minds they are never beaten when everyone else sees a sorry sack of a man who is thoroughly and completed beaten, but won't admit defeat. This isn't a Rocky Balboa-type desire to never quit, which would be admirable, but rather, it would be like Rocky, after being beaten senseless by Clubber Lang then running around the ring talking about his gloves not being on right, he didn't hear the bell, Lang being a hateful and racist fighter, then pretending the fight never happened while cracking lame jokes about boxing being a stupid sport. That Rocky would be loathsome and worthy of no respect.
This is it, this is the pivot point in which you can go from the toxic mentality to the healthy mentality and perhaps even eventually beyond, which is admitting you are wrong and that you don't know things. Once again, don't just breeze through this point, but live it. Accept it. It is much more difficult than the average beta can even imagine and it will be terribly painful adjustment. It is shedding the skin of protective dishonesty, without which you will be more vulnerable to start with, but eventually much stronger. Some of you reading this post won't be able to make this journey with us. I can hear the wheels spinning now: "I’m not really like that… he's full of crap and wishes he was an Alpha… I don't agree with something he wrote so it's all invalid… this is just out-of-control masculinity… he's not being Christ like in his attitude…", and so on. To you I offer no consolation, only this advice: Enjoy your life as a beta. I don't mean this as an insult, but rather don't obsess over your inability to go beyond what you are, and let it ruin you completely. Don't let "what could have been" be a cloud over your existence, but rather take what you've been given and make the most of it.
I have sympathy here for the beta attempting to cross this chasm on what looks like a frayed rope bridge, but it must be done, and it will be painful at times. Be prepared for the other betas you meet online and in person to pounce on your admittance to not knowing something, or to being wrong. Some of them will try to shout it like headline news. They will seize upon it, they will remember it, and they will try to use it against you, possibly forever. They are contemptible and you will find, as you leave being toxic, that you will have to leave your toxic friends and acquaintances behind. A very righteous anger will grow in you against men who cannot forgive, cannot forget, and lie all of the time about themselves while always being ready to point out the slightest flaws in others. The fists that ball up in your hands at this behavior are normal, and good. Men should be outraged at this conduct; you should be furious that a liar uses good (admittance of wrong) to do evil in order to make themselves look better.
The good news is that everyone but other toxic betas understands this and will respect you more for taking this step. Women will admire you much more, and even a low status everyman will silently nod his head, be your friend, and have respect for you when you own up to your intellectual shortcomings. This is normal behavior for men who are not toxic betas. Don't expect a parade for this behavior, though, or even a pat on the back very often, just don't be surprised when someone appreciates your candor and gives you respect for it. What you are doing is moving from a world of darkness and lies into the light of truth. Believe me, it is a much better world. It is so much better that you cannot imagine it while you are still a beta.
If you are ready to make this leap, then don't just think about it, act upon it. Look for the next legitimate opportunity to admit you don't know something when asked, admit that you are truly ignorant about the subject, and admit that you are wrong (using those very words!) when shown to be so. It probably won't take very long to find the opportunity.
A new take on the sexes, part I
I've talked quite a bit about what I think is wrong with girls in America today. For a change of pace, I thought I'd give some guidance for the boys. The text is largely adapted from Alpha Game's "Graduating Gamma" series and is therefore focused on getting rid of toxic beta behavior. I'd have simply linked to it, but it's not told from an LDS perspective, and for my purposes, it needs to be. Also, it's probably a bit on the long side, so I've edited it down.
How to be the kind of guy who will attract the kind of girls you want to attract
Dimension #1: Physical
(The order in which they appear is not to indicate any relative importance. They had to come in some order is all.)
Guys tend to misunderstand and believe that girls are as drawn by physical attractiveness as guys are. They're not. The parameters for attraction are not generally the same between the two sexes. That said, being as physically attractive as you can be certainly doesn't hurt. By this I don't mean obsessing with your hair, or anything else vain or OCD, but rather, being in good shape and taking care of yourself.
Get the facts. Do you know your weight? Your BMI? Your blood pressure and cholesterol? Most people, if they're out of shape, probably know it, but be armed with the facts, not suppositions, not guesses, and certainly not wishful thinking that you're telling yourself. If you haven't recently done so, get a physical. At the very least, go to a pharmacy and take your blood pressure, step on a scale, and look up your BMI. And make a plan to get into better shape if you're not. Given the epidemic of overweightness and even obesity in today's society, I'll presume that you probably need to lose some. If not now, as you get older you will.
I don't care what diet you are on to lose weight and nobody else does either. Let me repeat that: I don't care what diet you are on and nobody else does either. Nobody cares about your diet. Your mother probably doesn't even care what your diet is. And the last thing the world needs is some overweight guy running around blabbing to everyone about his holy grail diet that he just discovered a few days ago, or even months ago, for that matter. One of the most irritating beta habits out there is constantly lecturing everyone in an attempt to make yourself look or feel intelligent. You're not the food police, and even if you've read a book or two or an article online here and there, you're not a dietitian either. Nobody really wants your opinion on what they should be eating; the only one who cares about your opinion of what you should eat is you. The only time it is acceptable to talk about your diet is when 1) You can say that you've been on X diet for Y amount of time and have lost Z lbs, and 2) someone specifically asks you about it.
Just do it, don't talk about it. Don't make excuses to not do it. This is the killer for most people (including me). Taken from the article, here are some common ones. Don't say these things.
- BMI is stupid! – Yeah, it probably is. But it's a good guideline for more or less where you should be, and let's face it—you're not the exception that you're talking about. That's being hopelessly obtuse and binary in your thinking, and has nothing to do with the fact that you're out of shape.
- I don't have the time to go to the gym – Nobody has time to go to the gym. But for people who make it a priority, they do it anyway. In any case, if you really don't have time to go to the gym, do you have a floor you can do push-ups and sit-ups on? Do you have a neighborhood you can walk or run in? Do something rather than saying that the ideal thing that you'd like to do is too time-consuming for you to do.
- I don't have the money for the gym – Fair enough. But walking, push-ups, sit-ups, crunches, squats, stairs, and more are all still free.
- If I worked out I'd be in great shape if I wanted to – I bet you would, but you aren't.
- American, Western diet is terrible, man. Like GMOs, carbs, caveman, gluten, sugar, fat, protein and stuff, man. There's no way I can do it. – Yeah, yeah. We all know. And yet, not everyone is in terrible shape, and they don't spend an arm and a leg on food and hours at the gym daily to get there either.
That was kinda negative, but sometimes beta behaviors need to be faced head-on. Here's some more positive traits to take on instead. These I quoted directly from the article referred to above:
- Practice stoicism with your diet. This is a quiet, calm acceptance of what the diet brings, including the successes and failures.
- If anyone ever asks you about what you'd like to eat when you are a guest never tell them to modify what they are making to accommodate your diet. You have to be the one which practices self-control and deals with what is on your plate. In other words you don't want to be known as the weirdo who nobody wants to invite over because your diet. (None of this applies to legitimate food allergies or celiac disease, etc.)
- If you make a meal for others, be sure there's food for all tastes; don't force people into your diet.
- If you start to make healthier choices, women notice and they will follow. Want a practical experiment? If you have a girlfriend, wife, or just eat around some women, regularly start picking the healthier options and you will see just like magic the women will too. Occasionally they will get upset instead, but they notice. My wife still remembers to this day that on our very first date I skipped the chips and ate the fruit. I never mentioned a thing about being on a diet, though I was at the time.
- The same stoicism applies to your workout too. I don't care if you like free weights vs. machines, crossfit, running, or whatever. Keep your mouth shut and just go about your business.
- Whenever you feel like talking about your success in whatever you are doing in that first year, channel that energy into doing it even better rather than talking about it. Lead by example.
- If you are under 30 try picking up a highly physical competitive sport when you can handle it like a basketball, or soccer league or martial arts. Competition shakes out the beta tendencies and is great exercise.
Person: ”You don’t want any more of this? You on a diet or something?”
You: “I’m full, thanks.”
Person: ”What do you think about the diet-du jour I’m all into?!?!”
You: “I don’t know… I just try to watch what I eat.
Girl: “I love chocolate cake, you? I mean I could eat this whole thing if I didn’t stop!”
You: “Yeah, I know what you mean. I love desserts too.” *You eat one small piece in front of her*
Girlfriend/wife: “I want to lose weight, honey. I’m going to try the XYZ diet I heard about. What do you think?” **DING! DING! This is good news she’s changing for you.**
You: “Sounds like a good idea; I’ll watch what I eat too. I know I need to watch it sometimes.” *Then you stick to your diet and just help when she asks for it. Ultimately her food choices are NOT your responsibility*
Person at gym: “I’m doing this exercise thing I’m so excited about let me tell you all about why it is better than what everyone else does…”
You-interrupting: “Hey man, that’s cool and I don’t mean to be rude, but I’m here to get a workout in, so can I get back to my thing?” *walk away if you need to*
Person: “We are having a BBQ this weekend, is there anything you can’t eat? I’ve noticed you’ve lost some weight, are you on some diet? I don’t want to mess you up or anything…”Dimension #2: Spiritual
You: “Oh no, whatever you make is just fine. I’ve lost a little weight lately, thanks for noticing.”
Person: “No really, you’ve lost some serious weight these last six months, what have you been doing? Atkins? I know a girl who…”
You: *after waiting for them to catch their breath so you aren’t rude* “I’ve just been watching it some, nothing special. Thanks for the invite, I’ll see you there.”
In the modern world, spirituality is often spurned, especially if it's Christian spirituality (ironically, all kinds of other bizarre cultic beliefs are often celebrated.) The scriptures prophesied that in the last days, the truly righteous will be very few. You need to be one of them. This doesn't just mean not doing overtly bad things, there's a lot more that needs to be done. Much of what we talk about in Church is geared towards increasing our spirituality, and I don't want to miss something important just because I'm writing a much smaller summary of how to be spiritual than you'll get in General Conference. Rather, I'm going to focus on a few things that I think maybe aren't covered as much, or as succinctly as I'd sometimes like to see them, with a focus on removing toxic beta behavior with regards to your spirituality. This is probably the article that I'm summarizing that requires the most work, both because it was written as a catch-all for any belief system, and because the author is a Christian, but not of our faith, so he's missing stuff that we know.
Know what you believe and why you believe it. We've all been there —testimony meetings where people get up and use it as a thank you, or I love all of you, or I need group therapy and this is all I can afford, or whatever. Gospel doctrine classes where comments are a field day of false doctrines and bizarre ideas. Utah culture conflicting with Church doctrine. Pushy people at Church who want to proselytize their pet ideas as more correct than what the Brethren have taught (I had to hear that with regards to fouling in Church ball recently.) Quoting the article briefly:
The most common error I see betas make in regards to spiritual and ethical matters is treating it like a game of witty comments, snark, and playing at the edges of important matters without skin in the game. The second mistake is thinking width of knowledge of spiritual matters is more important than depth. This flows directly from the beta's ever-present and crippling fear of being wrong somewhere and somehow. The beta does not understand the deep matters behind what is going on in his own beliefs, which is ironic since most betas vastly overestimate their knowledge and ability in most everything.The first step is to really be familiar with the scriptures. Read the Book of Mormon every day. When you're done, turn to the beginning and start over. Do your Come Follow Me religiously (no pun intended.) Go to seminary or institute if it's age appropriate for you. If not, you can still get most institute manuals online anyway—go through them. Read the Conference reports backwards and forwards in the months between sessions. The best antidote to falling prey to false doctrine is to understand true doctrine. Seek the spirit and have it with you as you study. It will bear witness of the truth of what you read, and will warn you of false interpretations.
While I'm not very familiar with this market, I know it's out there for people who grow up in the Deseret area—Utah, northern Arizona, parts of California, Wyoming, and most of Idaho. Be wary of non-Church approved sources of doctrine and interpretation. Popular books, podcasts, memes, or whatever may all be well and good, but they may also be from people who have grasped on to Gospel hobbies, or who otherwise will lead you stray, or even if not astray, they will keep you from seeing what you really should be doing (remember Elder Oaks talk "Good, Better Best" from a few years ago?)
You should even be wary of reading some random guy's blog about this kind of stuff.
Some quotes from the article: "[P]ray a great deal about what you find in humility and ask for forgiveness in being arrogant and obnoxious about your beliefs. Pray for wisdom and insight. Pray for a peaceful soul when finding troubling new truths.[...] Realize you are probably not nearly as smart as you'd like to think and you need to change when the truth leads you to an inevitable conclusion. You do this because you need depth on your beliefs, not width. You don't need to know everything about everyone else's beliefs; you need to know yours very well. [...] [B]e honest with yourself about your beliefs and why you hold them. Live up to the beliefs consistently as possible."
Seek guidance from wise people placed in your path. You have a called Bishop or Branch President. You have ministering brothers. You have a family. You have Sunday School and Priesthood classes. Enter these opportunities with humility, not trying to show off your knowledge or play gotcha games with tough questions, but to honestly improve your knowledge of and faith in the Gospel and the Atonement of Jesus Christ. And then I'll also add another quote about forgiveness from the article, because it applies especially to a lot of toxic beta behavior that is sadly too common in our society. I'm quoting below with only one minor modification for correct doctrine.
One of the most difficult things for betas to do is to forgive. They are so afraid of being seen as wrong or disliked they almost never forgive a slight and think that others never forgive either. They hold grudges, they are passive-aggressive towards people who have embarrassed them, or ignore them (block them on Twitter in today's world), and they don't even forgive themselves for wrongs. Betas don't forgive themselves, instead they lie to themselves and claim that they have done no wrong. If they do happen to admit to themselves they did something wrong, they typically obsess about it to the point of exhaustion, but never deal with it. It's big reason why their relationships are perpetually troubled, they come across as disingenuous to most people because they genuinely are, and they obsess about minor offenses because they aren't honest and they don't know how to forgive.
Forgiveness is a big part of a spiritual life, and life in general. Don't be obtuse about this either, that I’m talking about a wishy-washy faux forgiveness in which one claims there’s nothing to forgive. You are not required to forget actions taken against you, or make yourself vulnerable to further exploitation, but of us it is required to forgive all men. When you forgive someone, that’s the end of it. Repentance isn't just being sorry, it means changing one's behavior, which is a big difference. You don't lord their past actions over them, demand penance, or other such nonsense. You move on. You should also seek reconciliation against those you have legitimately wronged. However, don't let your attempt at reconciliation open you to an attempt at revenge against you. Forgiving someone doesn't mean you have to date them, marry them, or even associate with them anymore beyond being civil if you are in the room with them. Forgiveness is not affection.
Being a man means being honest with yourself about your actions, taking responsibility for them, seeking reconciliation when you’ve done wrong, and forgiving those who have wronged.More quoting without needing much editing by me. The remainder of this post is quoted with only a light touch of editing by me:
Don't give out your word easily or say you will do something you think you cannot do or will not realistically do. This isn't a technique to dodge responsibility, but rather a way to focus your abilities into the things you can actually accomplish and do well. A beta will act like he can do things he can't and has a profound inability to take responsibility for his actions and typically resorts to running, lying, and deflecting as to avoid consequences. Once you start taking responsibility for things you will find it starts to become natural though not always easy. If someone gives you a task to do and you aren't sure you can do it, there’s nothing wrong with letting them know you may not succeed but then assure them you will give it your full effort. If you fail, take full responsibility for your actions even if someone else put you in a tough spot, but be honest about how you ended up there if people inquire.
Women generally despise men who have no firm foundations of beliefs. They may not notice for a while if you are careful, but eventually they spot your inconsistent behavior and lose respect for you. A firm foundation and wellspring from which you draw your beliefs about the universe acts like a rock of stability which women respect even if they don't believe the same. You’ll find the same is true with men as well. Christians routinely say, and mean it when they'd rather deal with an honest atheist than a dishonest Christian.
This is pure Game here, which is standing out in the crowd. In today's world will not an honest and honorable man not stand out in the crowd? I hear the cynic now talking about how an honest man is naïve, and people spit on honor. Honesty is not naïve it means dealing with how things really are, and who cares if the degenerates of the world scoff at virtue? They have always scoffed and they'll scoff to their grave and perhaps beyond.
The reason that depth is more important than width here is the gravity of the subject at hand. The consequences are eternal, and they're not limited to just you. If you have children then what you pass on to them can carry on for generations.
For the beta this lack of personal, spiritual, honesty is the underpinning of all of their problems. If you start to become honest with yourself, learn about why you believe certain things at a deep level, are ready to forgive and also repent when you do wrong, you'll find the other steps: Physical, Mental, and Emotional become easier to correct.
The anti-beta conclusion on Spiritual aspect of life: The world needs more honest men and honorable men. Be one of them.
Tuesday, March 5, 2019
What is a Judeo-Christian value?
https://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/yoris-news-clips/theres-no-such-thing-as-judeo-christian-values/2013/12/26/
This article should be required reading for all Christians. Yeah, yeah—"not all Jews are like that!" I'm sure that's true. I have an ancestor, somewhat distant, but still, who we believe was Jewish, from Prussia. He came to America in the late 1600s, married a local Christian girl, abandoned his Jewish identity and became American (I personally think it likely that this process started a few generations earlier, and may well have been part of the reason for the move to America in the first place, but his grandfather had already left Prussia to move to Switzerland. It seems likely that that's because they'd already abandoned their Jewish identity and married local Christian girls, although I admit that that's speculation on my part.) Personally, I believe that's the only way any fake American becomes American, and actually, even then he doesn't—his descendants a few generations later have become American. But given that my ancestor gave up his Jewish identity for a Christian, American one, I'm not sure he counts as a good example anyway.
One of my sons was declared to belong to the tribe of Judah in his patriarchal blessing (probably this Jewish ancestor plays some role in that), so I've given maybe a little more thought than most (certainly more than I had prior to that) to what it means to be Jewish. And what the world means and what God means are not the same thing—obviously my son does not practice the Talmudic Jewish religion.
The article really drips with the hatred, derision and contempt that many Jews feel for America and Western Civilization overall. You can see that there is a large group of Jews, including most of those who chart their public course, who truly do hate Western Civilization, especially Christianity, and are as fully and fundamentally opposed to it as their Pharisee ancestors were at the time of Christ. Once you can get your head around that idea in the first place, then suddenly your eyes are opened, quite literally. All kinds of behavior of Jews in politics, in Hollywood, in academia, in the press, and elsewhere, actually starts to make sense for the first time ever—it's because they never assimilated, never became Americans, and in fact, feel nothing but contempt and scorn for America, for Christianity, and our European nations (and by this I mean that America is a nation descended from Europeans, bearing European culture and genetics, not that we're located in Europe, obviously.)
Judeo-Christian doesn't mean anything. It's a rhetorical sleight of hand, meant to make it easier for us to be exploited to further Jewish interests. Which is why we've spent decades burning through American money and lives fighting wars in the Middle East that nobody who's not Jewish can think of a reason for exactly. Which is why it's been Jewish politicians and academics that have fed a steady diet of socialism and tyranny to Americans for decades (as they did to the Russians and other Europeans before that). It's why Hollywood, the media and academia have waged such a brutal political war to purge Christianity from the public sphere, enabled by subverting Jewish judges on the bench, who had no interest or respect for the white Anglo-Saxon Christian traditions which made Christianity such an integral part of American cultural fabric until fairly recently. It's even why the accused in the #MeToo movement were over 75% Jewish or part Jewish; a semi-controlled burn where a few were sacrificed to maintain the much greater massive system that exploits American women and children for Jewish sexual exploitation even today. Heck, Jewish lawyer Alan Dershowitz recently made a motion with Jewish 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals judge Robert Katzmann to keep the legal implications of unsealing documents related to Jewish convicted pedophile pimp Jeffrey Epstein from being made public. What's already been made public in stuff like Judy Garland or Shirley Temple's biographies, or in articles like the one I linked above, should be sufficient to make any American wary at best, and willing to entertain ideas about the behavior of Jews that he otherwise would never have considered—because an awful lot of them have proven that they have no qualms, reservations or willingness to condemn that behavior, as long as it comes from a Jew.
Now, of course, while I rather flippantly used the expression "Not all Jews are like that!" of course, that's true too. Just because you should be wary because you're aware of behavior patterns doesn't mean that you should automatically assume that behavior patterns are too strongly correlated. Most people are incapable of nuanced thinking, and I'm hardly recommending that being wary of the influence of Jews in both your public and private life means that you should shun and condemn all Jews either. That would be absurd. People, yes even Jewish people, need to be treated like individuals, and your dealings with them based on your experience with them.
But that said, be wary of people who have divided or hidden loyalties, and may not be pursuing the best interests of you, your family, your nation and your traditions at all. And the same applies to more than just the Jews, of course. And how do you know to be wary? Because a reasoned and calm discussion like I'm trying to have here would be met with shrieks and screams of "anti-Semite!" and demands for my apology, my firing, my complete and total unpersoning in American society. Or they would, rather, if I were important enough to get anyone's attention.
PS: Check out this transcript of a podcast review or Horazny's The Virtue of Nationalism: https://adversariapodcast.com/2019/02/26/transcript-for-yoram-hazony-the-virtue-of-nationalism/
This article should be required reading for all Christians. Yeah, yeah—"not all Jews are like that!" I'm sure that's true. I have an ancestor, somewhat distant, but still, who we believe was Jewish, from Prussia. He came to America in the late 1600s, married a local Christian girl, abandoned his Jewish identity and became American (I personally think it likely that this process started a few generations earlier, and may well have been part of the reason for the move to America in the first place, but his grandfather had already left Prussia to move to Switzerland. It seems likely that that's because they'd already abandoned their Jewish identity and married local Christian girls, although I admit that that's speculation on my part.) Personally, I believe that's the only way any fake American becomes American, and actually, even then he doesn't—his descendants a few generations later have become American. But given that my ancestor gave up his Jewish identity for a Christian, American one, I'm not sure he counts as a good example anyway.
One of my sons was declared to belong to the tribe of Judah in his patriarchal blessing (probably this Jewish ancestor plays some role in that), so I've given maybe a little more thought than most (certainly more than I had prior to that) to what it means to be Jewish. And what the world means and what God means are not the same thing—obviously my son does not practice the Talmudic Jewish religion.
The article really drips with the hatred, derision and contempt that many Jews feel for America and Western Civilization overall. You can see that there is a large group of Jews, including most of those who chart their public course, who truly do hate Western Civilization, especially Christianity, and are as fully and fundamentally opposed to it as their Pharisee ancestors were at the time of Christ. Once you can get your head around that idea in the first place, then suddenly your eyes are opened, quite literally. All kinds of behavior of Jews in politics, in Hollywood, in academia, in the press, and elsewhere, actually starts to make sense for the first time ever—it's because they never assimilated, never became Americans, and in fact, feel nothing but contempt and scorn for America, for Christianity, and our European nations (and by this I mean that America is a nation descended from Europeans, bearing European culture and genetics, not that we're located in Europe, obviously.)
Judeo-Christian doesn't mean anything. It's a rhetorical sleight of hand, meant to make it easier for us to be exploited to further Jewish interests. Which is why we've spent decades burning through American money and lives fighting wars in the Middle East that nobody who's not Jewish can think of a reason for exactly. Which is why it's been Jewish politicians and academics that have fed a steady diet of socialism and tyranny to Americans for decades (as they did to the Russians and other Europeans before that). It's why Hollywood, the media and academia have waged such a brutal political war to purge Christianity from the public sphere, enabled by subverting Jewish judges on the bench, who had no interest or respect for the white Anglo-Saxon Christian traditions which made Christianity such an integral part of American cultural fabric until fairly recently. It's even why the accused in the #MeToo movement were over 75% Jewish or part Jewish; a semi-controlled burn where a few were sacrificed to maintain the much greater massive system that exploits American women and children for Jewish sexual exploitation even today. Heck, Jewish lawyer Alan Dershowitz recently made a motion with Jewish 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals judge Robert Katzmann to keep the legal implications of unsealing documents related to Jewish convicted pedophile pimp Jeffrey Epstein from being made public. What's already been made public in stuff like Judy Garland or Shirley Temple's biographies, or in articles like the one I linked above, should be sufficient to make any American wary at best, and willing to entertain ideas about the behavior of Jews that he otherwise would never have considered—because an awful lot of them have proven that they have no qualms, reservations or willingness to condemn that behavior, as long as it comes from a Jew.
Now, of course, while I rather flippantly used the expression "Not all Jews are like that!" of course, that's true too. Just because you should be wary because you're aware of behavior patterns doesn't mean that you should automatically assume that behavior patterns are too strongly correlated. Most people are incapable of nuanced thinking, and I'm hardly recommending that being wary of the influence of Jews in both your public and private life means that you should shun and condemn all Jews either. That would be absurd. People, yes even Jewish people, need to be treated like individuals, and your dealings with them based on your experience with them.
But that said, be wary of people who have divided or hidden loyalties, and may not be pursuing the best interests of you, your family, your nation and your traditions at all. And the same applies to more than just the Jews, of course. And how do you know to be wary? Because a reasoned and calm discussion like I'm trying to have here would be met with shrieks and screams of "anti-Semite!" and demands for my apology, my firing, my complete and total unpersoning in American society. Or they would, rather, if I were important enough to get anyone's attention.
PS: Check out this transcript of a podcast review or Horazny's The Virtue of Nationalism: https://adversariapodcast.com/2019/02/26/transcript-for-yoram-hazony-the-virtue-of-nationalism/
Friday, March 1, 2019
Conservative Democracy
https://www.firstthings.com/article/2019/01/conservative-democracy
This is a really good article. I thought about trying to quote portions of it, or summarize it, but I think I'll revert to just linking to it and recommending to all that they read the thing in full.
There is one major thing that he misses completely and another that he skirts around without really saying quite enough about it. The former is that there is no such thing as Judeo-Christian. The Jewish tradition and the Christian tradition, especially the Anglo-American Protestant tradition, has remarkably little in common with Judaism. Well, I suppose it's not really remarkable; Christ himself said as much repeatedly during the course of his earthly Ministry, as we're learning this year in Come Follow Me. Considering that since that time, Judaism was essentially completely hijacked by Phariseeism and in fact the trends of Phariseeism were amplified by the Diaspora experience in Babylon where the Talmud was written means that Christianity and Judaism should be seen as completely different traditions, and the attempt to lump them together is either ignorant or dishonest. Surely it's (in part) driven by the fact that while the author is Israeli, he's looking out for his Jewish brethren in America and Britain. I notice, however, that Israel has very strict laws about Christianity, and Christianized Jews are not permitted by law to make aliyah and emigrate to Israel. Why not? Because the Jews recognize that Christianity would fundamentally remake their society, just as Jewish influence has fundamentally remade ours from our Christian heritage, and not to the benefit of Americans.
The second thing is that while he recognizes that large numbers of immigrants can't be permitted unless there are societal structures in place that cause them to assimilate rather than remain apart from the host population, his historical empiricism would suggest that this isn't actually possible, and that therefore large numbers of immigrants is not doable if one wants to maintain the host culture; they have to come in small enough numbers that there is no chance for them to practice competing culture in the same place as the host culture. What is a small enough number? I dunno, but if you think about the fact that Jews make up 2% of the population of America, yet have had a tremendous effect on changing our legal traditions, our entertainment industry, our education industry, and our financial industry—historical empiricism suggests that the number must be very small, and they must assimilate, not maintain themselves as a undilutable block within the host population. Read this snippet from the history of Rome:
This is something that many members of the Church would rather not face, but again—if historical empiricism is a feature of conservative democracy, then one needs to suggest that historical empiricism should lend a great deal of scepticism to the success of the religiously and culturally heterogeneous state unless that heterogeneousness is in small enough numbers to not threaten the dominance of the homogeneous majority.
This is a really good article. I thought about trying to quote portions of it, or summarize it, but I think I'll revert to just linking to it and recommending to all that they read the thing in full.
There is one major thing that he misses completely and another that he skirts around without really saying quite enough about it. The former is that there is no such thing as Judeo-Christian. The Jewish tradition and the Christian tradition, especially the Anglo-American Protestant tradition, has remarkably little in common with Judaism. Well, I suppose it's not really remarkable; Christ himself said as much repeatedly during the course of his earthly Ministry, as we're learning this year in Come Follow Me. Considering that since that time, Judaism was essentially completely hijacked by Phariseeism and in fact the trends of Phariseeism were amplified by the Diaspora experience in Babylon where the Talmud was written means that Christianity and Judaism should be seen as completely different traditions, and the attempt to lump them together is either ignorant or dishonest. Surely it's (in part) driven by the fact that while the author is Israeli, he's looking out for his Jewish brethren in America and Britain. I notice, however, that Israel has very strict laws about Christianity, and Christianized Jews are not permitted by law to make aliyah and emigrate to Israel. Why not? Because the Jews recognize that Christianity would fundamentally remake their society, just as Jewish influence has fundamentally remade ours from our Christian heritage, and not to the benefit of Americans.
The second thing is that while he recognizes that large numbers of immigrants can't be permitted unless there are societal structures in place that cause them to assimilate rather than remain apart from the host population, his historical empiricism would suggest that this isn't actually possible, and that therefore large numbers of immigrants is not doable if one wants to maintain the host culture; they have to come in small enough numbers that there is no chance for them to practice competing culture in the same place as the host culture. What is a small enough number? I dunno, but if you think about the fact that Jews make up 2% of the population of America, yet have had a tremendous effect on changing our legal traditions, our entertainment industry, our education industry, and our financial industry—historical empiricism suggests that the number must be very small, and they must assimilate, not maintain themselves as a undilutable block within the host population. Read this snippet from the history of Rome:
The Crisis of the Third Century was a period in which the Roman Empire nearly collapsed under the combined pressures of barbarian invasions and migrations into Roman territory, civil wars, peasant rebellions, political instability with multiple usurpers competing for power, growing influence and Roman reliance on barbarian mercenaries, and commanders nominally working for Rome, but increasingly independent, plague, debasement of currency, and economic depression. The crisis began with the assassination of Emperor Severus Alexander by his own troops in 235, initiating a 50-year period during which there were at least 26 claimants to the title of emperor, mostly prominent Roman army generals, who assumed imperial power over all or part of the Empire. The same number of men became accepted by the Roman Senate as emperor during this period and so became legitimate emperors.
By 268, the empire had split into three competing states. Later, Aurelian reunited the empire; the crisis ended with the ascension and reforms of Diocletian in 284. The crisis resulted in such profound changes in the empire's institutions, society, economic life and, eventually, religion, that it is increasingly seen by most historians as defining the transition between the historical periods of classical antiquity and late antiquity.What are some other conclusions to be drawn from these points? The first one means that I suspect that even rather slight confessional differences can bring about tension that will be difficult to overcome. There have been centuries of warfare between Papists and Protestants in Europe, and our own LDS history suggests that we only had peace when we were either a very small scattering mixed in with the Protestant majority, or when we had our own religiously homogeneous territory in what was then called either Deseret or Utah Territory, and which makes up almost all of Utah, northern Arizona, southern Wyoming, western Colorado and Idaho.
This is something that many members of the Church would rather not face, but again—if historical empiricism is a feature of conservative democracy, then one needs to suggest that historical empiricism should lend a great deal of scepticism to the success of the religiously and culturally heterogeneous state unless that heterogeneousness is in small enough numbers to not threaten the dominance of the homogeneous majority.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)