BlueOak

Thank you for sharing that. I agree with much of it; it's helpful to establish. It goes to the problem you are facing in dealing with people, at least in part. For me nice means: Helpful, sincere, and polite. If i were to boil it down. So the problem comes when you communicate that nice people are bad; inevitably, there is conflict on the meaning of a label. This also comes about in nonverbal interaction.

Who is they? Its good to define this. do you mean feminine men? Not really, I mean it'd help your argument to separate out feminine men from unstable men, you'd get a lot further with a lot less push back also. Because rather than attacking identity, provoking an egoic response to defend it, you'd be highlighting the instability inherent in many men who rely on emotion over logic. One reason to start us off is that they are quite dangerous; they have the physical capacity of a man while possessing less of the stable restraint. But this also goes to my above points. Mean is an emotion, or at least its a characterisation of an act from an emotional point of view. Being mean for mean's sake makes little logical sense. You can be decisive, protective, embody leadership qualities, logical, strong, emobody endurance, discipline, focus etc and be entirely neutral in your emotions. Its the same way defining someone is nice is an emotional observation, because logic doesn't really care about tone, only the equation and result. *I will add that if masculinity is to mean anything lasting, it has to rest on internal order, not just outward expression. This is a big lesson the world is going through in many aspects on the meta level too. **I am also reminded that stability from a masculine perspective is about integrated emotions governed by principles not reaction. Neutrality is perhaps a flaw when I approach things with a high reliance on logic alone.

It's interesting and a reflection of our current society, where mean is now equated to masculine and nice to feminine. Seems arbitrary. Yet for hundreds of years, people practiced decorum, discipline and manners while remaining masculine.

I understand your point but this isn't directly comparable. People do address smoking, hunger, heart disease, cancer, there is wide recognition of the dangers, education on the subject, psychological or counseling help, and often funded social programs to help. There is less social awareness of the reoccurrences of covid and its impacts on health, but of greater importance, I am not sure we have learned many lessons required for the next large-scale outbreak. You talk about bird flu as one of many candidates. *I also think those directly responsible either died from infection or the serious repercussions of doing that under the Chinese government. My only grievance was they never warned the world. My uncle did, but outside of accidents, people rarely die of one thing; it's many contributing factors. And you could make the case the same was true for him.

It would require addressing things like: 1, The breakdown of international relations between the current world powers of the time. Probably the most significant factor to influence all world problems. 2, Either quarantine measures in China or the food safety of its markets, depending on which perspective you believe. 3, Authoritarian governments' inability to speak about things that challenge their authority publicly, and I am speaking from America, Europe, Asia everywhere the world over because almost every government is unbalanced towards right-wing authoritarianism. 3a, The poor reaction time of many countries in addressing an outbreak with a lockdown because of short-term economic concerns being placed higher than health concerns; this is true in most countries. 3b, China's government's inability to admit the extent of the virus or the outbreak initially. This is implied by point 3 but needs further highlighting. I blame them in part for the death of my uncle as a result. 4, The breakdown of the world's biosphere leads to fewer cures and more virus outbreaks as a natural result. 4a, Addressing environmental concerns over economic concerns. Touched on below. 5, The overpopulation of the world, which removes natural barriers to infection by clustering populations closer together or making them more interconnected. Nobody likes population control terms, but if we don't do it, nature does it. 5a, Engineering an economy to where population levels are not key to success. 6, Conversely, the alleged overly severe measures taken by certain governments effectively condemning millions to death. That's a start off the top of my head.

@Hojo A far better approach is to wait till you are calm, then punish them. This teaches the child discipline, not anger, which is a quality that will propel their life far beyond anything else you could offer them. Then give a proportionate response to whatever they did so they learn. Having experienced the complete opposite to what I describe, I can tell you the results leave someone in fight/flight/freeze and reactions which don't differentiate between leaving an item out of place and being truant, or as an adult, receiving an offhand comment and someone throwing a punch. Failing a grade on a test or crashing your car etc. But discipline, focus and understanding who they are is everything in life, and if you can teach them those three things, their entire life will be beyond what I can describe.

No liberal world order. Far Right and religious authoritarian states being authoritarian states. Brave new world we've all walked into. Wonder when the population will start to think huh, maybe this wasn't that bright.

My life is full of challenge You can always find challenge! I think it would be the adversity to challenge, but the point is taken. Yeah lack of accountability definitely; that's one thing this period of time is correcting. This generally comes about from an immature parent or absentee parent and/or an overly abusive mother/father who instils a fear of authority as opposed to a respect of it (these are by far the biggest factors). Parenting classes, alongside financial classes, would completely change society within 80 years, and mean people weren't dealing with issues for 80 years that a basic class at birth could address. Sadly, nobody who holds strong beliefs of any kind, that I've ever seen, is capable of creating a politically and ideologically neutral template for things parenting classes or the education system. Role models exist, but i'm going to be straight with you: their perspective is often narrow and so only reaches a certain audience. This is why I mentioned in the last post about the people wanting this, needing to step outside of their own perspective to reach a wider audience. The truth is the people who usually hold rigid or strong beliefs are often bound to them. More cerebral theory really isn't needed. The opposite is needed.

I want to also say you can see the problems inherent in getting men and women into physical dating situations now, (hopefully from a few perspectives if you watch them) but that's the key to solving all of this, only it needs to be weekly or daily interactions as opposed to once every few months or a year.

Living online comes out in the often lack of tolerance toward others, but also in the neutering of the masculine and feminine natural polarity you are speaking about. In simple terms: Men and women act more like men and women when you put them together and let nature take its course. It's biological, energetic, etc, its expressed by socialising. You won't get the interplay of social aspects or gender polarities you are seeking if people are not social, or living together and relating. Do you understand? It's all the same problem. But also when people isolate, they often lose tolerance for other perspectives in that isolation, because they are not interacting with it much. Not only tolerance but a healthy social framework. Whereas if we were for example in the room together talking, there would be a million different ways our perspectives might intersect and build a rapport, as opposed to flat text over an internet screen. Which is more like a slice of consciousness or life than an accurate representation. As for people acting like children, I think part of that is because you've grown up, and some people haven't. There are childlike aspects in most people, that's been true forever, we are just more aware of it now and can highlight or observe it in a person and why. If you want a good way to fully engineer the changes you are seeking for lasting change, rather than just preaching to the same choir or remaining in perpetual opposition, look for or encourage a liberal version of it. Some people touch on that here, but it's obvious that'll be the subsequent step when society has adjusted again (or just swung the opposite way as it always does), although it'll probably be outside of my lifetime. Otherwise what happens is one side of the political spectrum will remain antagonistic towards you, when instead they could be working with you for example, or ensuring that change is grounded to remain.

Graduate from the victim mentality slowly into realising you are creating every experience you've ever had. I'd reframe every experience into thinking I can have all the sex I want, and go and get it. I'd reframe it in into speaking to a lot of women, with the mentality a lot of women want to speak to me, and practice a lot. I'd say I'll be more attractive to women not less, and do things to that end. Don't cope. Create. Experience. Adapt. You can have a 180 degree turn on the entire way you are experiencing/observing/creating life.

Socialism is dead because people don't live socially. I've hinted at that for a long time but i've got it down to one line now.

To keep it simple: You coping with other people would be a feminine quality at best, or a victim mentality at worst depending on the approach. A masculine quality would be more single-minded in focus. Note I don't mean you harm others, but you take care of your own business regardless. I suppose if you wanted to engage more, you could put yourself in positions of leading or at least showing a way of life by example. Not that I consider anything wrong with a certain amount of feminine qualities in a man, I think excessive polarities are detrimental to social order, culture and cohesion, because life is not black and white. At the moment, people are becoming very fragile, largely because they are living online in a cerebral experience of life, as opposed to just coming together socially and living in flesh and blood communities where things even out over time and things drift toward a collective norm naturally. This isn't something that takes a lot of effort in the way human beings are designed to live, a parity tends to happen when people live more socially and naturally, and then institutions are designed around that norm, rather than the other way around.

Ignore the thumbnail. Do we think China's population is overestimated?

I think we need to separate out the immediate 6 months after UBI and the rest of it, which I can attest if you do nothing for 6 months, your life is going to stagnate and to remain neutral here: not have a positive feeling state attached to it. While many would vegetate and relax, recuperating for a time, eventually, they would do something. Some would continue to dull their emotions through addictions, some would travel, some would do hobbies which may or may not pay etc. If I had oversight over all of this rather than UBI, I would simply eliminate the tasks people hate and what causes them undue suffering in the workplace. Not suffering which encourages personal growth, but stagnating repetitive suffering. I would take surveys, gather data and focus on the worst areas. I can say in the UK workplace, this has gone the opposite way for 20 years. People are more stressed, have more to do, less money available, and less time. But I don't have a handle on everyone's experience, only my own. I could theorize 90% of factory workers don't want to be there on a production line. That's obvious to me, and the repetition, while it has some positive benefits to regulating behaviour and structure in life, is also soul-destroying for many people. I could say the same of 50% of office tasks. Overwhelm is a factor for a lot of workers, and while there is growth in being able to handle multiple tasks at once, it ultimately leads to tiredness, stress and an unfufilling life.

I'm torn on this because it's the creative force of life, and creative forces are, from our perspective, considered infinite, even if logically they can be exhausted; practically, that exhaustion of possibility won't be observed, and observation is all there is. Take a piece of paper and write a billion combinations of letters or drawings on it, even if we could store all those permutations, it'd take trillions before we'd exhausted every colour, every shape, every image, every creative thought in exactly the same positions. That's why creativity is so fascinating, brings people so much happiness and is so useful for us.

Yes its a historical perspective you quote, but there's a critical disconnect here. Pointing fingers at other regions while glossing over the present actions of the nations involved is not helpful. Conflict is not unique to any one region. Europe, BRICS, South Asia, America, every region has war and violence in its past. The question is what is being done now to prevent the cycle from repeating? Otherwise we just repeat repeat repeat because you are focused on the past, and we already know the past. Yes, Europe learned the hard way, but it wasn’t war that taught respect for borders because people can repeat war forever; it was the aftermath that brought respect. Institutions like the EU, linking their economies together, and diplomatic agreements or treaties created cooperation despite those tensions and pressures you describe. This isn't about one region being more moral, better or advanced; it was a conscious shift of focus toward prevention rather than escalation. India and Pakistan get the same choice now. They either go through a decade of bloodshed, or invest in a similar framework that changed Europe. Dialogue, Cooperation, and linking their economies together. Strategy not ideology or idealism. If people want that border gone, it starts with that. Deflecting to conflicts in Ukraine or the past wars Europe avoids the core issue: Why is a shared border still a reason for conflict between India and Pakistan? Until we focus on the real root causes of a conflict it just persists. Here mistrust, yes some historical focus germane to the local area, integration, and political brinkmanship, the cycle will persist. That’s a failure of leadership, accountability, and vision to create something better.

War is not a prerequisite for respect. It's a fallacy to suggest that nations only learn through conflict, it dismisses diplomacy, institutions, education, and hard lessons in human suffering. None of which necessitate repeating the exact same cycles that others have done. You are advocating for suffering as a teacher rather than empathy, strategic leadership, and wisdom. India and Pakistan don't need another decade of conflict to honor a line on a map. They need leaders who can see beyond the past, organisations and institutions that foster cooperation, and citizens educated to demand the accountability of their governments, not educated to look to conflict as the preferred solution. If you really wanted to heal that area of the world, that is what you'd be advocating for, because it'd be required if a line were there or not. (And by your own advice, more movement over the borders) You are severely glazing over India's and China's history if you are calling them peaceful. To the point i'm just going to say refer to google or wookieepedia, because we'll be here all day going over the details. Humans are humans the world over, all countries have fought wars, and suffered through violence done to them

There are 44 countries in Europe. With well over 100 borders, with diverse cultures and people and yet nearly all of them are amiable. All the examples you are talking about are either not in Europe (Turkey) or funded and armed by Russia. The last parts are literally half in Asia. For WW2. As I said before, its a poor example to cite things over 70 years ago and then use that as a basis to live by, it's just one more excuse as to why things can't be improved now. We didn't, we took what happened and improved life for everyone here. BRICS countries are stuck in the past, constantly. Even though Russia's efforts to push governments into being militaristic and rightwing have had some effect, there is still nobody here looking to fight each other over borders inside Europe.

There are a few things here. Have you seen how fractured europe is, and how they are not constantly fighting each other? I mean there is one region in the Balkans where Russia likes to stoke trouble, and some localized issues each country faces, but for the most part we don't resort to violence. So the argument that a border on a map makes people violent never sits well with me, it's an excuse and a poor one. The people there are adults, they need to act like it, take responsibility for their own actions and stop looking 70+ years into the past if they ever want to move forward. Then we get people saying let's dissolve borders, which while it can work, its as arbitrary a solution as making the border in the first place. Its avoiding the pressures causing the issues, the usual looking at the symptom (or a factor here) not the cause. I'm just going to say it and not sugarcoat it for all BRICS members or supporters. I don't go to my neighbour when he's doing something I don't like and tell him that we don't need this boundary or kick in his door, I wouldn't do that even if there were no police looking over my shoulder. I work it out or I live with it. Boundaries always exist, they'd exist even if we dissolved the map line, and although the expressions of violence would lessen in magnitude (a good argument), the pressures causing these issues would not disappear. Now people will come back with all the difficulties, and i'll say YES. Its not easy. But war isn't the answer either. This goes for Russia, America, India, Pakistan, and anyone else who picks the path of a large mobilization or military action. I am not a pacifist either, and don't say violence isn't an option, but airstrikes or missile strikes over the border on a neighbouring nuclear power would be bottom of the list of things I'd be doing. - It all comes about because once again, people have been socially engineered to be authoritarian, right wing and frankly bloodthirsty, so they need large-scale scale overt 'solutions' that all they do is make these problems WORSE not better unless taken to absurd extremes.

And India can't just walk all over disputed territories or cut off water supplies without consequence. Two far right governments with territorial disputes and people waging war all over the world are not likely to coexist peacefully. Yes terrorism is abhorrent, but the balance is off, and further violence will off-balance us further. Which is what's happening. Its like complaining about symptoms of the issue.

Far right government vs Military Dictatorship in a time where war is not only normalized but supported and backed by industry. As i've said 5 million times the world has shifted way too far authoritarian and right with no counterbalance or authority which supercedes nation states with a more benevolent mandate. I watched Osho say dissolve world governments, and I face-palmed, because that's not going to address the root cause of any of this. What good would it do to have this on regional levels or even a global authority sharing the mindset these countries' populations do? All we've done by removing western liberal influence globally is replace it with an authority that sets the planet back several hundred years, and I what I can't believe is nobody on this planet but me and a few others can see it. Yes it looks different, yes it has different moral frameworks, but expansion is still the goal, and violence is still the tool of it.

Putting aside allergies, disease etc, sensitivity tends to come about from diet. Your body will know if something is junk if you detox all that particular food out of your system, then spend a few years not eating it and go back to eating it. I do agree, though that it's felt more strongly if you develop body awareness. To remain objective here, I will substitute junk with 'anything'. It's just more noticeable in things which have a higher impact on your body/mind.

No. You are just chosing not to be the victim of your creation.

Part of the process of God realization. More concisely, realizing you are or are creating infinity.