“Marxism 101: How Capitalism is Killing Itself with Dr. Richard Wolff”

A very interesting explanation of Karl Marx’s analysis of Capitalism:

Yes, I very much understand these critiques about modern life. Marx was a Luddite of sorts, which I can relate to. Let me pause to state this. THIS is why I get defensive when people categorically dismiss “Marxist teachings” and lay all blame for the Leftist political ideologies we’re experiencing/witnessing now squarely on his shoulders. As if he’d likely be in full support of what’s become of the so-called Left.

People like to say they’ve read his “teachings.” Yeah? How much really? Most of us haven’t directly read a whole lot from the man, especially considering how incredibly much he wrote. Letter after letter between Engels on him, on top of lengthy books on these topics. Not easy reads, hence why many aren’t directly acquainted with what Karl Marx actually said. Including plenty who claim to be fans of him. And the information and ideas bandied about in his name can drift straight off the plantation of he ever appeared to have in mind. The man wasn’t terribly pro-technology and he couldn’t foresee the industrial explosion of unprecedented proportions that the next century ushered in. People didn’t even have an imagination for what was in store on this level or in detail. How could they? UNPRECEDENTED times we now live in in terms of technological innovations and global economics.

This is truly an interesting time to be alive.

But the man added to the mix his own views and analysis. So be it. I have no problem with him doing so. Though I do take issue with what’s being done in his name. Leftism =/= “Marxism.” The political Left is puppetry, neo-liberalism, just as the political Right is as well with its “neo-conservatism.” Different teams competing for global jockeying positions. We see this. We know our political systems are ALL rigged around the globe. And money does obviously factor into how it’s carried out.

We don’t want to be slaves to a new kind of slave-owner. And this is precisely why I say that slavery never truly ended, it just changed shapes. More inclusive now.

The threat of Communism is similar. Different strategy employed but in the end you still wind up with a ruling class and a bunch of serfs under their thumb, only to a more extreme degree. Personally, I find Communism as it’s ever been practiced detestable. BUT, I don’t conflate Communism with socialism. Based off the idea, yes, but then taken to a crazy extreme since the concept was applied to a huge society and carried out in a top-down manner. Socialism doesn’t quite work that way. It’s a bottom-up approach, by and large, though wider federations may be possible. But it doesn’t translate (apparently) when applied to a massive nation-state setup. Turns into totalitarianism when attempted, so history has demonstrated thus far.

Rulers. Everywhere we look. And perhaps that we be okay if they were benevolent and actually committed to protecting our wider interests. But that won’t ever happen if the people can’t hold them accountable, which we seemingly can’t currently. We’re rendered at the mercy of what’s unfolding, and we see it and feel the earth shifting beneath us. Life has gone into hyper-drive over this last century, and now we embark on a new one. One where likely middle-classes will begin blooming in China and India and elsewhere outside of the West where we have been abandoned by a good amount of our manufacturing jobs and are experiencing record debts, printing money nonstop backed by virtually nothing. We do see this. No secret here. And what will become of the U.S.? We don’t know, but it doesn’t look very good. And the politicians running are caught up in a game that’s beyond most of us in terms of making much of a lasting impact.

While I can understand the shift in people’s hearts, I wish we’d use our minds all the more. Exercise them. Explore ideas, particularly those we may have a knee-jerk reaction away from.

I don’t see socialism and libertarianism as necessarily incompatible. Perhaps they are the new political “right” and “left” down here on the ground. Reckoning with the philosophical conundrums arising between individual vs. collective or “societal” interests. So many buzzwords make it to where discussing these matters feels cheap, like people’s eyes glaze over when they peruse them. I get it. Really do. But we have to somehow come to terms with the fact that we are both social beings and individuals in our own right. There’s a balancing act needed here, yet different people will likely opt to attempt it in different ways. Hence why I like to talk about my dream of 10,000 communities going their own ways. Let the social experiments begin…

Pipe dreams, I know. Because now we appear locked into this trajectory, whether we like it or not. Jumping in a political “camp” or movement won’t likely improve a thing. Especially not when so many are so divided. Few of us can agree on anything anymore it seems. If ever people did. But some of us must find a way and group up with those we’re capable of living and working with to the best of our ability, if only to find solace and cooperation in whatever lies in times to come.

I don’t have any answers. But I do understand the concern and always have. Can also understand our Western concerns and how it may look to those most well-adapted and proven successful in our current setup. But times are a-changin’ whether we like it or not. And whether we try to prepare or not.

Crime will likely increase. We’re a very materialistic culture. Entertaining ourselves to death. I’ve heard Yugoslavians basically fell prey to the same lure.

After listening to the audiobook for Steven Pinker’s The Better Angels of Our Nature, and appreciating it to an extent (final chapter aside), I’d argue that he spoke (and wrote) prematurely. Comforting as it would be to agree with his analysis.

Lately this eerie feeling has been coming over me. Listening to all the propaganda and watching how race relations are being ramped up in our society, I get to wondering if it’s possible if there’s an economic breakdown if the U.S. may go the way of South Africa. At least in essence, though in our case it’s not simply two or three races/ethnic backgrounds against one another. It’s become fashionable to talk shit about “white” people today, yet the reverse is deemed intolerable. Hmm. If we’re honest with ourselves and set aside our excuses and rationale and just pay attention, observe — we see this going on. It started with jokes and has grown noticeably more vicious with time.

Increasingly not a secret.

We should be able to examine these matters without being pigeon-holed as belonging to the political Left or Right as a result. Screw all of that nonsense. And to hell with devoting ourselves to ideologies of any sort. Better to keep an open mind since not a one of us has it all figured out. Explore. These ideological cages are just that — utopian traps sold to us by people who don’t give a damn about us, who simply rely on us and the money we spend, pandering to our psychologies so that we don’t revolt and remove them from power. But then another of a similar caliber would surely take their places since we don’t understand the process of power and how it can accumulate. Forming hierarchies is in our nature, but what we’ve constructed are so big that they’re guaranteed to fail us. We can’t reach them anymore. Just have to accept the dictates sent down the ladder in the form of laws. Can fight them and sometimes win, but eventually they plow on through while claiming to have enough popular support. Pandering and pretending — that’s American politics at present.

It’s easy to feel powerless in the face of all of this. But we only have one life to live, so far as we know, so we might as well make it interesting and do something with ourselves that isn’t a complete waste. Was watching another talk with Dr. Jordan Peterson earlier today (see last post) where he goes into all that and highly recommend others hear the man out. Aligning with ideologies is a way to shirk individual responsibility and hide within a crowd. Best to opt to do something more courageous than that at least. That is too easy.

There are plenty of thought-provoking thinkers on any and all “sides” who are worthy of hearing out even if we wind up disagreeing. Suspend judgment for a while and just let it in and ponder. Helps to better flesh out our own beliefs and ideas, to challenge them and thereby alter, deepen and expand them. No shame in exploring far and wide.

Admittedly kinda surprised me initially to stumble across Abby Martin conducting that interview. Proved to be worth taking in as more food for thought. The professor explained his position very articulately, though I still don’t see a top-down approach winding up ultimately resolving this dilemma, at least not how the globally-minded may envision it. We shall see.

Videos on 9/11 by Lionel Nation

This man’s expressed views are closest to my own in regards to the needed skepticism and critical thinking when assessing the 9/11 attacks.

Don’t refer to myself as a “Truther” either since so many jumped on that bandwagon over time and began drawing conclusions that we also have no proof for. All I know is the official story makes no damn sense. Never did and never will. We all remember the news that day and can recall citizens and reporters describing hearing explosions in or near the basements of the twin towers. And no plausible explanation has been offered for why Building 7 (a.k.a. World Trade Center 7 which housed various tenants including offices for the IRS, CIA, Department of Defense, Securities and Exchange Commission and many others) fell into its own footprint when the only damage it sustained was due to an internal fire, making it THE only steel skyscraper in the world to have ever collapsed due to fire. I watched it go down and heard the news guy say something about the building being “pulled” — never forgot that man saying that at the time. Made no sense. Still makes no sense what we’re being told on this matter.

So people can go ahead and believe whatever they wish. Obviously can’t stop them. And they can rail against those of us who remain very skeptical and dismiss us as “conspiracy theorists,” as they always do. It’s aggravating to me that so many people aren’t more curious about such matters, especially when it pertains to domestic defense.

And I’ll leave it to Lionel to question the incredulity of the official narrative when it came to the Pentagon and the other plane supposedly going down in Pennsylvania (United Airlines Flight 93) that somehow, inexplicably, vaporized on the spot. Makes not a lick of sense, not when we’ve seen portions of spaceships and the like return to earth at extremely high speeds and still leave recognizable debris.

Blows the mind that so many people still refuse to question what the heck happened that day. Some people even get angry at you for refusing to accept the official story as true. They’ve laced into me on several occasions, of course calling me a “conspiracy theorist,” and I always tell them clearly and directly that I won’t pretend to know what really did happen or who’s behind it, but the official story itself doesn’t make sense. I have to draw the line at accepting claims that are illogical and physics-defying. What sane person wouldn’t? And if that makes me and so many others crackpots on that account alone, well, then we have an even bigger problem as a nation. Sounds like it’ll just be a matter of time before we start denying scientific evidence altogether in favor of our preferred politics, and THAT IS DANGEROUS. Don’t go down that road, folks. Read for yourselves. Look into explanations and research from experts in related fields who aren’t government employees and find out for yourselves how buildings fall in various scenarios and WHY. That’s all I ever recommend to anyone, hence why I don’t bring this topic up much anymore since my goal isn’t to get into fights with people over bullshit.

The one rebuttal that gets under my skin is that which comes from military personnel who act like questioning such matters is somehow a demonstration of my lack of patriotism. That’s not fair and they damn well know it. If anything, the opposite is more accurate. Is the goal to toe the line here or to figure what is and isn’t real?

Until I know more I can’t say much more than that what’s been put forth to us in the official narrative leaves more questions than answers and is implausible to the point of being ridiculous. THAT much I can accept. What has actually occurred? I don’t know. Who does know? How many really know and why have they chosen to lie? We all can theorize about that, but we can’t claim to be certain without conclusive evidence. Which it’s looking like we’ll never have, and that’s a travesty.

So…in short, I don’t know if Middle Easterners had anything to do with these attacks. Could it have been an “inside job”? Yes, and it wouldn’t surprise me either if it was. But I can’t chalk 9/11 up to domestic attacks orchestrated by Muslim extremists and feel confident in that assessment. Doesn’t appear to be the case, at least not in the way it’s been described to the public by our government. I don’t know who’s responsible for all that, but we know they’ve gotten away with it (at least so far), and we also see that a lot of propaganda has arisen out of this debacle (perhaps due to seizing on the opportunity; perhaps for more nefarious, premeditated reasons). But I don’t trust a damned thing I’ve heard in well over a decade coming out of my government as a result of these attacks and how the matter has been handled and publicized. They’ve wrecked my trust and faith in them there. Can’t seem to re-establish it since either. Just can’t, not so long as the BS keeps flowing and those actually responsible aren’t brought to justice (which likely will never happen). Maybe many decades on down the road pertinent information will be declassified or leaked, but I won’t be surprised if that’s long after the players involved are dead and gone. And will the rest of the public even care by then anyway, considering so many don’t seem to care even now or over a decade back?

This probably has damaged quite a bit of my faith in my fellow Americans as well. Maybe even humans in general. Not that people could be so calloused as to attack us — that doesn’t surprise me one bit. But that people would rather stick their heads in the sand so as to avoid being called a loon than to take a stand and demand better information. THAT right there really sickens me. Unnerves me. Because it’s that precise impulse that keeps leading people all over the world to back or at least tolerate lying politicians and, subsequently, the rise of totalitarian forms of government. No country or people are immune to this impulse apparently. Many, if not most, would rather live on their knees than risk dying on their feet. That’s just a truth about human psychology, so it seems. We’re a bunch of cowards who are awesome at rationalizing ANYTHING under the sun when it suits us to do so.

“Alan Watts ~ Stop Competing With Yourself” (his BEST lecture!)

That was excellent. Tied together so many of his past lectures succinctly while also feeding into other reading material I’ve been pondering over time. This particular lecture cemented my respect for Alan Watts. Haven’t always understood what he was talking about, but I stuck with him and appreciate the light he’s helped provide overall. He’s right — the skill to living isn’t simply self-discipline (important as that unarguably is) but learning how to find the right balance. Differs for each of us, and the possibilities are nearly endless.

We can be snobs to one another. That’s easy enough to do. We can divvy up into separate “camps” and talk shit and focus our attention there primarily. Plenty already do. Will lead us straight to hell as a society and a species if we keep this up, but we’re free to do so obviously. Or prove incapable of not doing so if we individually remain complacent in our present forms. Life requires growth and we’re psychological beings. No escaping that truth.

But how we figure out navigating in a manner that seems worth it is the existential question of our time.

It’s a fact that much of this can’t help but come down to our own selves, impactful as external influences can’t help but be. Hence why it’s important to opt for better influences, those which can promote positive expansion. The alternative is what? Let ourselves slide into the abyss? What is our love affair with the abyss? I think Dr. Jordan Peterson is right when he’s basically said staying down there comes with the benefit of evading personal responsibility. Strikes a chord inside, rings correct. Mea culpa too.

Nobody else can change these facts for us. Only we individually can make the decision and actively plod in that direction. Even a slave-driver can’t effectively force us if we collectively and actively resist like mules. That seems obvious enough. Might murder a bunch of us, but still can’t force us to put our hearts into something against our will. Might reduce many of us to a cowardly state, but that’s largely through our own compliance, if not entirely. We as individuals actually do possess a lot more power than we commonly publicly acknowledge and demonstrate appreciation for.

We’re spoiled on modern life and the ease at which we can hide out from one another and interact behind keyboards anonymously if desired. Modern technologies allow for an atomized form of existence never before known by our species. Easy to get drunk on it and all its comforts. I know. Welcome to modern life. It’s ALL a big mystery to each and every one of us. Learn as we go. Hopefully. Maybe.

Depends on how we choose to live. Nobody else can determine that for us. Short of killing us, and all that does it extinguish us — still doesn’t force our will to ACT. Definitely can impact us seriously though. And that’s no small matter. But this is where ancient Stoics did have the right idea. We can’t control all of the variables in life, quite obviously. Never could and never will. We can’t help but be vulnerable beings, as all lifeforms are. And we can’t completely control other people, try as we might. Can to whatever extents, but that’s it. There is a sovereignty to the individual that is untouchable by others, try as we undoubtedly will. Sadists probably know this all too well in the end. There’s a private sphere within each of us that will forever remain unexplorable by all others. Fact of life. We are individuals yet we are communal. Both are true, and neither is avoidable nor alterable (at least not without massive negative consequences). Not if any balance is to be achieved. And some sense of balance is necessary for satisfaction in life.

Can’t seem to escape these truths lately. Recurring. Thanks to my reading and viewing material, which I’ve learned a lot from over time. We are blessed to have this amazing internet. Anyone who doesn’t own a desktop computer or at minimum a laptop is being left in the dark ages (and no, “smartphones” aren’t solely sufficient for exploring this medium — way too limited/limiting). But I suppose people will have to work with what they’ve got if that’s necessarily the case. Still, the information available so freely to us nowadays is unprecedented, truly amazing. We are lucky in this regard and shouldn’t take it too much for granted. So many opportunities surround us currently.

I say this all to myself more than to others, though it’s to all of you too. We need to step up our game as individual persons in however many which ways that may unfold. For one’s own personal sake, if for no one else’s.

“LARRY ELDER: Black Men Crushed By Excuses NOT ‘Racism’; Talks On Hating & Reconciling w/ His Father”

A very good talk. Highly recommended.

Dan Carlin on The Rubin Report

“Dan Carlin is a Political Martian (Pt. 1)”:

“Dan Carlin on Trump, the Military, and Foreign Policy (Pt. 2)”:

“Dan Carlin on Hardcore History, and What Liberty Means (Pt. 3)”:

Further exploration of Milo’s controversy

After seguing over to the topic of pedophiles Milo had spoken out about in the past, let’s return to his own current case.

Once again, here is the relevant portion of Milo’s appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast (excerpted from episode #702).

I can understand why it comes across as if Milo is making excuses for those who took advantage of him as a young teenager, particularly the “priest” in question (I put quotations there because I hear Milo has since waffled on whether or not that’s truthful). But I can also understand how such life experiences can skew one’s perception. He’s not the first to approach the topic of his past in this manner and won’t be the last. I’ve at times done so as well when it came to my own sexual experiences with adults as a young teen, though I’m prone to oscillate back and forth over the years since. Creates a lot of mixed emotions inside a person, which then can lead to drinking excessively and drugs and promiscuity, as Milo himself acknowledged.

On a side-note, this topic also harks back to MRA/pro-MGTOW vlogger Karen Straughan’s mention of being sexualized by an adult at age 14 and how she too didn’t feel like a victim as a result.

Causes a person to question whether the perspective of adults impacted as youths by such life experiences are capable of being impartial enough in order to be taken seriously in these discussions. On one hand, they possess direct, first-hand experience with the event and subsequent consequences that may have arisen. On the other hand, they’re biased by the event itself since it likely played a not insignificant role in shaping their psychological development from thereon. Meaning such events become normalized in the minds of the young individuals in question as a consequence of having to directly deal with them and then find ways to cope with their memories. There is a moral component to all of this that isn’t mentioned often where the youth in question has to wrestle with his or her sexual and social identity as a result of seeing themselves relegated to that role in the relationship with the adult early on. Speaking as a female, I recall wrestling immensely with the notion of being a “whore” at age 14 due partly to my experiences as well as others’ feedback on the subject. And those questions loom over me, even now in my mid-30s. Can’t pretend being assigned to that “camp” early on had no impact on future life choices from there on out or how I might have chosen to unfold my life as I did in the absence of such early sexualization experiences. Will never fully know, and by now it almost doesn’t matter since what’s done was done long ago and can never be undone.

But it does lead to the curious question of who we might’ve all been had the chips fallen in another direction…  And we’ll never know.

Resuming viewing Stefan Molyneux’s video on Milo’s current controversy:

That was a very fair assessment, IMO. I think Stefan is right about naming names of these Hollywood celebrities who threw parties where they essentially drugged and raped young boys/very young teens. When I listened to that portion of Milo’s appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast I was surprised Joe didn’t flip out on him. Why provide cover for these predatory persons? And as Stefan pointed out, we are judged by the company we keep. That was the company that Milo, for whatever reason(s), chose to gravitate toward in his 20s. Wasn’t a kid anymore — yet still chose to partake in partying on multiple occasions with people who treated “very young boys” that way. Why? What excuse possibly exists for doing that, and then to choose to remain silent on who these people were? That sounds like the opposite of anyone I’d personally care to call my ally. That right there tore it for me. That and protecting the name of the priest who, for all we know, is out there continuing to molest and teach oral sex techniques to other 13-year-old boys. That’s not okay. Simply not acceptable. What excuse could ever possibly make it okay in this day and age?

This is what I mean in saying that those who undergo such life experiences early on wind up with skewed perceptions that follow them into adulthood. When a person is subjected to such treatment at the onset of their budding puberty, it tends to alter their psychological development on that plane. It was normalized by Milo enough to where it apparently wasn’t shocking or tremendously worrisome when he witnessed similar treatment carried out against other young boys years later. Not unsettling enough for him to call the police or to try to offer aid to those young boys or even for Milo to cease attending those parties in question. Just wasn’t, as he demonstrated by his own account. That serves as proof positive that Milo’s obviously deeply impacted and biased as a result of what all he was subjected to early on, which then can’t help but taint future arguments he puts forth.

I’m not aiming to be mean here. Didn’t have much of an opinion one way or another on Milo prior to this latest controversy. But knowingly partying with grown men who are sexually using and abusing underage boys strikes me as pretty damn fucked up. I can’t get around that. Even after reading about the pedophiles Milo called attention to through his journalistic work. Still.

Joe Rogan and Gavin McInnes on Milo Yiannopoulos Controversy:

Have now also listened to a couple videos from reporter Lee Stranahan on his YT channel. Don’t know that man and am not sure if I’ve ever read any of his articles, seeing as how I’m not very acquainted with Breitbart News. Took in his perspective as Milo’s colleague.

Another video by someone named TheOneTrueLib. Randomly came across his clip tonight on the subject:

Listened to Milo’s words repeated several times now, and I will say this definitively: MILO IS NOT DEFENDING PEDOPHILIA IN THESE VIDEO CLIPS. HE IS, HOWEVER, DEFENDING HEBEPHILIA (at least so far as his own personal experience goes, according to his own word choices). Let us use these terms in their proper sense. This distinction does matter. Pedophilia is arguably much more destructive and harmful than hebephilia, though I certainly don’t consider hebephilia to be fine and dandy either. Hebephilia defined: a sexual attraction to minors ranging in ages 11-14 approximately. Basically very early pubescence. Many of us would argue that’s totally not okay either for adults to pursue, absolutely, but it does differ qualitatively in regards to puberty. That does matter since we’re discussing sexual acts here. Still not cool for adults to sexually mess with 11-14-year-olds, in my firm opinion, so that’s crystal clear on the record. But not quite on the same level of perversion as raping a baby or toddler. Can we at least acknowledge that as true? Different quality of fucked-up-edness, is it not? Requires a special sort of sexual psychology to pursue sex with an infant or toddler or any other pre-pubescent child. Not identical to the sexual psychology in play for those interested in pursuing pubescent youths. Different degrees of warping in the mind.

Pubescent youths are undergoing the process of budding and transforming into full-fledged, highly autonomous sexual beings. That qualitatively contrasts with the pre-pubescent child, though we obviously acknowledge growth and development flows along a continuum. Puberty is a majorly important transition zone though. And it quite obviously doesn’t unfold overnight. It’s a lengthy process. Hence why we as a society also feel it necessary to protect early pubescence from adult sexualization as well. Makes sense. Evidence points to us being better off drawing the line around 15-16 when it comes to more than a 5-year age difference, with it being ethically (if not criminally) prohibited for teenagers to engage in sexual relations with teachers, priests/pastors and other authority figures. That’s where a lot of us out here choose to draw the line, whatever term we think we need to apply to it.

But, honestly, equating it all with pedophilia is truly a misnomer and does distort the conversation for those who do think the nuances to be highly relevant. Both pedophilia and hebephilia deserve to remain punishable by laws, in my firm opinion. No good reason for grown adults to be sexually messing with youths that young. Doesn’t tend to work out well for both parties involved in the end, especially the youngest. Can be seriously damaging and destructive. And I’m probably preaching to a large choir in stating that. Perhaps including Milo to whatever extent he agrees. This is why age of consent laws matter. Early sexualization appears to be messing a bunch of people up. Experienced some of his shit in my family as well. We’re being impacted directly and indirectly by all this perverted nonsense going on. Doesn’t look to be helping us in any justifiable way as individuals or as a people. And many of us didn’t need academic studies or claims on the matter to originally figure that out. Too often it’s a mind-fuck, regardless of how we might try to rationalize it. This seems so evidently clear all around us in society that I feel like I’m beating a dead horse to keep belaboring the point.

Is this not obvious by now to most Westerners? Very likely it is. Let’s take that as granted. Yet don’t most of us also distinguish, to whatever degree(s), between sexual actions perpetrated against young children versus young teens versus young adults? Quite obviously different degrees of sexual (and emotional/psychological/experiential) readiness, so we understand a line must be drawn somewhere and that it must be clear and concise enough that laws are capable of enforcing it. Maturity outliers (however they are to be determined) do not get to decide legislation on the matter, because they do not represent the norm in this case. Not like it’d likely prove unhealthy for youths seeking promiscuous kicks be denied access to adults, referencing Milo’s opinion expressed on the matter. And I don’t doubt Milo might himself agree with that if he seriously took time to ponder and reflect back. Might’ve been better off had the sexualization by adults not occurred until he was at least 16 and not come by way of a priest at all. Hot or not.

I’m speculating, yes. In ways it’s none of our business, but it became our business when it entered the public square. Became a topic of discussion, uncomfortable as it kinda makes me to be looking into this eccentric gay guy I knew little about prior to a few weeks ago. Heard his name bandied about and watched a few clips, but now here we are dissecting his past sex life and comments on the topic. BUT, he did bring it up. We all wouldn’t know had he not. And I understand that drive to live out loud, to say what’s on our minds, sometimes flippantly depending on the context of the situation. I’m guilty of that plenty myself, won’t pretend otherwise. But what goes on the internet stays on the internet. Much of a bummer as that turns out to be at times. We’re all growing and maturing and unfolding our potential to whatever degrees. Life is a process. In our 30s we still can’t claim to have it all figured out. So much remains a mystery. (Sometimes more and more so over time, since the more we learn, the more we realize how much we can’t be certain about.) Even when we’re introspective and actively seeking out knowledge, we’re still limited by time and experiences insofar as what we’re capable of comprehending (and to what meaningful extent). Intelligence helps, but it’s not the end all/be all. Acquiring wisdom takes time. Comes at the cost of a number of failures, often enough. We live and we learn. Not a damn one of us has it all reckoned with to where we fully know what the hell we’re doing. Lots of good actors out here in the world, that much is undeniable.

Is this turning out to be somewhat of a defense offered on Milo’s behalf? Maybe. Offering it up on all of our behalves though. Because we are all stupid and misguided and have made some morally reprehensible choices (to whatever degrees). Sometimes people go beyond the point of social redemption — that can happen. Pedophiles do just that, in my firm opinion. Milo hasn’t done that in regards to what he’s said, IMHO. He has turned a lot of us off and made us seriously uncomfortable with his expressed viewpoint though. And that may likely impact his popularity (at least among thoughtful conservatives and libertarian-leaning individuals), as perhaps it should. Content matters when you’re a public figure. What you say and do gets scrutinized. Who you are matters in all walks of life. Our morals are what check the beastly aspects of our character. Milo happened to be more public than most and stated some things about himself that quite frankly creeped a good number of us out. Looks to me like he has a lot of self-reckoning to do. Just gotta work through it somehow. No clear and easy answer on how to do that though. He hit a moral wall, as to be expected. I, for one, am glad that wall does exist (much as it too might deserve to be challenged at times). Glad so many out here aren’t complete and total nihilistic moral relativists. Heartening to be reminded of that, even if Milo’s expressed views wound up being the most recent proving ground.

Part of me does feel sympathy for him, relating so far as I can based on my own history. Not sure what advice is of real value right about now other than that being humbled isn’t such a bad thing. Sometimes it’s our greatest teacher. Speaking from some experience on this, though admittedly still personally struggling with the matter. Wanting to get morally upright to a greater degree and actually doing so obviously aren’t one and the same. How we’re conditioned early on can construct a bunch of hurdles we have to then figure out how to surmount. Even when we’re winning the race in some particular area(s), those dark spots/shadows tend to wind up jeopardizing us eventually if we don’t effectively reckon with them. And I think that’s what we very publicly witnessed here. Strikes me as a bit of a tragedy actually, just to know a man not too much younger than myself is having to learn these lessons without the blessed sanctity of privacy while being forced to confront and hopefully sort it out for himself. Another reason why fame holds no appeal to me. Hard enough to grow up without the spotlights on you. In that respect, I wish him the best in coping and managing his life from here on out. Perhaps (hopefully) this recent “implosion” will ultimately prove valuable in his process. Implosions happen. And they can prove very necessary and long term in our best interest. Hard as it is to see that when it first hits though.

I don’t wish that man harm or hate. Do wish he’d figure out a way to open up about the sex parties he supposedly witnessed in his 20s. And about the “priest” as well if he’s still working with young teenagers. Sucks when assholes get let off the hook for doing depraved shit. Pain tends to pay forward. Helpful to always keep that in mind.

Hard Bastard’s take on the situation:

Leaving off on Millennial Woes’ video titled “Interdegenerational Milo”:

“Tough love” can sting… MW’s expressed views strike me as valuable in this discussion as well.

It goes without saying that Milo has a lot to further sort out for himself. So I’m just gonna leave him to that and move on.

Milo and the Freak Show

Not a big fan of Milo Yiannopoulos. Have listened to some of his stuff over time but am learning more about him in the last few weeks due to the riots at UC Berkeley. Then all this went down in recent days. Oy. Was already on the topic of pedophilia due to Andy Warski’s videos on that Omnipolitics16 guy. Then some Deep Web-related YT channel told of that Australian man convicted for creating snuff child porn videos in the Philippines.

Anyway, here’s the Drunken Peasants podcast from back in January 2016: episode #193. Relevant portion begins at approximately 51:26 in:

?t=51m26s

About 52:45 in they show a video from somebody who included some footage from Milo’s appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast.

Pausing 1:05:08 into that DP podcast…okay, I do comprehend the importance of distinguishing between actual PEDOPHILES (people sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children) versus HEBEPHILES who are interested in very young pubescent youths (in the age range of 11-14 generally). That is a noteworthy distinction because the two involve differing psychologies. That does matter. Because the Law does not make this distinction in its wording, the public is being misled. I do understand that and have openly discussed this since back in my undergrad criminal justice curriculum. But I also grasp that so far as legal purposes go, the lines drawn must be pretty damn clear in order to enforce them effectively. Hence why we have age of consent laws and yet there is leeway granted for youths only a few years apart in age, dependent on the state in question. AND the authority of the adult party in question. A priest or a teacher are in a special classification precisely because of their sway and influence over youths as well as the community-at-large. So they do deserve to be more heavily scrutinized due to the authority their positions grant them. Same with law officers.

Now, I’ve viewed several videos on this ordeal and read and watched Milo’s recent responses on the matter. Posted up his resignation from Breitbart speech. Watched Styxhexenhammer666’s first (now removed), second and third videos covering this topic. Watched Milo’s recent Bill Maher appearance. Read an article about Bill Maher basically defending the same thing back in 2007 and before. And am generally not a stranger to the controversy over age of consent laws and specific cases where victims claim they weren’t harmed, etc.

But I have to say that people who are sexualized young wind up seeming to mature sexually earlier. That’s apparently a byproduct OF early sexualization of youths. I understand it from my own perspective and upbringing, as well as through taking in so many, many stories from others over the course of my life thus far. Any defense of that shit does get me prickling with aggravation precisely because I do comprehend this complex situation personally and the mixed emotions that can and often do arise from it. And it does differ between hebephilia and pedophilia — that is true. But people who are sexualized explicitly when they are very young and pre-pubescent, it tends to incline them toward greater promiscuity once they do hit puberty. And though they are inclined this way, it doesn’t mean they are emotionally mature enough to handle the potential consequences. Sometimes that promiscuity continues on well into our 20s or 30s before we even seriously start grappling with its origins and its impact on our lives. All is not a bed of roses there. Many regrets are common for such terrain.

This is where I get to thinking a much more nuanced discussion on these matters certainly is warranted. But one of the problems that arises there is our own biases and sorting out how much of our opinions evolved out of a drive toward self-protection and/or “owning” our experiences. Though we may be made “stronger” as a result of what we’ve been subjected to, we also tend to get a bit mentally fucked up. Let’s be honest here. So our own relation of experiences on this topic can very easily be skewed if we developed close bonds with the persons we were sexualized by. Our loyalties wind up screwed up as a result, hence why our boundaries tend to become so loose and permeable. We don’t wish to live as “victims,” yet we can also do a disservice to others by downplaying such matters and trivializing them. So sometimes our contributions to such conversations wind up doing more harm than good since we’re coming from a place where that seemed normal to us, at least at the time. Or we had no basis for comparison to anything else. Even now, as grown adults, we can’t erase that early programming (which is essentially what it is). It’s a part of what all has constructed us into who we are now. In short, we cannot help but be biased there. It’s sown into us.

I’ll be honest. Milo creeped me out at times as well. Kinda like how Justicar did also, before he too came out with claims that at age 9 he felt sexually mature enough to consent to sexual acts with a man in his 20s. That was very disturbing to read (hence why I screen-captured it and posted it elsewhere on this blog back in 2015 — Justicar has since deleted the relevant videos). Sickens and saddens me to read that sort of thing because it definitely does serve as justification to pedophiles and hebephiles interested in pursuing young individuals, whether the one who experienced the early sexualization is aware of that or intends it or not. That really does matter here. It’s not all about the particular victim in question and their own thoughts on the subject; it’s also about the ramifications of sharing such thoughts openly and widely and allowing them to further entice those who are inclined that way. As omnipolitics16 demonstrated himself, these people tend to be on the lookout for anything and everything that supports their attempts to justify their actions against children. They want to believe it’s not so bad for them, that kids aren’t horribly harmed in many cases, that psychological injuries aren’t a direct consequence of their sexual activities with immature minors. They want to believe the pleasure they may experience in the moment trumps the potential for long-term pain.

Each individual child likes to think they know what they are doing. They see no problem with staying up super late despite it leaving them tired the next day at school. They would eat whatever they fancy if restrictions weren’t imposed upon them by external authorities. And they will harm themselves unintentionally in countless different ways if not provided proper and healthful guidance from others who genuinely care about their individual well-being.

There are lots of wolves out here in the world, let’s face it. Lots of selfish opportunists who will take advantage where they think they may be able to get away with it. Children are especially vulnerable in this regard, and that includes young teens who are in the process of budding into adulthood. We don’t yet know at that age what the wisest decision might be, what the long-term consequences may prove to be, how momentary slips can haunt a person literally for years. We had no way of understanding all of that back then. But that consideration never stops those who are out in pursuit for their own jollies. They may have been harmed themselves when young and therefore have fetishized what they themselves were subjected to (or whatever else their sexual compulsiveness drove them toward exploring). The effects spread out and can impact generations of people. This is certainly no small concern when countless people’s psychological well-being is at stake. Pain pays forward, in one way, shape, or form.

I also find it interesting how many homosexuals I’ve personally met who were sexualized early on as kids, whether in an outright abusive fashion or through grooming by older individuals they trusted at the time. Began noting that back in my teen years and have only uncovered more evidence of this trend ever since. Should look into what research studies might exist on the subject.

Anyway, today I listened to Styx’s update on Milo’s situation:

I find it very interesting what he said there about how the political Left isn’t so much in favor of NAMBLA types as it is in trying to justify Islam and its Sharia Law. Hmmm. I can see that, but I also see where both wind up justified regardless. It’s a disturbing trend either way.

Recently heard about what Salon magazine put out in the past. Rarely read that rag anymore. Gonna look more deeply into what Salon published in a new post.