• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About at_anchor

  • Rank
    - - -

Personal Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,403 profile views


  1. Do you flirt with the idea of suicide from time to time ?
    Do you flirt with the idea of suicide from time to time ?
    There is an interesting dynamic that can occur when one is suicidal. Ordinarily the suicidal ego structure is intensely contracted. This sort of contraction is caused by suffering in one form or another. The type of suffering can be manifold, I think often it is related to shame, hopelessness or loneliness. The ego structure is resisting reality because it desperately wants reality to be another way, causing friction that becomes intolerable to the structure.
    Through suicide the ego seeks to resolve that tension and resistance, in other words, the ego seeks freedom from itself. Freedom from the rigid, constricting and suffocating texture of the structure of the ego.
    The interesting dynamic I was referring to is that, the ego can realize that it's own death means freedom. I am not talking about some sort of thought, but a direct realization of the solution to this problem.
    "If I am dissolved, all my shame will be gone, because I will no longer care about being ashamed anymore. It will not matter!"
    "If I am dissolved, all my hopelessness will be gone, because I will no longer care about hoping for something. It will not matter!"
    "If I am dissolved, all my loneliness will be gone, because I will no longer care about being alone. It will not matter!"
    If I died now, everything would be meaningless. Everything I am right now resisting so much against, it will not matter. And then the ego realizes:
    Why then, do I need to take it seriously at all? What if I let go? What if I let go of wanting to not be alone? What if I let go of wanting to be something I am not? What if I let go of wanting something that is not? If I was dead, none of that will have mattered anyways, so why does it need to matter while I am alive? What do I have to lose? I have nothing to lose if I let go of everything.
    This is how Eckhart Tolle achieved ego-death. When the ego is inflicting so much suffering to itself, it builds up a tremendous momentum, a tremendous force. If the ego realizes that it's own contraction, it's own nature, it's own structure, is the cause of it's suffering, then it will turn around. It will look at itself, and realize the opportunity of that energy. It will shatter itself and what will remain is freedom. Freedom from shame, freedom from hopelessness, freedom from suffering. There is nothing to hope for and nothing to be lonely about, because it will not matter anymore.
    There is nothing to lose if you let go of it all, and that's what you want to do anyways. Get in touch with your own suffering, with your own contraction. With everything you want the world to be. If you were dead, none of that would matter. This means that all you need to do is live as if you were already dead. Then you will see the beauty and perfection of existence, because it will not matter anymore where it is beautiful and perfect. Your suffering will have served it's purpose.
    You must turn the resistance against itself. Make your ego realize that it is the source of all it's suffering, and that there is nothing to lose if it will simply let go. Let it go, and live your life freely.
    Look at this thread. Terror of letting go. If you are truly suicidal, why do you need to be afraid of letting go? See, you are not afraid of letting go. You want to let go. So, let go. You are one step ahead of most people, because you are willing to dissolve yourself. You just need to dissolve the right thing, the thing that is causing your suffering.

  2. Why life is better than death?
    Why life is better than death?
    This assumes, that after death you won't have any experience. There is no objective answer that can be given, why experience makes life worth living.
    However, if we want to go with the conventional definition of death, then we can say, that paradoxically death making life worth living.
    When you ask yourself the question why living is better than being dead, its basically a subjective question. Because any experience can be subjectively evaluated on the good and bad scale. You are the one, who evaluates an experience and put a value on it. So the answer can only be given by you.
    On the other hand, we can talk about generally speaking why people subjectively value life over death. For instance being able to
    have enjoyable, pleasurable experiences, to create, to connect with others, to  develop yourself, to express your unique nature in the world to have the ability to love to have the ablity to fall in love etc With life you have the ability to create. Lack of meaning is better than a deterministic meaning, because you can create the meaning yourself.

  3. The Invention of Individual Responsibility
    The Invention of Individual Responsibility
    Very interesting watch

  4. Why Lead Kills you
    Why Lead Kills you

  5. What is the difference between awakening and mentally illness?
    What is the difference between awakening and mentally illness?
    The whole teaching of "no-self" is problematic in this regard. The mind can get so stuck on the notion of no-self that it becomes blind to the fact that all is the God Self.
    The correct teaching is not no-self, it is God Self. Even though, of course, God has no self.
    I feel that neo-Advaita and Buddhist style teachings can get people stuck in no-self.

  6. Leo's straw man arguments against JBP
    Leo's straw man arguments against JBP
    JP does this all the time when it comes to political activism on college campuses. Like when students protest about LGBTQ rights or racism, he will say something like, "You guys are being foolish. Go clean your rooms first."
    But the biggest problem is how JP ignores many collective issues entirely. Like for example, climate change. I have not heard him talk seriously ever about taking massive collective responsibility for climate change. And we could find dozens more examples like this. When has he ever talked about taking collective responsibility for corporate corruption and lobbying or the excesses of capitalism? Never.
    The whole point is that our society and globe has serious problems because people are not looking at problems collectively. And stuff like heavy metal toxicity is directly one such problem. JP spends all this time whining about college feminists, meanwhile our entire population is being poisoned with heavy metals which can only be fixed with strict regulations at the Federal level which no conservative would ever vote for. So my example holds. It is not conservatives like JP who will clean up the water supply, it will be the Cultural Marxists / Socialists who he rails against.
    Here are collective issues which are not seriously addressed by JP or any conservative:
    Health care and Big Pharma Income inequality Pollution Climate change Corporate corruption & lobbying Regulation of Big Tech monopolies Excesses of capitalism Poverty, welfare systems Racism & sexism Reparations for slavery Access to broadband internet in rural areas Regulation of housing market Regulation of Wall Street Equalizing the education system so it's not based on real estate taxes Taxation of gross wealth Curbing excessive military spending Gun control to reduce mass shootings Shoring up voting rights Federal jobs programs Infrastructure Animal extinction, over-fishing, factory farming, coral reefs dying BPA and plastics in food And more
    Responsibility for all the above is shirked and offloaded onto the individual or perhaps the local city/state level.

  7. Do you have to Be a Psychopath To Become a Billionaire?
    Do you have to Be a Psychopath To Become a Billionaire?
    I believe psychopathy is on a range and not something binary. Some people have more of it. But when it comes to acquiring billions and billions of dollars, do you have to be a psychopath in order to make it to the top?
    I am not talking about millions of dollars. I am pretty sure you can become a millionaire without being a psychopath but when it comes to billions of dollars, i believe only the most cruel, cold and vicious people make it up there.
    You have to stomp on a lot of bodies and not really care too much about all of the bottom of the pyramid. It's like you have to be extremely vicious to be a warlord at the time of Genghis Khan and Alexander the Great. Both of these were ruthless mass murderers. You couldn't become Genghis Khan by being someone like Jesus or the Buddha. If the current billionaires were more loving and caring then i guess the current situation in this planet would be a lot better for all of us.
    Any thoughts?

  8. Pertinent Question on taxation on billionares.
    Pertinent Question on taxation on billionares.
    They don't have to be criminals to justify a 100% tax.
    There is no reason whatsoever that society should allow billionaires to exist. There is no right to be a billionaire.
    A conscious society would recognize that any individual holding over a billion dollars is harmful to the society as a whole, simply in principle. In the same way individuals holding nuclear weapons is harmful to society as a whole and it is thus not allowed.
    What you have yet to realize is that just the very fact of holding a billion dollars harms the billionaire, his family, his friends, his colleagues, and society at large. It is like being morbidly obese. It is not good for you and it is a poor allocation of social resources.
    See, if you had a billion dollars and you mother was dying of cancer due to inability to pay for her doctor, but you desired to hoard your billions, we would call that a sick situation.
    Well, that's what's happening in society at large today. And you are justifying it as normal and even as a right of yours.

  9. Pertinent Question on taxation on billionares.
    Pertinent Question on taxation on billionares.
    I don't care what the numbers are. The numbers are mostly arbitrary.
    I would be happy with 5% to start.
    The money wasted by billionaires would stimulate the economy far more if it was put in the hands of ordinary consumers.
    What you say is the opposite of true. Economic stimulus comes from pushing money down the hierarchy. Taxation does exactly that.
    The money Jeff Bezos wasted on his yacht could have gone to his employees to educate their children. The yacht has zero value to society. The education of 1000 children directly adds value to society in a massive way.
    It makes a huge difference how the money is distributed, or rather, who it is leeched from.
    It is not his money to begin with.
    There you go again. Like a broken record.
    What you call "self-made" is a lie.
    That's like citing to me a report that says that wealth of 18th century Southern plantation owners was self-made. Yeah, through owning slaves!
    Your definition of "self-made" is a socially constructed silliness.
    Imagine I enslave your children and make them edit my videos for free for a lifetime. Then on my grave I will write: "Here lies Leo. Self-made success story."
    We will reform the system by changing it so that billionaires are taxed out of existence.
    But they won't die. The people will still remain and still do all the same work they did before.
    It's not Jeff Bezo's existence that I want to end, but rather his ability to leech wealth from workers.
    I got nothing against Bezos personally. After we take away his ability to leech money from workers, he will still be exactly the same as he is.
    You are acting as through I am talking about killing all entrepreneurs. No! We just take away their ability to hoard money.

  10. Pertinent Question on taxation on billionares.
    Pertinent Question on taxation on billionares.
    Actually it's a terrible question because we already tax real estate and vehicles in this way.
    If you buy a $10 million house or a $300k sports car, you owe taxes on its assessed value every year. If you can't afford the annual tax on your $10 mil house, gov don't give a fuck, they will repo your house.
    Billionaires will have to sell off a tiny portion of their stock to pay wealth tax. How shocking!
    Why do homeowners have to pay 2% annual tax but stock owners zero? What sense does this make?

  11. Spiral Dynamics Stage Green Examples Mega-Thread
    Spiral Dynamics Stage Green Examples Mega-Thread