BlueOak
Member-
Content count
2,647 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by BlueOak
-
-
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. -
On 10/05/2025 at 11:21 PM, Never_give_up said:I think I will die a virgin. I am sure to be honest.
I have zero personality, zero humour, I am 5'6, I am not intelligent.
I workout a lot because when I was fit I got a lot of attention from women many many years ago, but I don't know if it will be the same if I achieve fitness levels again. I have way much more muscle than before and women don't like too much muscle.
How do you people or people you know cope? how to cope? how to live without regret and pain from the primal desire that can't be fufilled? What would you do or do in my position?
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. -
51 minutes ago, Ajay0 said:In a demonstration of its highly regarded diplomatic prowess and capabilities, India has patched up its relationship with China in recent times leading to pulling back of troops from border regions and easing of relations.
Indian and Chinese leaders were seen interacting well in the recent BRICS summit in Kazan and the G20 summit in Brazil on November 18-19.
In the recent conflict with Pakistan, India , along with a military victory won a diplomatic victory as well after agreeing to a ceasefire.
On the other hand, the war in UKraine is still raging with the potential of a nuclear holocaust that can end the nation states of US, Europe and Russia on a permanent note. The war has also increased economic stress on the average global citizen due to inflation and higher prices.
So most of the mischief over here is done by the west who seems not to have learnt from the two world wars that came up in their midst, and is now going to foolishly blow themselves up to the amusement of the world around them.
Both India and China are ancient civilizations which has spent the vast majority of their time in peace and enjoyed good relations.
It was only in the latter half of the last century that they saw limited battles for the first time with few casualties (compared to the european ones) .
Europe which is of recent civilizational origin and was living in a barbaric state for long periods when the Indians and Chinese were living in an advanced civilizational state, has not yet known large periods of peace and is compelled by the momentum of its conflict-prone past to pick up new fights and conflicts so as to assert its perpetually threatened and insecure collective ego.
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.
-
38 minutes ago, Ajay0 said:All this amiability came up because they have been heavily traumatised by the two world wars that came up in their midst and noted for its sheer brutality and mind-numbing violence, and they just don't have the stomach for a new war amongst them.
Also european population is ageing and reducing while that of immigrants from asia and africa are increasing leading to greater heterogeneity and multi-culturalism as well, dissipating the conflict-prone conditioning of a homogenous society.
As Eckhart Tolle remarked, "If you live only in one culture for the first 20 years of your life, you become conditioned without knowing it."
Both India and China were ancient civilizations that enjoyed peace for very longer periods of their national existence and this is why they have a billion plus population which europe in its totality never achieved (and probably never will) due to its frequent wars and violence including the present ukraine one.
The two world wars 70 years back cannot be dismissed just like that and what has happened obviously stems to spiritual, cultural and sociological deficiencies in the western thought process that must have its consequences.
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 -
1 hour ago, Ajay0 said:Europe has seen large number of wars fought on artistocratic, nationalistic and imperialistic reasons.
The two world wars in the twentieth century originated in europe killing over a hundred million people and based on competition over colonies and expansion.
The Slav genocide perpetrated by the western nazi europeans in eastern europe including present day ukraine killed over a 25 million slav population over there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalplan_Ost
A positive that came out of the ferocious infighting between the european colonial powers is that they were weakened to the point that they could not hold on militarily or economically to their colonies in Asia, Africa and latin america resulting in their independence.
Even in the latter half of the twentieth century they saw the cold war and wars in serbia, bosnia, Georgian-Ossetian conflict, turkish invasion of cyprus, unrest in Kosovo, war between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and many smaller conflicts too long to be listed here.
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. -
22 hours ago, kbone said:The problem is that the region lived as an integrated whole for thousands of years until the partition in '48. Sure, there have always been attitudinal differences, but they were worked out as communities, again, have done for thousands of years. The division along geographical lines were mangled and of course that was turned into an all out 'reason' to hate and be bitter towards one another. Now, there's religious fervor and strong tools for psychological manipulation on populations still struggling with varying degrees of basic survival and upward mobility.
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. -
5 hours ago, Jodistrict said:In this situation, Sadhguru is right. Pakistan can’t be allowed to use terrorism as a method of covert warfare and then claim their state wasn’t involved. India has a long history of being brutalized by Islamic rulers for centuries and they just aren’t going to take it anymore. The forces of darkness in the world are strong and the light can be snuffed out. Modi is a lion protecting the Sanatana Dharma. Kaishmir Shaivism is starting to make a slow comeback. This knowledge and culture is worth protecting for the sake of the liberation of the entire world.
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.
-
6 minutes ago, zazen said:What’s gotten into India - they’re escalating big time as if it’s Israel striking Gaza and not a neighbouring country they have nuclear parity with. Bonkers.
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.
-
3 hours ago, Sugarcoat said:high interoceptive awareness or they are just more sensitive to junk.
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. -
There is less likelihood of Russia being able to pull off its objectives in the east of Europe, merely because they are stalled in Ukraine. If they don't get past Ukraine, then they don't get into the baltics, Poland, Hungry or Romania etc . They still have enough manpower to burn but unless China really ramps up its supply of arms the best they can hope (and are trying to do) is change EU governments by Russian and BRICS-backed money.
There are many reasons why Russia wants to reach Polish territory, I could list hundreds and have done repeatedly but there is little point as those who don't want to read them or acknowledge other factors, simply don't, it fits their narrative better to ignore anything but one or two talking points. -
9 hours ago, Someone here said:To me it makes no sense .you should be searching for happiness not for suffering. Am I wrong here ?
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.
-
Authenticity vs A Created Reality that I want to experience.
It's a tough duality to collapse. This seems to repeat in an endless dance throughout everyone's day to day experience. -
9 hours ago, Raze said:India provided no proof the Pakistani government was involved in the attack
That's why I said Pakistan, not the government of Pakistan.
In the mind of the average person you won't see a difference. That's why they say America, not the government of America for example. Or Russia not the government of Russia, the distinctions are not made in the general populace, thus their elected leaders either are of that mind directly or have to respond to that.
I usually go along with it, then every so often I restate that most people just want their basic needs met, they are the same the world over. 6 Human needs conversations, etc.
https://www.tonyrobbins.com/blog/do-you-need-to-feel-significant
https://www.earlyyears.tv/the-6-human-needs/
https://tealswan.com/resources/articles/relationships-and-the-six-human-needs
Then it just becomes a matter of how to satisfy those needs with the least amount of suffering globally, and if we want to take that even further, the most amount of joy/love/gratitude, but that's not usually the conversation we are having. -
There will be a certain level of conflict. We can't ignore that we have a far right government in India and a Military dictatorship in Pakistan. India has threatened the water of Pakistan and escalated in Kashmir previously, Pakistan have killed people in India, and now India has launched missiles. Major countries around the world have already lowered the bar for invasion and set a precedent for doing it repeatedly, as well as pumping out more war industry to assist it (excess arms and production or the ability to produce arms) The civilian industries such as media or the collective mind of each nation and individual expect it. Along with electing leaders that represent strong stances against threats matching that expectation or fear.
Each war makes more war likely.
They are already above what they've been at before, with the current governments further right than ever.
The wrong missile hits the wrong person, the wrong commander or official gets killed, that'll be it. I want to say it won't go into a full scale war, but I can't call this one; its too close to being either. The only thing is the nukes, it may pull them back, it may not. -
Eh.
30 Seconds into a video of hers.+ Female
+ Pretty
+ Engaging
+ Extravert
+ Charismatic
+ Interacting with her community
+ Funny Social Commentary
+ Self-deprecating/humble
+ Lighthearted
+ + + + + + + etc
We'll add lucky to that also. Because any youtuber doing well had a certain amount of luck, even if they had everything I just listed going for them and more. Do you know the percentile of those doing well on youtube, hint, its like winning the lottery. -
Come be a cat for a few minutes
Love these, sorry if they are already posted
-
You are never a victim.
You are always the creator.
-
36 minutes ago, nerdspeak said:However, he has a tendency towards grandiose self-referential victim narratives.
Like 99.999999% of the world, we all create victim narratives, me included. Until someone realises they create the entirety of their experience, accepts that, and readjusts every single thought or pattern they enter into, changing themselves from the victim to the creator. But this would mean they are ready to finish human experience and accept that they are creating their own universe/experience.
in Society, Politics, Government, Environment, Current Events
Posted
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.