Carl-Richard

@Raptorsin7 Tell me what "Zionist world order" means and I'll tell you what "all Jews" means.

Again, how many Jews are we talking about? If that is not explicitly stated, then we're back to the ambiguity game.

If the amount of jews is not clearly stated, that is a problem. Is your idea of evidence him saying his true views explicitly? Do you not see the problem with that given what I've just said? He thrives on ambiguity. Here is an idea: if there is even a slight indication that somebody might want to kill just any amount of Jews, should that not be enough to completely disregard them?

How many Jews is that exactly?

When you think that Jews rule the world and you say "who runs the media? Globalists. Time to kill the globalists" or "what can you and I do to a state legislator—besides kill them?", or when your rhetoric is indistinguishable from that of a nazi (white supremacy, holocaust denial, antisemitism etc.) and you've stated explicitly that you're deliberately hiding your true views, and that you're constantly seen hiding behind irony and jokes, it sort of says itself.

The fact that you actually don't know that is the problem.

Nick Fuentes wants to kill all jews.

They're talking about Destiny's recent IRL streams with Nick, and Mr.Girl wants Destiny to hold Nick more to account for his views. I wrote a comment after pausing at 2:04:00: Then 40 minutes later, at 2:48:55, that was the exact argument that made Destiny reconsider. Imagine if I could've jumped in and saved 40 minutes of spinning in the mud

McKenna had a period where he was scared away from psychedelics. I think he started hitting on the more spiritual ramifications of tripping, and he didn't like it. I believe McKenna used psychedelics primarily as an insight-making tool, of the intellectual and visionary kind, not as a self-help tool. So intention and cultural machinery matters a lot. You might hit on the same insights without it (like I think McKenna did), but you might interpret them differently and find them undesireable, which is of course not a surprise. Hardcore ego deconstruction is no joke.

Can you give an example of something toxic and non-toxic?

Thank you for being so succinct.

??? Did I write "Andrew Tate" as my male role model in that thread? The only thing I've learned from discovering Tate is that I have a similar kind of energy inside me that I've been neglecting most of my life and that I should work on integrating, but this has nothing to do with buying Boogatis or reverting to ancient gender roles.

I never said he wasn't a piece of shit.

I remember back when I first started smoking weed, I felt that a part of me was starting to fade away; that neurotic and conscientious part of my identity that was nagging me about what to do and who to be, who and what to care about, and who cares about me, and it struck me as both freeing but also a bit eerie. "Am I just letting a part of me die like this? Who could I be if I didn't hide away from these feelings? Why are those feelings there in the first place? Am I maybe supposed to have them?" Anyways, soon this feeling, along with pretty much any feelings about that aspect of myself, fell on the backside of my mind for years as my life was crumbling... which eventually lead me to spirituality and my first awakening. There the same thing happened. Suddenly my mind had entered this very different place; quiet, serene, but also empty and in some ways severed from an even larger aspect of myself. It was on a completely different scale than before, and this same eerie feeling caught me: what have I lost in this new change? Have I forgotten something? Not many days ago, I remembered back to this eerie feeling, and then I viewed it in context with my current self who is 6 years older, and then I realized: maybe I have forgotten something. This idea of self-transcendence being preceded by self-actualization, of burning karma, of uncovering the shadow, is what my mind was trying to tell me about all those years ago. What I was trying to ignore through substances, and then later meditation, was the very thing I needed to face. It's so obvious, because the same feelings are still there, only magnified and projected out into my actual surroundings: my lack of social aptness leading to less relationships, lack of direction and decisiveness leading to being years behind my peers, etc. That change cannot be reversed either. My mind will always be different. There is no anti-weed or anti-meditation. I'm also intrinsically less inclined to address those feelings, as I've become accustomed to bypassing the entire machinery. Neither did it help all the spiritual bypassing tropes I was engaging in ("there is only now" = you don't need to work on your future; "practice is ego" = self-defense mechanism for having squandered my plans to join my friend to a year of music school, etc.). Anyways, the lesson is that the thing people call the ego, you should probably listen to it sometimes, because it does have say in your life no matter what you think about it. Then again, maybe I wouldn't be here at all if I didn't take this path. What did I actually lose??

You're talking about concrete things. You want me to make you a grocery list for things to do. I'm doing something different. I'm talking about abstract concepts from which you can derive which things to do. If you can truly understand the concepts that unite all healthy things, that is much more powerful than just following a list, because then you're the one who knows what to do, and it creates intrinsic motivation towards applying that knowledge. This goes back to meaning again: merely engaging in the process of meaning-making; of making sense, of understanding; is in itself healthy. I'm trying to make you do something healthy

Ok.

You make it sound like the police was hunting him down. He said he moved because there is generally a lower chance to be falsely accused of rape. There is no #MeToo hysteria there.

Dispelling false information makes me a supporter? I'm disappointed in you.

That is what you should absolutely not do.

Why? Well yeah, childhood conflict and trauma is not everything, but it's something. It's fascinating how accurately trauma can predict behavior. There was this one case study of a lady in the ACE study who was a victim of childhood sexual abuse by her grandfather, and she was exclusively working night shifts at an elderly care home, because then all the old people were asleep (and not able to hurt her). Illusions exist. They just aren't what they appear to be. Even a criminal has to discipline their id. I experience the superego every day as my voice of conscience ("do the dishes", "take out the trash", "deliver that assignment", "read that chapter" etc.), and id as my impulsive animalistic side ("I want to play videogames, jerk off, eat more food, sleep" etc.).

I'm talking about what is common across all those things: meaning. It's not enough to talk about things. It's also about the approach to those things. Meaning is not just structure or order. It's dynamic, self-organizing, intelligent. It's that which orients you between order and chaos. It's optimal grip, elegance, balance, flow. It's resilience, self-sustaining, vitality, organic, aliveness. It's morality, reason and consciousness. Like meaning, I approach the concept of health as a deep metaphysical thing, not just as something concrete like diet or exercise. It governs everything you do. Every action you undertake is either more or less healthy, and exactly how that works has to do with meaning. This is also not just me. The mainstream is also going in this direction: the biopsychosocial model, salutogenesis, anti-paternalism etc.

Wut

That's a stretch. It's easy to view your childhood development as a conflict between lower emotional desires (id) and sociocultural expectations (superego), that most of the conflict is unconscious, and that the "resolution" of that conflict (adulthood) is often not unproblematic. Then you have the need for therapy, and Freudian concepts can be useful for structuring that process. The way that psychoanalysis generally focuses on the past for understanding the present is effective for some conditions more than others (e.g. CBT is generally more "now"-oriented and effective for other conditions). The ACE study is one example of how many problems in the present can be anchored in the past.

@thisintegrated Lol. What @Raptorsin7 said is accurate. Tate has debunked all of these points, and his explanations sound way more probable than what these sensationalistic headlines are trying to paint him as.