Open Thread

Open Thread #122

The Open Thread is a place for open discussion among my readers. Post anything you feel like sharing! From now on, the Open Thread will no longer be monthly. Instead, there will be a new Open Thread whenever it is adequate. The stage is yours. Go ahead!

The latest Open Thread is made ‘sticky’ to improve access.

Please consider throwing a few coins into the tip jar, and buy my books! They are great. Your support is greatly appreciated.

57 thoughts on “Open Thread #122

  1. Lately I am very much interested in learning more about conspiracy theories of Elites,Bankers and those handful of men(maybe white) who run the world.
    Can anyone tell me is it true or false.
    If true,then anyone share their knowledge and books where it proves that such things exist.
    I would love to have a closer look at them and how they run and control the world.
    Sometimes I wonder that if this is true there must a couple of families who are controlling the world since the past 2k years right!?
    Before that it was mostly Roman civillziations and other civilizations.

    1. I’m not sure if there are vast conspiracies. More mutual interests coalescing. Cultural Marxism and corporatism, for all of their bickering, seem to be winning the day. The best examples would be that feminism and multicturalism benefit corporations emensely.

      You can’t get anywhere in Hollywood, the media and Washington without towing the line. MSNBC has fired multiple people for supporting or criticising certain candidates. People who work for the New York Times are fucking brain dead zombies compared to regular Joe’s posting on the internet. Corporations influence the media through threatening to pull their advertising, or buying them outright. If you want tenure at a major University you better have the right views about social and economic issues. Commies control the social sciences and Randian fucktards control the economic departments. They even taught that derivatives were a good thing.

      We’ve all seen the results of this. So, the question I am on a crusade about is how the cultural left and economic right (supposed enemies) seem to be winning at the same time. A sure fire way to give people a false choice at the polls. Well, the only concrete evidence I can give you is that prominent feminist leader Gloria Steinem admitted to Mike Wallace that she once worked for the CIA.

    2. Research: The Secrets of the Federal Reserve by Eustace Mullins

      The Creature from Jekyll Island

      Industrial Society and its Future by Ted Kaczynski

      Tragedy and Hope by Carrol Quigley

      Research: The Bank of International Settlements which is the Central Bank of Central Banks

      Antony Sutton: Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler, Wall Street and the Rise of Bolshevism, etc.

      There are many works documenting the people who actually run the show.

    3. I stand with GoodLooking on this one, conspiracies are by and large bullshit, the larger the conspiracy, the larger the bullshit.

      Have you ever tried to run a simple small business? Even a family business? Have you ever worked in a large bureaucracy, like a corporation, a university, an NGO? Ever worked in a public service bureaucracy? Or an Army?

      Except for the last two (public servant and army), I have done all of the others. And the last two I have studied extensively, academically, and I know plenty of acquaintances that work in them. It is incredibly complex to get people to work together and coordinate to get anything done right, even when everything is out in the open. People have their own differing interests, agendas, values, and visions, some people have different and conflicting loyalties altogether, different government agencies have their own agendas that often conflict with each other, inside large corporations some branches or departments will undermine others. Also most people are stupid, mediocre, or both. Incompetence is the norm. Keeping a secret is near impossible.

      Even if you had only the brightest and most educated minds at your disposal, history is full of examples of “best and brightest” elites leading to some of the worst disasters (Corona crisis would be only the latest example of this). State bureaucrats are inefficient at administrating even simple things, and even when a policy is implemented the way its designers hoped, it invariably causes a lot of unanticipated, unintended and often undesirable side effects.

      Now try to run an organization like this but covertly, and get something done.

      Its nice to have one big story to explain why everything that happens is happening, and to someone to focus your blame on. Its also simplistic and wrong. The world is unfathomably complex for anything like this to be workable in the way people believe. People who peddle conspiracy theories have a penchant for cherry picking only the data that support their narrative.

      Sometimes things happen that seem to be coordinated, but in reality it is way more likely that many different actors are naturally converging on a broad agenda because it suits their own agendas separately.

    4. Sometimes things happen that seem to be coordinated, but in reality it is way more likely that many different actors are naturally converging on a broad agenda because it suits their own agendas separately.

      Is your position that it’s not a conspiracy if not everything was completely planned in advance? If you think the label “conspiracy theory” is the problem, then I have no issue with using a different term, for instance “subversive coordination”. It is clear that the mainstream media are in cahoots with the Democrat party, for instance.

    5. @Yash:

      If you type in the book titles “Ruled by Secrecy” and also “Clinton Cash” in Amazon, you’ll find those books and other recommended titles to peruse. (Of course, this may be controlled dissent in that the books available to read are heavily filtered and “allowed” by the elites.)

      Sometimes you can check out: https://conspiracies.win/

    6. @GoodLookingAndSleazy
      Thank you for this.I am looking forward to all the theories.Also whatever you mentioned sounds legit but a lot of people dismiss unpopular opinions as overthinking/crazy.

    7. @Yarara
      I understand your view point.Just that I need to find out more.Whatever you wrote makes sense though.
      Thanks for your time!!

    8. @Yash

      Your welcome. Hell, I forgot to mention that almost every politician in DC is the bitch of Wall Street, corporations, and the military-indusyrial complex.

    9. I would recommend mileswmathis.com/updates.html. You can start with papers that peek your interest, or choose some of the more introductory ones like Kennedy, Lincoln, Manson, etc. I would recommend the Ancient Spooks series. After some time you won’t be able to deny the connections that he found, because it’s always the same families that do the hoaxing.

      It takes time to gather the data points, but at some point even the circumstantial evidence becomes basically a fact. Sometimes it’s so ridiculous, I have to laugh. You can learn his method of looking for inconsistencies and doing geneological research to cover your own topics. I think it’s the best stuff on the internet, I’m not joking. Besides Aaron’s blog, it’s the only site I read because the rest seems like fluff at this point. He has also a lot of stuff about physics and art, if you like that. These are also areas that died during the last century.

      PS: My first post here. Thanks Aaron for this blog, helps me to stay sane in this world.

    10. I did not know Miles Mathis, but his site looks interesting. I’ll have a look later.

      Welcome to the blog, and thanks for your kind words! I have heard from a few guys that mine is the only blog they read, and that there is nothing like it out there. I tend to agree with this sentiment.

    11. I would recommend this book to everyone who is into “conspiracy theories”:

      https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/36606376-inadequate-equilibria

      We have this bias to assume, that the point of civilization is to make humans happy. But it is not. Civilizations just exist because they can exist, there is no goal in evolution.

      And so if we see something happen that is bad for civilization or human happiness, we have this bias to assume there must be some agency behind it (this also lead to the creation of religions)

      In the book it is explained how everyone following the incentives, can lead to suboptimal outcomes (basically, civilization gets stuck in a local minima)

      I think the current corona situation is a good example.

      Politicians are pretty much forced into making lockdowns. If they don’t do it, some people will die, and the media will blame the politicians for it.
      So the politicians are just following the incentives that exist for them.

      The media on the other side, is doing fear mongering, but not because of some evil intent, it is just that bad news generate more clicks than good news, and so they just follow the incentive to make more money.

      So it looks like there is a big conspiracy going on, but in reality you just have independent agents doing what is best for them.

      Basically, it is a coordination problem. Normally you need an external authority to resolve such problems, but there just isn’t one.

  2. Aaron,

    One theme that has been discussed often in this blog is that a woman who is, say, 30 years old, single, with no kids, and focused on her “career” (regardless of what kind of career that is) often suffers from poor mental health, and the idea is that such a woman is really not doing what nature intended a woman to be doing. In hunter-gatherer times, such a woman would be raising offspring.

    I really wonder whether a similar argument could be made for men. Let’s take a 30 year old male that is fixated on his career. Let’s assume that he’s actually had a fair amount of career success, and has acquired significant resources. But let’s also assume that he is single and childless – maybe he’s a lonely incel, or maybe he’s actually a Chad that’s having tons of casual sex with women. Is that really what nature intended a man of that age to be doing?

    I’ve met incel guys in such a situation who are basically on the verge of suicide. They’ve done everything “right” that would have secured them a wife 60 years ago – good job, car, house, etc. – but they’re “forever alone” because they haven’t looksmaxed, and haven’t put forth the rather substantial amount of effort it takes to get good at “game.”

    The case of the unhappy Chad is perhaps more controversial, but I can tell you, as someone that’s both had a steady rotation of fuckbuddies / one night stands and who has been in relationships, I found that being in a relationship really helped motivate me to do well in my career and put up with the stress it creates. I’ve worked with a lot of men with families and I’ve found that they are often very successful. Work may be really stressful at times, but the fact that they’re doing it to provide for a family gives them a huge amount of motivation.

    Of course, “providing” for some 20 year old that you don’t have kids with is rather different from providing for a wife and kids, but – if I can get a little Freudian – having a girlfriend who is significantly younger than me definitely has brought out my paternal instincts.

    So could it be said that, just as women weren’t meant to be single and childless at 30, neither are men?

    To come back to the evolutionary thinking, the one concept that I have not addressed is the case of the so-called “alpha male,” and whether Chad, by being an alpha, is actually succeeding wildly at what nature expects from him. But I would imagine that in hunter-gatherer times, such an alpha male would have lots of kids, whereas the contemporary Chad is often childless, so maybe for that reason, there’s something that’s just not quite right.

    Thoughts?

    1. You are mixing up cause and effect.

      It is not the wife and family which makes men successful, it is that women don’t marry losers.

  3. @ubermensch

    I completely disagree that women do not marry losers. I work with a number of men who are pathetic sacks of shit: fat, dumpy, always complaining, drinking their woes away, pillheads, etc. and these guys are all married. I have had a few admit to me that they are in sexless marriages even though they have children of a variety of ages or the only time they have sex is if their wife wants something. Mind you, only one of these guys makes six figures and that is my boss who is obese with multiple health issues and is the most NPC person you can imagine. This guy is letting his teenage daughter transition to a man. The rest of my coworkers make somewhere between 40-60 thousand yearly so basically average salary in my location.

    I know women who have married men they are not even attracted to and in one case a couple dated for over 6 years and never had sex even once, and he never even felt her breasts or ass. That is how pathetic people are. The guy is amazingly lower beta and she is your typical masculine controlling bitch who thinks she is amazing. The whole situation is disgusting and he is going to be getting cucked because she was making passes at myself and other guys while with her current husband.

    1. The real losers of the male population are homeless people and men who are in prison. And they are definitely not married.
      If you exclude those, you already have a very biased sample.

  4. I have Seen a really short Guy in my social circle guet a really hot girl (for me she is a 9 and he is 20 years old).

    I Can t really understand that.

    1. To me a 9 is bikini model caliber. Is she that hot? Does he have money?

    2. Too little info to comment on, except:

      Anecdotes are not data.

      All distributions have outliers.

      He may have other factors playing in his favor (status, $$$)

  5. Hey guys, this has probably been talked about before but I was wondering if anyone can offer their advice with what makes sex, great sex vs shitty sex. I think I lost a steady fuck buddy because I either busted too fast or was too selfish ie didn’t care if she came etc. I read somewhere (probably here) that getting women to orgasm consistently kind of keeps them locked in. Anyways i know experience is the best and you get better the more you do it but I think I may be focusing on the wrong things when fucking. I dunno.

    1. Thanks torsten I’ll take a look. At this point I think I’m decent at getting a girl into bed. My issue is the sex part. Atleast I think it is. I haven a above average slong so it’s not that. I’m just self reflecting here and trying to figure things out. Thanks tho.

    2. When I still had girlfriends, they always wanted to have sex with me 3-4x per day, so I guess I did something right after all. (as I would expect her to not push for sex if she didn’t enjoy it)

      This was my method:

      1/2 – 2/3 of the time when we have sex, focus on me. Just use her as a fuck doll. After I came into her, just cuddle. You have to understand female psychology. If she makes you very horny and you lose control over yourself, and she makes you cum very hard, that is very good for her self confidence. The biggest lie is that women don’t want to be sex objects. For the right man, they want to be a sex object.

      1-2- 1/3 of the time, focus on her. Finger her, eat out her pussy, massage her.
      One technique I used was 2 fingers in her pussy, while eating her out, and massaging her breasts with the other hand. With that I got all of my girlfriends to orgasm quite easy. (below 5 minutes normally)

      Also with one girlfriend I tied her up so she couldn’t move, then eat her pussy, and before she gets an orgasm, stop. Then repeat. Do it until she begs you to fuck her.

    3. And if you have a new fuck buddy, at first always focus on her so that she comes back. Then slowly shift to being more egoistic from time to time.

  6. We’ve recently talked about de-platforming (i.e. removal or de-monetizing) of various Youtubers and other guys who provide opinions that go against the mainstream narrative.

    I saw a news item about how Spotify has quietly removed 42 episodes of Joe Rogan’s podcasts. So that’s the other shoe that dropped after Rogan sold out and made that $100M exclusivity deal with Spotify.

    https://www.outkick.com/spotify-joe-rogan-delete/

    Just another way for alternate viewpoints being taken out.

    1. Joe was always a sell out. He’s controlled op. I used to like Joe. But what a coincidence that him and Alex Jones have been best buddies for a while now.

    2. I stopped following Rogan about 2 years ago, his interviews became less interesting over time, and started sounding like the same things over and over. After he went over to spotify I knew it was only going downhill.

      Wondering who will be next

  7. https://youtu.be/xnYqPjvfmj0

    Great video. Surprising how dumb people are. IMO covid isn’t even real. There is no virus. Yet people follow orders and never question things. I wounded what separates these sheep’s to people like this guy in the video. Someone once told me 90% are sheep, 5% are trying to wake up the sheep, and the other 5% rule over us.

    If people all just realized that we are perceived as goyim this will all just make sense.

    What I’m worried about really is this vax, I know I’m not taking it 100% and I wonder what the consequences will be.

    1. The virus is real but the plandemic is the result of overhyping it by like a factor of 20x
      Rofl at wearing a mask outside.

    2. If the virus is real then why do they use a PCR test to test for it?

      Also where is the evidence it’s real?

    3. The tests are mostly bullshit as they are way too unreliable to be of practical use.

      But common, you really think this is a globe spanning conspiracy involving 10s of 1000s of people?

      You need to apply Occam’s razor:

      Do viruses exist? Yes
      Did pandemics/epidemics happen in the past? Yes

      The easiest explanation is that the virus is real but our reaction to it is irrational.

    1. Reddit is literally cuck central of the planet. His wife had fun with Chad while he was working himself to death lmao.

    2. When women get cheated on everybody feels sorry for them. When men get cheated on everybody blames them.

    3. There are a lot of women/wife cheating threads on Reddit. Tho I’ve never been married I feel for the guys. That must suck. Reddit seems to attract odd people. I sued to go on Reddit daily long long time ago but now I can’t really relate to a lot of the stuff on there my more.

  8. I’ve recently watched some clips of Call of Duty Black Ops Cold War. There is a mission of infiltrating Russian KGB headquater Lublyanka. The interior of the building is well-designed (but not sure if it is accurate compared to the real interior.

    But I find this utterly ridiculous. No American special agents could get into this building, similar to no KGB agents could infiltrate CIA headquarter. It is a loathing propaganda.

    Most first person shooting franchises like Cod and Battlefield depict Russia and China negatively. It is not an exaggeration to say that modern video games like these are propagandistic products of the US.

    I don’t like China but I also don’t enjoy the demonization of that country either. Despite many of its shortcomings and bullshits, it is still phenomenal to see that country rises from ashes almost unaidedly.

    1. If the propaganda angle interests you, you may want to go down that rabbit hole on YouTube. At least a few years ago I came across quite a few videos that dissected the various Call of Duty games and pointed out how propagandistic they are. Today you are probably no longer allowed to say that.

    2. When it comes to propaganda, I think the US is lagging behind China or the former Soviet Union. Why? Because the free access of foreign media in the US. In the State, you can access virtually all kinds of Chinese and Russian media, like CCTV, ITAR-TASS, etc. White Americans would be understandably brainwashed, but not minorities like Chinese or Russians.

      This is a comforting truth. Nevertheless, if the US government decides to step down on this very freedom of speech, then we are going to live in a prison that is named “freedom house of the world”.

    3. Like you said, CQV, your average Chinese or Russian would see through propaganda where your average American would not. Thus, the U.S. government is in fact far ahead of China and Russia in that regard.

      “Free access of media” in America consists of a cartel drowning out the small signals of truth with a tsunami of propagandic noise.

    4. If you are in China, you will be totally brainwashed. There are no youtube, no facebook, no google, no blogspot, no wordpress. You are experiencing a locked-up prison. Foreign media are absent. Thus, it is the US that lags behind in propaganda. It is the freedom of accessing foreign information that I treasure in the US. The government has no business of sealing my alternative sources.

    5. Yet, the US government does precisely that. It is largely done via private corporations, i.e. the government mandates, for instance, quotas for women and minorities, and those people then push their crazy leftwing agenda. This is surprisingly effective as you won’t even rise in the ranks in any company if you don’t give at least lip service to the leftist mainstream. Some fields are almost completely closed to people with genuinely diverse ideas such as academia, which will try to get rid of you right after your Bachelor’s degree if you’re not a lefty. In fact, the most “prestigious” institutions will not even admit you if you are a conservative and don’t mask this fact in your application. Meanwhile, Stanford gives you a seat if you copy and paste “black lives matter” 100 times in your admissions essay: https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/05/us/stanford-application-black-lives-matter-trnd/index.html

    6. @Aaron Sleazy
      I don’t understand what is the relation between your answer and mine. I am talking about freedom of having access into foreign, opposed media. It is clear that the US allows the diversity while China does not tolerate it.

    7. The US allows just a token amount of it while the mainstream is controlled. In China, you only need to get a VPN. The Chinese could block that route but they don’t. It is merely one extra hoop to jump through, similar to us using Tor when we read our favorite sites online.

    8. “The US allows just a token amount of it while the mainstream is controlled. In China, you only need to get a VPN. The Chinese could block that route but they don’t. It is merely one extra hoop to jump through, similar to us using Tor when we read our favorite sites online.”
      That is a myth. VPN is very slow and China has found ways to control them as well. If the ban is not strict, why impose it? I have tried to install VPA back in 2013 before I left China but the speed is abysmally slow.

      That is when you could access VPN in China territory when you were there. Now, it is very difficult to do so, and you need to do it when you are still outside of China. Read this:

      https://www.tomsguide.com/features/are-vpns-legal-in-china#:~:text=VPNs%20are%20legal%20in%20China%E2%80%94sometimes&text=Yet%20to%20use%20the%20technology,foreign%20visitors%20have%20received%20one.

      You are evading the fundamental aspect of my point. In the US, you can easily access foreign media without any kind of restrictions. If you are not bilingual, then it is your problem, not the government. Think of millions of Hispanic who get access into media from South America or Spain. Such a huge diversity of sources of information doesn’t exist in China.

      All countries need propaganda and all countries shall impose certain restrictions on sources of information. Yet the degree of difference is staggering between the US and China. It is clear like crystal that freedom of accessing information is much more ensured in the West than in China.

    9. It’s an interesting take that countries “need propaganda”. In the case of the West, we are talking about a hostile elite that suppresses information whereas the Chinese government actively works towards improving the standard of living of its people. In the West, we have been on a decline for over three decades. Once the Iron Curtain fell, the hostile elites took off the kids’ gloves as they no longer needed to pretend that theirs is a better alternative. Suddenly, there was no longer any alternative (that’s the Thatcherite “TINA” way of governing).

  9. @CQV:

    I’m no expert in History, but the way I see it, in Western androcentric societies, i.e. the Patriarchy, it worked more or less like this: enforced monogamy for everyone, but loose rules against prostitution to allow men that outlet; prostitution is, as the saying goes, the world’s oldest profession, but prostitutes were rightfully shamed so as to keep virtuous and non-virtuous women apart; homosexuals were also shamed, but again, loose enforcement of laws against sodomy and, as long as they weren’t caught, a gay man could bang other dudes on the side while having a wife and being another productive member of society…

    Worked like a charm and advanced civilization. What would be wrong about going back to that?

    1. And why should men enjoyed such a freedom of sex and power, why women are viewed primarily as the pleasure of men? Why men are allowed to cheat why women are asked to be a good obedient housewives?

      “prostitutes were rightfully shamed so as to keep virtuous and non-virtuous women apart”
      The line between virtuous and non-virtuous is much more blurry. Some do it to raise her children, some do because of greed. Remember that slavery and prostitute are binded together. The same is true for women from defeated tribes. If we view humans are endowed with inalienable rights, why should we accept this inhumane phenomenon?

      “Worked like a charm and advanced civilization. ”
      Nonsense! If such a system was not morally reprehensible, why did China abandon polygamy? Why did almost all countries enforce monogamy? Right! Advanced right?

    2. “humans are endowed with inalienable rights”
      there are no such things as inalienable rights. Who has the power decides what rights you have.
      And there is nothing special about not giving rights to everyone. In fact we do it every day.
      There is a big group of people in society who don’t have full rights: children.
      We don’t give them full rights because they don’t have the capacity to decide for themselves, and no one sees an issue with that.
      I can use the same argument to not give rights to women.
      As soon as you give them rights, you get feminism, gynocentrism, socialism, and pretty much the collapse of society soon after.
      Patriarchy is the only system that works long term.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.