Pleasure’s false excuse

I don't know, but carnal desire would seem much more worthwhile and gratifying if it occurred piecemeal (after a relationship had been established), and didn't involve just one type of attraction, rather a whole/complete form of desire that encompasses understanding, and physical and emotional intimacy.

Understanding can only come from unlimited disclosure, and a willingness to do so, of each other's thoughts and feelings. From that understanding you create a bond. It is almost like our subjective worlds become one – something extraordinarily special.

Where sex is apparently essential within general society, it takes a back seat or, a standing of equal importance to all other elements of a relationship – it isn't the only reason.

A relationship focused on sex cannot offer anything tenable, or worthy of continuous ties. It lasts on one urge, and not an entire cause. When someone of greater physical attraction flutters by, one of the presumed partners will shift necessarily to the greater urge. It is a fancy of little connexion and attributes. Sigmund Freud's pleasure principle inherently misses a crucial component to existence – meaning. Attaining sex, for the simple reason of pleasure will push the human psyche into a closed corner. Man will face defeat by losing sight of the meaning of their pleasure.

Avoiding the self-defeatist approach of life, that of focusing on pleasure, one discovers that appropriate fulfilment is ancillary to holding meaning and not the meaning itself.

Putting it another way – one cannot pursue happiness, but rather allow it to ensue from the attainment of meaning. The former leads to the corruption of the self. Hence, sexual desire based solely on attaining pleasure without cause will inevitably falter.

I also question whether the serial monogamist is any different to the sexually promiscuous. If it lacks an ultimate purpose, it lacks raison d'être.

As Viktor Frankl hypothesises on the existential vacuum, sexual pleasure can be used by individuals, in certain circumstances, to escape from existential frustration. Pleasure elevates itself from a subsidiary to meaning and by that very turn, lowers one's self from achieving fulfilment.

To clearly state my position, if it hasn't availed itself to you yet, I hold a relationship as a significant step in forming a raison d'être. A loose and licentious attitude to my objective will only serve to impede my goals.

Mistakes

Mistakes are what life can amount to – a journey through errors and failures, which we should hold as building blocks towards accomplishment. My life contains many of the problems I had not wished for, but nevertheless had impressed themselves upon me. They have helped form me and define who I am. It demands a question: would I want to have lived my life up until now, any differently? I would have to say – no – for I firmly believe who I am intellectually wouldn’t have eventuated the way it has. I can say that my clarity of the world around me would not be present. I wouldn’t hold value on the small things that abound in reality and I most definitely would have maintained an overpowering level of close-mindedness and ignorance. The mistakes in my life have at every step been required to spur an appropriate counter-action, and with every such action a greater rise had followed.

These mistakes, which come in plentiful supply, have damaged my ego, spirit and being. The impact however is cleared up in one famous quote from Friedrich Nietzsche, what does not kill me, makes me stronger. In my life, I directly relate my mistakes to points at which my existence becomes more aware, and stronger.

Every time I collide with a challenge, I become a better person for it. At the age of 23, it seems (by my powers of generalisation...or observation rather) that people of similar age do not have a care, nor urge to identify the benefits of mistakes – even when they go through this cycle of rises, dips and greater rises. Acknowledging their importance in the establishment of an individual is crucial to gaining meaning through existence and as a direct consequence of a relatively defined existence – happiness. What must be demanded of the mind is validation from every task, whether successful or unsuccessful.

My lovingly uncouth affliction

I am Jesus, his equal; just as divine. I hold enough Godly characteristics to live forever, as Jesus does. It brings light to the possibility that a belief is a truth, and only requires a committed human to will my presence.

I am God and chief to my domain, because I have written that I am – I have willed it, and placed faith upon this objective.

A supreme defeat to these pretenders; they do not contain sufficient presence, as I do, to elevate ideas. They have no power! These Gods are idle, whereas I make tremors within this universe.

Did you not see me feed 1,000 poor malnourished people from one big mac, and provide unlimited coke from just one cup? I am an instigator of great happenings; you conjure my love, my strength, my Godliness, because I have urged you to do so – such is my way.

Your worries become broken, for my promises provide enough hope to quash ills – this is my divinity fronting your human weaknesses.

I listen to your prayers; I always know what you want. As a God, I can pick and choose which are answered. You cannot know which I have urged, for I enjoy mystery and confusion.

In divine circles, we must leave you in awe – this is why I do not answer you all the time. I like to keep things exciting.

A triumphant authority, I will guarantee your demise. I will tattle little about whether you head up or down – you’ll find out when I send you there.

I am your will to power – any conjured thoughts of action are merely part of my divine plans.

I have made you all different and set guidelines you can’t hope to meet. Since the way I made you was the way I made you, I live off the pain and suffering you have when you can’t meet my demands. But I love you.

Thoughts on ‘No One Here Gets Out Alive’

I’m not entirely sure why, but I feel fairly happy after reading this biography about Jim Morrison. It seems to offer an understanding of how life persists as a rollercoaster, speeding along, jerking at the bends, and evoking an enthralling desire to remain uncertain about what lay ahead.

The key perhaps is to take a serious grip on reality – push our limits, uncover that hazy future and live life with vigour and effort.

Jim’s mind, and talent as a poet, goes far beyond the superficial pop music that commonly corrupts our ears. He pushes his values onto us through his deep and adventurous lyrics that will for the listener, leave them in pursuit of more when the music is over.

When you hear the Doors, you aren’t merely arousing your mind. You are stimulating your spirit into a meteoric frenzy! You are catapulted into the dark universe in search of the little lights that catch your fancy. These are the feelings that allow a greater understanding of the group behind the lyrics.

The Doors are more than a band; they are a piece of knowledge you use to enrich the determination of the will, and sprout an expansion of the senses. Rather than living through life as an automaton, without self-perception and blindly swinging with the commons, you are given a key with which you can use to pass through doors, into limitless reality.

I tender no exaggeration here with a superficial attachment to times gone by. Jim’s life compels me to extend into the unknown and shatter normalcy; I beckon existentialism as sufficient for meaning and encouragement – take this however you wish.

Something I can never have

I find myself rewriting this for a second time, due to technical malfunctions. The Universe did not want me to issue my thoughts as initially intended.


I am plagued by mind's arrogance regarding the depth of reality. That is, increasingly I become impaired by the Universe and its possibility of infinite existence. Everything I see has a beginning and an end, and as a basis for consistency, believe the Universe rightly has both of these. With matter, the issue of time becomes irrelevant. Matter simply is, and, always will be. It neither has a beginning, nor end - it removes the requirement of a creator, and it removes the hope for purpose.

An unwavering demand for answers flows from within me. My strengths to achieve an outcome however, are locked like two poles of a magnet to the demand and not the actual answers I seek. It is a pathetic question, for which the Universe is not willing, nor able, to provide a conclusion. What is the purpose of everything? There isn't any. There isn't any particular meaning, there isn't any particular god wishing or egging for an outcome. There is no love to speak of in our living amongst this Universe. There is existence of bound atoms and not much else.

Awe, as emotion, drives me to take everything life gives - the good and the bad. The sheer remoteness of existence and the requirements to simply have come this far in time, remove any doubts about my expectations. The human mind's relentless attempt at enlightenment falls on deaf ears; I just want something I can never have.

How true it is what Thomas Jefferson had said - "Do you want to know who you are? Don't ask. Act! Action will delineate and define you."

For life to make progress, it takes human action. It isn't just thoughts, but objective manipulation that sees advances or movement within one's existence. Wishing won't make it so.

BNB - Is there light over the horizon?

For a man who despises fractional-reserve banking, fiat currency and anything related to money manipulation, the dabbling in margin lending over the past six months seems a retreat on the values and principles I stand for.

Confidence has unquestionably struck my largest investment – Babcock & Brown. Its value is 1/8 of what it was. My hope had foolishly rested in EPS, but when nobody wants a smelly pile of debt laden shares, the market can be brutal. Emotion is probably playing a part it shouldn’t have, and I’ve taken the stance of sinking along with the ship. When I tally up my stock listing and find where at a time was I once debt free, I now see myself owing more money than I have in stock! A brilliant situation.

There is nothing quite like living for a bank and watching your savings seep into a black hole.

Eric Idle is ringing in my ears: ‘always look on the bright side of life…’

A Destiny to Master

Taking hold of your presence in the universe is oft a great task to grasp. Your existence relies on your efforts to maintain itself. Without input your being within reality ceases. It ends abruptly, however strong the desire to continue.

This world offers you the freedom to think, feel and live. I argue however that it is the masses that are prepared to command other's individuality for their own personal gain, throwing liberty to the dogs. I do not call this a system of kindness or necessary human action, but taxation. Despite forever promoting the interests of the public, it is through the rule of government that humanity has become enslaved unwittingly. Through this, the goal of government and central planning becomes justified, but in no way does it subscribe morality to its cause. Plundering effort by the collective stakeholders is always theft; always an assault on liberty and your right to life.

Despotism holds a new name – democracy.

Should another have sway upon your life's dividend, I ask why? I ask how? I ask what right there is to challenge one's existence and force compensation where none is due. For every dollar that is taken from me, for every minute of labour I have contributed that does not return to me, it equates to just as much bondage – just that much of my life stolen.

Seemingly the world is created on non-effort; at least this is what a socialist may have you believe. That the world gives, or ought to give more than is distributed freely, is a fallacy that has no future in the millennia to come.

With those that agree with social freedoms, there is a tendency to place economic freedoms in a different category. If you support a person’s right to euthanasia (in effect, their right to do what they please with their life), and at the same time agree with redistributed wealth, there would be little consistency to your views. If consistency isn’t within your views, then there is no foundation to your convictions – there is no logic!

The nature of humans to divide and group certainly provides a strong inclination against freedom, but it can rarely be justified when looking at the core of our existence. We all have the right to pursue our own destiny, and at the same time, have no right to direct another’s. It remains yours to conquer and nobody else’s.

Anarchy, State & Utopia...

I’ll take a quick stab at defending anarchy (more closely, anarcho-capitalism), because it seems to be taking a bad rap from statists of all degrees with the perception it is only a Utopian ideal or ignorant et cetera.

My property is my effort. Indeed it is the ultimate expression of my effort; a mark of my existence. When does my effort become that of the state? What becomes of my effort when I have no definable right, but what others feel is just by the collective?

Consensus, or middle ground is the result of a group having their property taken by tax and getting it back in altered portions. How often is the outcome equal? And if it was equal, why contribute to the great bureaucracy of government in the first place?

I would say that democracy is a great disbeliever of morality within humans (perhaps second to religion). We are innately bad…

Joe down the road needs a hand up, so we need to coerce our terrible nation through tax to give him that hand. We can’t be charitable? We can’t be trusted to help that man?

How much do we pour out of our pockets every day to help find a cure for cancer? Is that through the wisdom of democracy? Or is it through the wisdom and morality of the individual willing to pass on his effort (albeit for altruistic gratification)?

I am growing more discontent with the LDP (Liberty and Democracy Party) simply for its tiptoeing around rights. Social rights are clear in the party…that is it. The consensus drawing on everything else is pitiful. To be honest it was the main motivator for finding another party outside of Labor and Liberal.

Participation in a democracy with clear property rights before the law is the only form of government that will hold any ounce of morality, and one that liberty and freedom enshrines.

I do believe in the rule of law, and I do believe in fundamental rights. Rights that cannot, under any circumstances, be contradicted. You either hold title over your efforts, or you don’t. There is no middle road.

I’ll give two quotes –

“The law perverted! The law - and, in its wake, all the collective forces of the nation. The law, I say, not only diverted from its proper direction, but made to pursue one entirely contrary! The law becomes the tool of every kind of avarice, instead of being its check! The law guilty of that very inequity which it was its mission to punish!” Frederic Bastiat’s The Law.

“Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law,’ because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.” Thomas Jefferson.

Your attention please...

Words, letters, sounds, everything you see; your perception and experience has been moved by me. Even the little voice inside you has been sent a stray. You may understand, but should you feel empty after reading this, too bad. I have taken a piece of your life, and made you dwell in a direction that would not have occurred should I not have written and projected this feeling of mine. Now, interconnected by experience, everything moves you. Because you can only be aware of what you are aware of, you have surely been altered. A reality altered on an ever changing course.

Your right to offend me

It looks like the offensive police have been out in force.

Deadman has pointed out an article where a Gold Coast teenager had been charged with offensive behaviour for wearing a 'Jesus is a cunt' t-shirt.

Click here to see the News story.

"The Reverend Matt Cunt [sic] of the Helensvale Baptist Church said it was sad people spoke about the Lord in such a way. "

Alright, so this guy finds it sad, and the police think it is criminal to be offensive.

Let's turn this around in an appropriate manner. I want all religious people to be charged for making false and misleading science, for pursuing their own happiness in an intrusive fashion (whereby it limits my freedom), denying the use of contraception in Africa where millions are dying of AIDS each year, their offensive anti-abortion protests to which I don't agree (hey, I find it offensive...), their psychological abuse of children, their physical abuse of children, their destruction of human innovation, their coercive abuse of the law, and the discrimination of minority groups.

Which is more offensive? Are lies not a crime far worse? These religious people are the ones that are offensive. They are the ones that should be muzzled. The truth is always more palatable than lies no matter how coarse...

Ok, I'm not so naive as to contradict myself. I know I'm offensive and I know they are offensive, but I'm not going to be silencing thoughts or opinions because they don't agree with me. Right or wrong, the truth will shine through.

The Egotistical Altruist: A Walking Contradiction

The outspoken altruist takes pleasure (they will deny this) in placing themselves at the forefront of human kindness. Claiming slogans of self-sacrifice to be the only way, and rousing (false) courage develops an appearance of moral fiber, to which the altruist will thrive.

I will not deny my pleasure in being an egoist. I will not however attempt to tax favour from people for lulling them with empty rhetoric. I will not deny what is clearly natural amongst us. The altruist will place others above himself to edify, and egotistically gain satisfaction from it. The altruist will deny it. They will deny nature, and claim themselves bigger for it.

Hypocrisy! A rationally self-interested being borne out of nature, denying what is inherent in it (principally the supremacy of numero uno) for a clear motive of an expanded ego. A twat – no less.

I say this only for the outspoken altruist – those that wish others to be like themselves; these are the hypocrites – these are the ludicrous and obscene. These people push an ignorant vision of global self-sacrifice. Would much be left? Can a being survive by placing others, at all costs, above themselves? If one can’t, then what should stop a group – the world – following the same fate?

I fear a world in doubt; a civilization unsure of themselves and not capable of standing out or achieving. Blind subservience to a lost cause will not improve our condition, but, rather, altruism is a drain on society and a leech on progress that should be torn apart with wide scrutiny.

I maintain that any person requesting or requiring people to drop their values of self-worth and live for others, is acting as the bigger man and taking the moral high ground to lift themselves above the population and achieves (for their own selves) precisely what they want others not to do. A position much to be ridiculed for the ignorance of their arrogance is undeniably evident!

I had typed this rant a while before discovering an appropriate term (thanks to deadman) describing what we all follow, knowingly or unknowingly - "psychological egoism".

Letter to a misguided party

Indeed a portion of the Liberal party contains pro-business ideas, but true liberalism provides no assistance or affirmation of a particular group. When we take on the name Liberal, we do not need, nor want a reputation for defending the ‘rich’. We rather wish to hold as our ideals, that of entrepreneurial zeal, individual action and responsibility, our rights to property and ownership, and above all, liberty. Liberalism is for the free and independent choice of all individuals; swayed by no special interest or group but the common right of all to be free to choose. Our means to achieve these ends lies in laissez-faire, free market devotion (in other words capitalism).

Capitalism has become a much hated term and consistently linked with “exploitation”. The vale of distinction of the employer and employee is immense. But, no greater fallacy has existed. It is always and ultimately the free action of individuals within society. The ability of men and women to trade at will, in terms that are favourable to all parties. Capitalism which has become corrupted by misunderstanding, means freedom. It is the liberty of individuals and allowing one’s own effort (in which I mean income) to be mutually exchanged. This is the freedom of Australian’s to expend their effort in any way they wish.

A person’s life is their effort, where should they be limited or controlled in the way they dispense with their effort, they have lost their freedom. They have lost control of their lives. They are no longer individuals of free action, but controlled subjects at the whim of the few that rule over them.

The elimination of their basic rights to ownership over one’s own body, life and effort will never allow for a betterment of humankind and will always work in the reverse.

I will repeat again. Capitalism is not about the employer or employee. These two parties are almost irrelevant, or at least should be considered conjointly. It is the consumer which holds the power in the market. Or, more rightly, the market is the consumer. The consumer is without doubt the individual who chooses to spend their property and income on items that provide and satisfy them adequately. It is each and every Australian that maintains choice of where to shop, eat and live and provide for competition.

It is however, government intervention that limits the choice of the consumer. It is the government that erodes competition in a free society. Central economic planning, whether by minimum wage, fixed prices, subsidies or tariffs, will always limit the power of the consumer, which of course means you. When government decides to play with prices on products, it plays with you. If government levies a discriminating tax on a product, it has burdened you. When government provides a service by monopoly, or even allows a corporate monopoly, it has decided for you. Government as an institution has no faith what so ever in you the consumer.

It becomes largely ironic that the consumer elects these representatives to do the thinking for us and eliminate our right to choose. We elect these people with a lack of faith in our own capacity to think and act. In this climate, we are not able to live as peaceful, civilised Australians, for that is precisely what our government bureaucrats take away.

Milton Friedman put it wisely in his book Capitalism and Freedom where he said “underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself”.

As I have been listening to the various members of the Liberal party speak on policy direction (not the policies themselves), I have become extremely worried about this leaving behind, or ‘dumping’ if you will, of our very beliefs in the direction this state or country should be heading. Instead of allowing what we know to be right forming policy it becomes what ever the voting public can eat out of the ever growing government pie. This idea of consensus, or even moving to accommodate what has been proven wrong over the centuries is extremely disappointing. To this I refer to our middle class welfare which is now common place. We have lost confidence in our values, and sold-out our ideas on what is purely and simply a pathetic attempt at vote grabbing.

To be frank, if the voters of this country want high taxing, high spending government, the Liberal party would never be their first consideration. Let them vote Labor and watch this nation sink. It offers little help to the party to be playing ‘Big Brother’ and giving the ‘poor guy’ a hand as Labor will always hold that ground.

I find it extraordinarily surprising that I have to present to this party a reason to return and focus on our home ground; almost as if the concepts that the Liberal party had once adopted as core beliefs are thrown a sunder by false and ignorant consensus building. The party may lose it’s way at an increasing pace if we continue to ‘toe the line’ on flawed policy being spat out by the socialist governments presently in power.

Our party can, and without doubt ought to be focusing on policies that remove these boundaries on competition and choice in the market. We ought to drop tariffs as they drive up the prices of goods in society, taxes ought to be low, for each dollar extra in the hands of consumers is a dollar extra towards the production of goods that add value to the economy and thereby increase the standard of living.

The key to our focus ought to lie in increasing the maximum level of production. Each policy designed with this in mind will assuredly proceed with a real and clear advancement in the nation’s standard of living.

What we have to do as firm believers in free-enterprise, is prove how they can benefit everyone. We must define every step of the way with clear rejection of policy based on faith and feeling. Rather than tout voodoo economics like the socialists, we need to present our beliefs as truisms – facts that are undeniable.

To pull Tom Paine’s banner, it is to us that will promote what is simply ‘Common Sense’. We can show that we do not take one particular group or special interest into perspective, but the whole of Australia. Not just looking at the effects of policy on one area, but on everyone. This is our reason for a common sense approach to the direction of policy in this party, in this state, and in this country. We do not favour the employer or the employee, the rich, or the poor. We favour what is true.

Government holds a monopoly over the law, and with such power we must constitute ethical conduct as a supremely undeniable principle. This means the refusal of politics toying with the haves and have nots in society. Without coercing one through restriction or redistribution, we will axiomatically prove an ideology with no contradictions. We will show the left that it is acceptable to disagree, but that it is their principles that will not allow freedom and work strongly against society through mystical, dogmatic perceptions of the mechanics of human interaction and cohesion.

We favour each and every person in this country, and their rights to just and equal treatment from the law. The delusion of getting ‘something for nothing’ must be quashed.

This is common sense. This is right. This is liberal.