Manliness is ephemeral and should be meaningless but manly is bold and sometimes desirable

Maybe there is a better way of defining this pride of self, culture and mental toughness; but my definition of this definitely overlaps with manly. 

What is being manly to me? To be manly is to make a single binary decision that can be defined as being bold, having muchismo or of what your base instinct of maleness demands. The crucial detail is this is that being manly is this one decision. You can make a lot of decisions that are manly, in which case you are consistently manly, but I have not and choose not to define this as manliness.

Look at the mucho-roid men of the internet like Andrew Tate. They have made this cult of man where their objective is to make as many manly choices in life as they can. They can't physically bend in pictures since that they believe that is beta, thus being not manly. They are consistently money motivated and have this internal hatred or looking down on women, cause it is manly. They choose to idolize the male machismo, defied as big engines cars, guns and brash inconsequentialism. They strive for the Wikipedia definition of it,"a strong sense of masculine pride: an exaggerated masculinity".  I can say that yes, they are more consistently manly than me or many others but they do not achieve manliness since this can and should not be defined by men.

Being manly might be desirable but it is not always synonymous with wisdom, kindness, e.t.c. Being manly is choosing to leave bed at night to start work on a side project, A single binary choice to get up, leave your wife sleeping and work on an ambition. It is sacrifing job and livelihood to go help and be with a friend, a single binary decision that sacrifices your job for for the sake of someone. Being manly is deciding to leave a relationship that lacks respect for you, a single binary choice that sacrifices love, happiness and even the future for the sake of a virtue or honorability. Being manly is sacrifing physically, emotional and even financial welfare for family, a single binary decision that cripples, destitutes and impoverishes you to help out your family.

I can say that I have not always been manly. Sometimes, but not always. It is only one of the gauges on myself, a threshold of what I believe is the man thing to do. It is not the only gauge, it is not even the most important one. As long as I don't strictly adhere to this mucho-ness, I can consider wisdom, kindness, fears, laziness, appeal and other factors in my decision making.

 I choose to never define manliness. That is up to others to define. If a woman chooses to see Muscular and physical prowess as manliness, more power to her. If public perception chooses to equate monetary power and materialistic affluence as manliness, good for them. if society equates manliness with mental bearing, that's fine. They can say only guys with dauntless spirits, unlimited courage are manly, that has no bearing for me. Manliness is ephemeral and nebulous. To try and define it is not only hard but doesn't help me in any way whatsoever. If women, the public and even society does not view me as a man, it hurts, but bears no importance to how I view myself.

Of course, this is my personal definition. It comes from my kikuyu culture, my personal philosophy and pragmatisms. It is not stoically defined and able to morph. It is what I will bring to future generations of our family. I do hope that the future generations of the family have a better definition of being manly. Maybe there is already an existing definition that can be defined without the "fixed in stone" gender roles. For now, I think that sometimes I need to be manly. Sometimes.

Ps. I saw a tik Tok of a guy that was very upset that people redifined "literally" to mean the opposite of literally. It was hilarious but understandable. Maybe this is what I am doing here. Please follow your own definition of manly and don't adhere to mine. Please don't take offense to me redefining the word.

Pps. It is probably not manly to end my thesis of being manly with an apology, but whatever.

To stir up Hope

I'm obsessed with the activisim that you do beacuse to me it seems inefectual. What is the best thing that you hope to accomplish as an activist individual? I would say not much

You can say that you will soon have the power to vote, but as an individual what good does that vote do? In Kenya they will take your vote ,throw it in the trash and write in who they want, True fact.

You could say that you will influence someone else to make a difference but again, what will changing one person's mind on one given issue accomplish? Hell even if you convert them like how the religious do their conversions and have them believing all that you believe in, is that the best that can be done? Using Logan Paul's phrasing; if your goal was to dent the universe, is that the biggest dent you could have made? Seems kinda small to me 🤔

And the other thing that worries me with the activisim that you are a part of is all the baggage that comes with it. Being influenced by these groups that you have come to identify with means being influenced by the positives and the negatives that they preach. We all involve ourselves with at least one useless endeavor but it would be bad if we were swept up by group identity to dedicate our hearts to something that will never give any payback.I have this horrible nightmare of you marching for a whole night cause some random white person said nigga or something and your activisim group decided to march for that. Similarly, I really do see you in the near future taking part in a riot organized by BLM when they finally hear Trump say nigga or something. In scenarios like these, your efforts are effectively inefectual.

These are some of the bad things that are associated with group think, there are good ones for sure but looking at some of the movements I see you aligning with, those are not many.

I think of myself as a human, able to identify with any problem and as a critical thinker looking for solution to those problems and prioritizing on the immedieate problems and those that I have a feasible and direct solution for. I don't see my role in this world as a rabble-rouser whose role is to raise alarm for said issues. I don't like to view problems with filters based on ethnicity, feelings, history, injustices e.t.c. I identify each problem in society, community or the world irregardless of it's misliers as what it is,a problem. I don't like to dig up meaning(conspiracy, bias, bad intent) where there is not. This is a critical thinker and it seems to run antithetical to the mindset involved with the group think in activism.

I take pride when I see people solve the worlds problems with that mindset. When I think of us (you and me), I think of people like Linus Tovards(founder of Linux). When he lacked an OS he could work on-he didn't join the thousands begging or demanding Microsoft, he built his own OS.  To quote him, talk is cheap, show me the code. It might be a better use of your smart ass to try and solve the worlds problems as a critical thinker rather than an activist.

Just saying.

Relationship questions

What would it like to be as an dyed in wool atheist to date or even have a significant relationship with a deeply fundamentalist christian. Would it have to be that there are off topic things that are never mentioned like religion. Would there be terse conversations about religion such that in the end of it, there would have to be a conversion or a breakup? I know there are different ways that many couples can and do go about navigating this dangerous and charged topic, but in the end after many years of life together, what is the net result? I'm curious to know whether it would have been worth it for them to have pursued and preserved this relationship.

General MacArthur was a dick with a boner for victory

General MacArthur was a dick with a boner for victory. This is a claim I am making about one of the greatest icons in the history of modern day, and through about a page of writing it will become clear that there is sufficient reason to take this claim seriously.

I have little fault with the generals early life, mainly because his early life was a quite one. He did benefit unfairly from his fathers military history and his mother's heavy handled nepotistic advocacy but that was unavoidable on his part. His actions in world war one certainly proved that he had a very good military acumen and deserved to be in a leadership position. But his late life is full of alot of dismissive shallow thinking and mistakes that undeniably caused harm and made the world a worse place.

In regard with his campaign against Japan, Why did he urge the Philippines to fight and not to surrender on the onset of the war?was his mind already on the end of ww2 and he was thinking of depleting Japanese troop numbers or did he really believe he was getting reinforcements? Did the struggles of the Philippines help in the war? Did he abandon his brilliant island hopping technique to come back because of his wife,his pride,bribes, or was it his idea of help? Are the rumours of him filming his Beach landing twice to get a good shot true?

He also tried to take advantage of the Korean war to invade Russia. Why else would he ignore his orders to restrict the fighting above the meridian to south korean forces. Why did he push the invasion forces so far up into North Korea so fast? Since North Korea  is directly land linked with Russia, he must have assumed that if he could bulldoze his war through China, he would be able to invade into the borders of Russia without a hitch. China made punitive attacks to try and send messages but these were resolutely ignored by MacArthur. Finally China was forced to attack in order to drive away the american forces. I blame him for the genesis of dictatorship in North Korea. The Chinese at this stage would have traded literally anything to ensure their security.

He tried to combat communism in any way possible and coined what is the keystone to the hardcore right to this day which is McCarthyism. The art of proclaiming, accusing and declaring without any real regard to evidence. He did not care for any real proof to throw around accusations, or wait for investigation to force litigation. He only cared for complete victory aganist any percieved threat, minor or major. A textbook example of the present day Republican mantra of McCarthyism. Look at what the Republican party has descended to, a platform for flapping lips and  demagoguery.No one bothers to think critically or look for solutions, all there is is a mantra that begun with MacArthur and continued on by Reagan down to today's Republican party.

These three reasons sufficiently prove that even though he might have been a good general in ww1, his action in his later life made the world a worse place and proved him to be a dick with a boner for victory.

Moral Absolutism

I want to talk about relative morality and how it applies or does not apply to religious doctrine. Religion is based around absolute morality, The concept of some stuff being absolutely evil and not to be performed under any circumstance. I have nothing against Moral universalism, there could be a universal scale of ethics in which one action is demonstrably worse than the other, However moral absolutism is complete hogwash, even though an action can be categorized as immoral in almost all cases. There will always be a situation that can hypothetically exist  that the action can be constituted as moral.

This is more of a show stopper for absolutist religion than it seems. For example assuming the christian god exists and you are a christian(assuming you are one), you go to school one day and happen to meet the Antichrist. What if the Antichrist told you to get his number? This is about as obvious a moral absolute in the christian faith as there can be. You should not get the Antichrist to brand you with his number! I doubt there are many Christians who would argue that point. Most Christians would not get his number in such a situation. Even if the Antichrist told you to get his number and that if you refuse it would be at the peril of your life. If you are a christian, the choice to refuse his number is dictated to you within the bible as an absolute.

What if the antichrist told you to get his number and that if you refuse it would be at the peril not of your own life, but that of the lives of a class of innocent children? This is the spawn of the literal devil(assuming he exists) so of course he is going to play dirty. Is the moral absolutism dictated to you by religion oblivious to the lives and plight of a class of innocent children. Would you doom these children to death for your assurance to heaven. What if it went further than that, what if by taking the antichrist’s symbol, you somehow prevent the symbol from being offered to the class of innocent children. Would the absolutism dictated to you by the holy scriptures mandate you to take the symbol and save the children from eternal punishment or not to take the symbol but remain righteous? Would you take it to save the children or not take it to save yourself?

 

Now all is highly hypothetical and most likely not possible to Christians and even to me.I don't believe their god exists and they don't believe that their god is such a malicious god and would put them in that situation. But i can construct a less hypothetical situation more closer to our current reality that bears the same weight and has a realer chance of happening. What if some Muslim terrorists told you to denounce your god at the cost of a class of innocent children. You have to remember,according to christian fiction, if you denounce jesus in front of whatever or whoever in mortal realm, He said in his scriptures that he would denounce you on judgement day in the immortal realm. According to the moral absolutism practiced today by Christians, there does not exist an argument that says it is OK to save those innocent children by denouncing god. I believe many a christian out there would let innocent children die for their belief in god. Even if god and heaven existed, is this right? are they being moral for performing this action? Can their reverence to their god excuse them from deaths of the innocent children?

No,i don't think that moral absolutism exists and can exist in the real world. There will always be a situation that can not be defined by any clear cut rules written beforehand. It is up to the individual to use the Moral universalistic senses within ourselves to ask, Is this moral or immoral? is this right or wrong? and this has to be done without quoting the holy ‘rulebooks’.


P.S: Christianity twists itself in knots with the issue of moral absolutism. Is contraception immoral or moral? by preventing a obviously bad situation easily(Microcephaly), is it a sin?
Why is it not possible to throw away these stifling rules and dogmas that bind one to such stiff thinking and just use your innate moral sense and  not a black and white unrealistic rule to know if it is right or wrong. Think outside the box or in this case outside the book!
http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Item/4594/contraception_congo_nuns_choosing_the_lesser_evil_and_conflict_of_commandments.aspx

SALUTATIONS FROM MY BLOG!!!!!

I am not the moon

 from a rising poet-

I Am not the Moon

Metaphorically speaking
I am not the moon
See the moon is beautiful but it's beauty at cost
Beauty so barren
Beauty tied down
Beauty solely superficial..
See the moon is not original
The moon is not creative
The moon is stuck
As a follower

An absence of  light
Only a transmitter of it shone by a mass that has the capacity to do so much more.
A mass exploding with power and potential

Potential energy that demands to be the center of attention
Potential radiance to illuminate entire solar systems
Potential to sustain life
Untouchable because it vaporizes anything that dares to approach it's benevolence.

But see I'm not the sun either
Doomed to run out of fuel and burn out.
Doomed to the fate of catastrophic death that results in a merciless black hole
A never ending burst in the very skin of the universe.
Doomed to mortality.

See I'm something so much more. 

I am the darkness in the spaces that you see. 

I am the darkness that supports the stars. 

I hold entire galaxies. 

 See I am strong enough to contain infinitely dense singularities but I'm gentle enough to support the frail and fragile beings that populate this universe.

 Courageous enough to hold all of space and time but responsible enough to manage it. 

You can't see me yet  I am everywhere. 

I go unnoticed and unappreciated

Think of me as air that holds the clouds and birds and the tops of skyscrapers or

 think of me as water that holds entire ecosystems
Revel in these thoughts and realize I could never compare myself to the rock that orbits around us
My immortal conscience flowing with ideas only limited by fleeting time
In addition to the knowledge that compiles from the evolutionary miracle that is my ancestors.
Metaphorically speaking
I am not the moon.

~Hope~

Nature or Nurture on Terrorism

I have a hypothetical question for any Christians out there. What if I had access to Jesus DNA and I cloned Jesus? This can happen (some private collector somewhere might have some Jesus blood on an artifact)but it most likely won't. Would the offspring I brought up be a God? Would you have to worship him? He does have holy spirit DNA in him? If he became a Christian, would he be worshiping himself? Can he Sin?

 Now some of the questions above are asked in jest. I know that many Christians are struggling with more basic queries of humanity like planned parenthood or LGBT rights and their staunch mindset render them unfit to ponder these question. If they can however, I would like an answer to the last one. If a person had God DNA or was made of God stuff in him, would he Sin? Would he be ever culpable? Able and/or willing to commit crime?

Of course this question is moot to everyone of humanistic values. However there is an analogous question that can be asked. Do some people have a genetically better human nature than others in that they are less prone to crime? Are some people actually built more good than others?

Recently i had a very interesting  discussion about nature vs nurture. The question was which was more responsible for radicalization of a person. Are the upbringings of the people who become religious terrorists more to blame for their radicalization or is it in their nature to become terrorists? If we take these people out of their inimical environments, would they stop being terrorists?

Maybe we can learn from examples on the causes. There is the case of Abu Mansoor, who was brought up as a southern baptist. After becoming of age and converting to Islam, he became radicalized. He eventually traveled to Somalia to become part of Al-Shabaab and in the end became their DE-facto leader. Did his fundamental nature lead him into becoming a terrorist or did his upbringing make him one? There are some interesting things that went on in his life that can give us answers. From his father’s conversion to Islam to him running away at an age of 16 and becoming heavily involved in online Islamic activism. This might point to the fact that his environment had a lot to blame for his radicalization. Such is the case with many other individuals, in that their environment seems more to have an influence on their radical behaviors than their nature.

For me, I think that a person can be predisposed to be violent or calm, zealous or apathetic. This may literally be written in their genes, however how they go about expressing this in their behavior is up to them. I do not think that there is a  person prone to be a terrorist simply due to their heredity, it is because they followed a given pattern of behavior that is of a terrorist nature. The most common way that people adapt a given behavior is by watching others behavior and imitating or learning from them.

I may be wrong, Some person somewhere may actually discover some sort of radicalization gene. Until that day arrives, there is something that is very obvious- Religion followed uncritically, is one of the biggest source of these terrorists.

Erdogan takes Daesh money

It is clear  to me as it should be clear to anyone with an open mind that Turkey is buying ISIS oil. That is not even in question. The Turkish-Syrian border is as porous as a sieve, even though according to president Obama, they have made progress reducing the amount of people and oil coming through there. His exact quote was that there are some gaps. The question now is if the government is complicit in this leaving of gaps.

They recently asked an armed forces guy here in america about Turkey and oil. I think it was the head honcho in the army in Iraq and his reply was immediate. Of course turkey does not help ISIS terrorism, it is a major partner in fighting them. You could physically see him squirming. This is due to the amount of pressure that Turkey has on USA in that America has so many resources and so much money tied into the country that the USA cannot dare critisize the Erdogan government. Even though they harbor suspisions of his actual trading with ISIS in oil. Biden had to actually apologize last year for even impliying that Turkey has traded with Daesh.

With the recent Russian accusations about President Erdogan's family connection with the energy industry and ISIS. There seems to be a clear pattern of co-ordination between Turkey and ISIS. You have to remember that Turkey has had a huge ongoing problem with PKK. What essentially seems to be happening is that ISIS is helping Turkey with PKK, sapping away its fighters and actually fighting aganist them. In return, Erdogan is allowing trading with them to occur. In the process, him and his family are turning up a tidy profit in all this as big players on the energy market in that area. ISIS is killing turks, it is damaging PKK, Erdogan was losing aganist PKK, even had to try bargaining with them last year but not any more, not thanks to Daesh

The attacks from Turkey aganist Russia are make the appearance of the existence of a patnership seem damning,Russia says they were flying against ISIS, implying ISIS was close to or even in Turkey. Turkey officially fired the missiles, the turkmen(Grey wolves who are alligned with Erdogan and help him fight the PKK) kill the pilot, They gave the body back to the government (implying the clear ties btw them and Erdogan) now Erdogan gives back to Russia a dead corpse for burial and wants them to chill out so they can go back to business as usual.

If Turkey was a secular state this would not be happening. Even though they profess secularity,Turkey in the hands of Erdogan is a muslim state, a muslim state that has ties with fundamentalism and ISIS.It is not a bastion of stability in the middle east

Kenya's 'Pope holiday' puts church and state too close for comfort'

You can never escape from this shit. Even the Kenyan government is trying to cram it down its citizens mouths. WTH?

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/26/opinions/harrison-mumia-kenya-pope-op-ed/index.html

Traffic coming from Copyright claims

There is alot of traffic coming from copyright claims. In my younger days, i used to rely on google images alot and usually just copied images straight from the net to my blog. Supposedly in the last month, there have been 35 visits to my site, each averaging about 2.5 minutes just looking for copyright images. That is why in alot of my older articles, you find alot of blank images that have been taken off.

Hello there copyright reviewers, sorry for the stealing. I'll try not to do it again.

Lateline: Sam Harris and Maajid Nawaz on the future of Islam

Purpose of mortality

There is no escape from mortality. It is something we all have to deal with.How does one deal with loss of a loved one? How does one manage the pain? When you lose a loved one, Why does this happen? How can you understand this? How can one cope?

As an atheist, I have no incentive for death. There is no afterlife, no place that comes after death, But due to this what i do in this life is of utmost importance. I plan to accomplish many things within my limited time. I need to do something meaningful in this world that will endure. I need to have a legacy. I need my friends and family to have a meaningful contribution to remember me with after I'm gone.

With religion, one is told time and time again of Gods master plan. The principal object of faith is the one who ordains and orchestrates this, all to a grand purpose. I always ask myself what kind of monster would do this and rob us of our friends or even family? What sort of convoluted, depraved purpose can only be accomplished by bringing death in the painful ways that it occurs?

I know when something happens, it is tempting to look for an agent in it. Why was what was precious taken away from you? Whom caused this and what purpose was there in it? There was this unerring comment by Sam Harris about this aspect of human nature. When we are in the dark and we hear rustling in the bushes, we don't first think that it might be the wind or a gust. The first thought is who is that? What do they want? Not because it is likely but because we have developed or evolved in situations where thinking like this was beneficial to survival.

We are stuck in this primal mental make-up. However we do not have let it rule our lives. It is better for you not look for an agent to a loss as you will always be looking for something that does not exist.There is no purpose to it, there is no one who required it to happened, there was no plan for it, It just happened.

If you have experienced a loss, I want you to instead think of your loved one and all they accomplished in their lifetimes. Think of the struggles they overcame, of the changes they made in your life and all the lives that they have influenced. Appreciate that they have made an impact in the world, They might not have solved all the world's problems but they have helped somehow. How do you want to continue their legacy? How do you want to their meaning to endure.

Shell

Not much of a Cad expert, I'm just removing the wheel wells and rough edges at this stage

Social inertia or group think

How do you view social inertia. It is rarely thought critically.I do not mean social inertia as defined psychologically. This is just part of what i describe as momentum of the populace. I define the inertia as the collective of people that is your community or society acting some way not necessarily because they have a goal but that is where their sum of emotions has led them. It is a matter that is rarely thought about in terms of right or wrong. I mean in all of human society, the winners get to tell the tale and if the populace is the winner, the tale get twisted and warped around the phenomena that is social inertia.

The Arab spring has objectively brought mostly nothing but war and death all around the world but it is still talked about as this beautiful thing. Why? Because the arab spring is a child of its society and society can do no wrong in its own eyes. I know some might disagree as a fact but the arab spring  has caused objectively a bad effect on the world. One might argue that the net effect in the future will be good but when is this good net effect going to happen? How many decades is it going to take to overcome the poverty, war and misery that are occurring now? Is this the only way that was found to bring change to whatever needed it or was this caused by simply mob mentality?

The clashes that have occurred and are still occurring that can be termed as “witch hunts” all across the world, in africa and the western world, in the lay world and political worlds are part of this mob mentality. Blaming people for a problem they did not cause, where the pressures of society cause for lack of a better word,  hordes of people to spring up into action creating strife or bring forth accord. These events are not derived from reason or logic, they might have individuals, or entities within them that have logical reasons for what they are doing but the group as a whole is usually a rabble of people devoid of any particular purpose. They might have an end resolution that is agreeable but the beginnings of these things are from dark parts of our primitive brains.

I think that this is what happened in Romania this week. Essentially the prime minister of the country was made to resign due to a club fire. I am not making light the death of the  27 people or the injuries that occurred, but it was not the fault of the prime minister. It just was not. I cannot see it. The reports claim that rampant corruption was the reason for this, but how is this related to the prime minister? Did the owner of the club send a personal bribe to the prime minister? What is this link i am missing that puts the blame of some stupid organizer on the PM?

To be fair, The corruption charges that  have been levelled against the PM might be true and there actually might be some truth that the corruption on a local level might have led to the conditions that caused the accident. However, the resignation of the PM will not be the solution to end all corruption. The PM has very little say on a local level, no amount of oversight would change that, he would be doing fuckall trying to improve corruption at such a low level in such a short amount of time considering the scale of corruptness currently in romania as talked about by the EU.

My point is this, The revolts that are going on  and will be going on there are a “witch hunt” at their best and violent unthinking mobs at their worst. This is not the best way to get change in the country, This is probably not even a good way to get change in the country. It is just the social inertia has swayed people, and since the throng has an energy, it has to take action, The people who really hates the PM have found themselves leading this horde and have conceived of a way to get rid of the PM, who by the way i view as somebody who was trying to do something about the corruption. This is not a feel good story of revolution and social change, it is a story about the ills of being led by social inertia. Do not let yourself be easily moved by the momentum of the collective. 

#Trending or not

The pleasant words and ideas of the debonair world are a poison. Spun into sweet sounding cosmopolitan nectar that is left singing in your ears. It robs your mind of the ideas that are the results of its grueling toil, it erodes your canons and removes reservation to the dangers of its lures, it launders the script of your mind. You suddenly find that what you need to be doing is hard and somehow the least path of resistance is where you are.

I do not describe myself as immune to this. Indeed even I have been corrupted by the evil that is Pop, and also forced to recon with the might of the PC world. However I do not yield lightly. Even when I am the odd man out, the last hold out when everyone else is flocking to neutral, inoffensive viewpoints or to the new hip and vogue trends, I will not be cowed into fashionable ideology or ‘cool’ styles. It is not always right and they do not always win.

Think about all the trends in technology that have gone the way of the dinosaur. Where is your zune? Where is that fancy amazon phone or your fancy BlackBerry tablet? Why did you not sign in to AOL or Earthlink? I'm sure your info is still on file.

Think of the cultural trends that have come and gone in your life. Maybe tech gets outdated but surely Britney Spears would forever live in your hearts. What about Mike Jones? … . Who? Or Adelle, Scratch that, i heard Adelle is back, but for how long?

Think about the metaphysical trends, those spiritual attestations that are now so passé. I remember when people were copying Angelina Jolie and inking themselves up with Buddhist scripts. Britney Spears, the now defunct definition of yesterday had inspired many hapless teens to tattoo themselves with Kabbalah or something close to it.Everyone was wearing red Kabbalah string, the “bling” that was trending was the cross with diamonds and gold, with stars like 50 cent (now bankrupt) sporting examples of them all the time.

Do not let your reasoning be affected by this debauchery. I know it sounds nice, sweet and innocent but it is not.You might prescribe to it now but there is a good chance that it probably won't be long before you regret WASTING time, money, energy and brain power trying to look or be cool.

Energy crisis

I am running out of steam. I feel like a geriatric writing this, but i find myself not wanting to pursue things i would have pursued while i was younger. Maybe this is just growing up.

I am now reading the last paragraph about 6 months after writing it. It dawns on me that I need to amp up or else the lack of vitality I am still experiencing will plague me till my old age. I'm not going to wake up tomorrow and find myself like a buck youth springing forth with energy. I'm not going to be able to masturbate 5 times a day for a whole week's stretch anymore.

To that end, i’m putting forward a resolution. 1 page blog entry a day, 1 video entry a week and 1 thirty min video a month. Hard but definitely doable. It may be that I am already on my downward slide to oblivion, but it behoves me to fight this to stupor to the end.

Arab Spring it is not

Arab Spring is a misnomer, A pseudonym given in order for the media to talk about what was really happening and remain politically correct. Sticking with the seasonal theme, the real name that i would give this period is the Islamic winter or even more foreboding the Islamic Fall.

Sounds awful does it not. Im sure if i had a higher reader count, I would be spammed with comments about islamophobia and whatnot  but let me be clear.This position is coming from a very logical analysis of events. Even though I hate all religions equally, hate their institutions, their practices and anything else they do, I am not one to discriminate between any of them. The position i find myself adopting is one coming from looking at the trends that started in 2010 and are still continuing to now.

Tunisia was the epicenter of it all. Major protest started occuring all over the country demanding the resignation of Ben Ali who some might say was somewhat despotic. This was a somewhat innocent beginning but then the religious organizations joined in and turned the political aspirations of the protests into the doctrinal fervor culminating into a religious uprising. Key among these organizations was the Islamist Ennahda party. Ben Ali abdicates, The country votes, The islamist are unable to acquire power, they revolt again and finally they get their desire; political power.

All the meanwhile, the other islamic integrists in the other countries are watching. They see an opportunity to increase their power. Starting in egypt, When riots begins occurring, The Muslim brotherhood which had been banned from politics fans the flames of revolt in the city, Alexandria and Suez, forcing the armed forces to act and overthrow Mubarak, And when elections occur, it is not surprising that the Muslim Brotherhood have not only won the presidential election but many of the local elections.

In Algeria, the situation seems even plainer. We have an actual religious terrorist group, The Islamic Salvation Front which somehow had won power in the 1990’s but then lost it due to popular revolt , civil war and democratic action. They are largely recognized as one of the key movements behind the 2010 protests. However, unlike the other countries algeria was able to resist the Fighting of the other countries mainly due to the memories of the civil war.

In Jordan, the Muslim Brotherhood essentially forced King Abdullah II to dissolve parliament and involve them in it. In Syria, Isis was a key part to the unraveling of the country, In Libya again we have the Muslim brotherhood. In Nigeria, We have Boko Haram going through a resurgence since 2009. The only noted exception to this is Mauritania which was not Arabs protesting but blacks protesting against the largely Arab government. The thing tying all these things is not Arabic descent rather Islamic religious organizations fighting for power, as such Islamic Fall is a more fitting term to it than Arab spring.

Religion is the slave master with the addictive stuff

My  atheism belief was fought for  tooth and nail. I battled parents, relatives, friends, enemies , friend-enemies and my own self to get and maintain the simple belief that the exists no god or supernatural being that can or ever has helped shape me or humanity. Like the christians have the ficticious devils in their heads dissuading them of their religion, there are always things that attract me to religious communities.

The main thing for me has always been the communal experience. the friendship and kinship that goes along with church membership. Maybe it is like Marx said?

To all the agnostic theists out there

        I always wanted to ask the agnostics why they sustain their system of belief. This question is specifically for the agnostic theists. why not give up the hope in finding religion instead of desperately clinging onto the little hope  of finding religion that makes sense. They believe that there is a higher entity, but doubt the plausibility of the current day religions. If you ask them, they think that a religion exists somewhere or will exist some time in the future that is able to satisfy their wishes, or that if they give the current religions more time they will eventually make sense. In my opinion, there never will be a religion that will satisfy a rational mind, you will always find a hole in the logic of any supernatural belief. The only thing that religion can provide is satisfaction for emotions, biases and false pretenses; irrational stuff!
        For me it is like the little kid who does not believe in Santa Claus but still believes that there is an all knowing physics defying person who will reward him for his good behavior. or worse there is the kid who knows intellectually that Santa does not exist but is always desperately searching for proof of his existence. Grow Up! Even if these beliefs give you comfort or serve some personal purpose in your life whether emotionally or psychologically , They deprive you of rationality in terms of outlooks to life; they keep your mind in a loop, cycling through the bunk logic of supernatural beliefs; they are chains to enslave you, your peers, friends,family and society to the maniacal plans of religious organizations .
        It is the same way the parents use Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, the Easter bunny or even the thanks giving turkey, if their children believe in these myths then this is a short cut around their minds allowing the parents to influence the behaviors of the kids without having to work with the kids logic. Be good or Santa wont get you a present; you must do your homework or the Easter bunny wont crap some candy on Easter;You must be thankful of stuff or else the thanks giving turkey wont die for our dinner, and we wont feast on thanksgiving Thursday again. These beliefs destroy kids good sense and replace it with blind devotion to some folk idol just to make it easier for parents to micro manage their kids.
       Unless there are agnostics out there who just believe that there is more than one supernatural being and it is impossible to choose just one, in that case i say to you that are just another nutcase theist so there is no merit in you even reading this.