Comparing Women to Animals

In animal rights, there are those who advocate humane slaughter and other measures to make slaughter of animals as painless as possible eg using a captive bolt gun to stun a cow before it is slaughtered. However, even when the cow is stunned, the cow still suffers, and when there is pressure by business to make money, there is pressure to slaughter as many cows as possible, which results in businesses not following regulations. The pressure of commerce ends up hurting the animals. Abbatoir workers take out their aggressions on the animal leading to atrocities.

This is why vegans believe that the problem starts with demand. Stop putting the cow in the supply chain as an economic commodity and it won't be exploited. To stop the cow being there, there must be reduced demand. If there is no demand for beef, it everyone went vegan, then cows would not be exploited. It would be unprofitable to start an abbatoir or CAFO business if no one will buy the meat. However this is difficult given so many people lust for eating meat. The problem is the demand of the end consumer.

The same can be seen in porn and sex work. There are those who argue for welfare of sex and porn workers. They argue for regulations on sex work eg in Australia sex work is legal but is regulated eg women must get regular STD checks. However, many times the pressure to serve clients as well as the demand from clients for rough sex, can take its toll on the women, which is why many believe a "vegan" approach is necessary ie stop consuming porn or visiting sex workers to reduce the demand. If there is no demand for porn or sex work, it would all disappear. Too often we focus on the supply (eg pornographers and brothels) without thinking of the demand. However, this faces the challenge that many people like to visit sex workers or watch porn, often violent porn. It is the male lust for female sexuality that drives the porn and sex work industry in the same way that human lust for meat keeps abbatoirs and CAFOs running, and in both cases, sentient beings are exploited to feed the desires of the end consumer.

The two are similar in that a group of beings are seen as lesser beings exploited through commerce to meet the desires of the end consumer who is completely addicted to the product.

There are multiple approaches for dealing with the problem, from mitigation of suffering to an abolitionist approach. The problem is made complex by the fact there there are many interest groups eg the businesses making huge profits from the exploitation and the end consumer who derives pleasure from consumption of the product. Both these groups conspire to keep the "lesser beings" continually exploited and oppressed.

Noting that animals are oppressed in abbatoirs and CAFOs and women are oppressed in brothels and in pornography, let's look at an example of abolition succeeding, which is the victory over human slavery. There is definitely slavery that exists today (so-called modern slavery) but the attitude and legislation is broadly against human slavery. While slavery has not been eradicated, I am confident the magnitude of slavery is much less than centuries ago.

Yet if we look at veganism and antipornography, the oppression of animals and women is very mainstream, which is why vegans and antiporn advocates are seen as extreme.

One of the problems is that the end consumer, as I mentioned, is addicted to the product. Many people like eating meat because it tastes good, and many people like consuming porn because it is stimulating. The self-interest of consumers is strong.

If human slavery back in the eighteenth century was normalised such that each household had a slave in their home whom they could use for slave labour, sexual exploitation, etc, I would imagine the abolitionist movement would not have succeeded. My understanding is that human slaves in the eighteenth century were mostly owned by wealthy slave owners, which meant consumers and households did not feel that freeing slaves hurt them, so they could easily support the abolitionist movement without feeling guilty they they themselves had done anything wrong. However, if meat or porn were banned or if environmentalists banned cars and made people ride bikes, these products strike into household demand.

This is why there is a knee-jerk reaction to banning cars, meat, dairy or porn. People don't want to admit to the truth that they are oppressive but want all the conveniences and stimulation that oppression provide them. Most consumers want the convenience of cars in spite of the environmental damage, the taste of meat in spite of the suffering to animals, and the sexual release of masturbating to porn in spite of the harm to women.

Had the household consumer had a personal slave, I fear there would be no way to eradicate human slavery. Once the masses are addicted and complicit in the oppression, it persists. The only solution it seems is gradually lowering demand either through boycott of the product or general human population decline.

In a propertocracy like Australia, you should have some exposure to property

Many people think Australia is a country free of corruption. Corruption is something only poor countries have. However, my hypothesis is that corruption is just as deep in developed countries. The only difference is that the corruption in developed countries is formalised into the system. The corruption is woven into the establishment, so the elite of the country own nice buildings, drive nice cars, and live in nice houses, which puts an aura of legitimacy around their dealings. Humans are naturally snobbish. We evolved that way to increase the probability of survival. Those who ally themselves with the powerful are protected from enemies. Because snobbery is a natural part of our DNA, we are more likely to believe the rich and trust their rationalisations for why their corrupt dealings are legitimate.

The attempts by government, banks and regulators to prop up the property market in the past year has exposed this corruption for all to see. We live in a propertocracy. Government depends on property for taxes. Politicians invest in property. Banks rely on property for profit. Regulators will relax standards for property. Unions need a property boom to keep their workers employed and collect funding from industry superannuation funds, with the funds under management into these industry super funds growing higher and higher as union workers continue to be employed mostly in constructiom jobs. Central banks will lower interest rates and print money to prop up property.

The entire establishment is geared towards propping up property. As such, it makes sense to have some exposure to property, but not too much. Also diversify into stocks, bonds and gold. You don't need to stop eating avocado toast or drinking almond lattes to afford an investment property. Just live with your parents or flatmates forever and never have children.

Romantic Love is Superficial

I actually didn’t even know it was Valentine’s Day until someone mentioned it at work in the morning. I hate the day because it makes me feel lonely. People talk about relationships as being very virtuous and profound, but in reality relationships are very superficial. Attraction is based on superficial things like good looks, slenderness, hip-to-waist ratio, income, wealth, what car you drive, whether you own a big house, etc. When you really think about it, relationships celebrate all that is ugly about humanity e.g. greed, superficiality, and domination. Men seek to signal how dominant they are and women seek to attach themselves to dominant men in order to breed and overpopulate the world thereby destroying the environment and contributing to overpopulation. On one hand, I hate relationships, but I am only human, so I do have a hunger for female intimacy just like I have a hunger for food. The challenge is in satiating my desire for female intimacy in both a low-cost manner as well as an ethical manner. There is also a despair that comes from the realisation that love is nothing more than a delusion built by evolutionary forces that drives procreation. However, hope feels better than despair, which is why we cling to the idea that there is someone out there who is perfect and is meant for us and who will love us for who we are.

The Greatest Argument Against Having Children: Human Corruption

I am definitely more liberal than conservative. I generally find conservatives nowadays to be very hateful, e.g. Trump supporters (and other conservatives) seem to mostly be Nazis who view non-whites as inferior, and many of them are sexists as well who subcribe to men's rights activist (MRA) or manospherean beliefs believing that women should be subordinate to men. Many of these MRA manospherean conservatives (e.g. Roosh Valizadeh) actually believe that on private property women should be allowed to be raped. I have heard that in schools nowadays many young boys who are influenced by conversatives values are literally grabbing young schoolgirls by the pussy and sexually harrassing them thinking this is normal traditional masculine behaviour, which is a sad state of affairs. Men in power should set a standard of proper gentlemanly behaviour for other men to emulate. I personally think we should all be treated fairly and with dignity regardless of your skin colour or your gender. I think that the divisiveness that in politics nowadays is not going to help the world in the future, which will be plunged into war, chaos, environmental disaster, and this is the main reason why I don't want to ever have any children. If I go have a child, not only is it expensive to have children (one child costs US$1.1 million over your lifetime) but my child will grow up in a world filled with racism, sexism, religious extremism, division, hatred, and environmental degradation. With the way international politics is going, there will likely be a future nuclear war that destroys all of humanity. If my child doesn't suffer, chances are the generation after that will suffer or be eradicated, so to bring an innocent child into such a corrupt world is tantamount to child abuse, so it is better to never have children, which will save me and my future wife millions of dollars, which will allow us to live life to the fullest, to travel the entire world and see unique cultures and natural beauty while it lasts because the way the world is going now, it is clear that humanity is nearing its end. We must live our lives to the fullest while we can and bow out before humanity self-destructs and implodes due to excessive greed, ego, and aggression.

Garbage in the sea in Bali

I am currently in Candidasa in Bali where I have noticed that there is a lot of garbage not only on the streets but also in the beaches. Supposedly the garbage here is not only from Bali but also from other Indonesian islands such as Java. The current moves the rubbish to Bali. There was a program set by the Indonesian government to ban single-use plastic, but there was little willingness by people to follow it. This is why it is important for people to stop or reduce single-use plastic. Plastics in the the ocean break down and dissolve into the water forming microplastic particles that can end up in fish and humans.

Humanity deserves extinction and the connection between antinatalism and financial independence

Look around at everyone around you. They are mindless drones trying to do everything they can to keep their credit score healthy so that they can one day get a mortgage and car loan so that they can drown in debt.

My advice to everyone is to forget about your credit score. It should be called "slavery score" to reflect what it actually is. It is a signal to slave owners of how good of a debt slave you are. Debt is slavery.

What do you do instead of becoming a debt slave like everyone else? Don't succumb to consumerism, never have children, invest in shares and crypto, and live off dividends.

Of course, most people agree that too much debt is horrible and having children is wonderful. But the two are related. A child is a huge liability. Debt is characterised by an obligation to pay. Children are no different.

Living off passive income is great because you get an income and don't need to work. If you have debt, it is the opposite, that is, you have to work and someone else gets income for doing nothing.

Having children and living off passive income are related. How do you get the money in the first place to buy the financial assets to give you financial independence?

The answer is that you don't have children. Children are extremely expensive. The decision to never have children will save you approximately $1.1 million across your lifetime.

Of course, isn't living a childfree life for the sake of money selfish? Yes it is, but it is also highly selfless and altruistic. Breeding is the number one contributor to climate change. More people in the world means more pollution, more carbon emissions. Furthermore, as humanity grows in size, there are more meat eaters (assuming no vegans) contributing not only to climate change but also animal abuse as the need to feed more and more humans means slaughter of animals needs to occur much faster, which leads to industrial scale mass slaughter that currently kills one billion animals per week in a process so evil that it puts the holocaust to shame. This process will need to scale up much more to meet the demands of 10 billion people on the earth by 2050, and scaling up the factory farms will lead to unimaginable animal suffering.

As the apex predator, as the most dominant and intelligent and arguably most moral species, we humans have a moral obligation to impose a moral order on all animals below us, to protect the weak and vulnerable.

Instead we have completely failed. We exploit, oppress and torture the animals and destroy the earth. We have failed the world and we deserve nothing but extinction via antinatalism.

Could Laziness be Good?

There is a common belief that laziness is a mark of failure and that you must be productive and work all the time. This results in people being very busy and using busyness as a status symbol.

Personally, I don't mind being lazy. I believe in freedom. I believe in antiobligationism. I believe in minimizing obligation so that you give yourself freedom to do what you want. If that is being lazy, there is nothing wrong with that. We all need rest, and sometimes sitting down on the couch and watching some Netflix is quite relaxing and enjoyable.

In my opinion, there is a cult of busyness in America and around the world. We fill our lives with obligations e.g. mortgage, marriage, minors, and materialism just to fill the void, and these financial and non-financial obligations enslave us and deny us our freedom, which includes the freedom to be lazy.

The idea that laziness is evil can be found in how "sloth" is seen as a sin. Sloth is one of the Seven Deadly Sins. Those who accept the idea that sloth is sinful have been brainwashed into a slave mentality by those above them. Think about it this way. Many people I know are eagerly living the American Dream, which involves marriage, mortgage, minors and materialism. They are up to their eyeballs in debt, they buy cars, houses, and they have children, which are expensive luxury goods. As a result, they work like slaves. Who benefits? It is the bank who collects the interest payments and fees, the businesses who sell the daipers, etc. In other words, it is the shareholders who collect their dividend payments who benefit. Many people I know who live off shares (i.e. living off slavery) pretty much never work. They might work part-time or do some casual freelance work, but otherwise they're on permanent vacation, relaxing at resorts or taking it easy. The question is who has been brainwashed here?