new member's welcome Mat

Seriously, you guys should be more careful. If "they" think you can cause any real trouble, everything might just start anew for the younger generation. Elders would do well to let them know they're alone. Russia has many "European" countries in between to be of help, which means no help, of course.

Speaking of which, these look "exactly" as all those suffering in the west, for whom countless tears are shed all over:



No mercy and no voice, just a lone reporter acting on his own.

And so sorry I forgot: happy Easter, Ozy. Христос васкрсe!

There are several of his books easily available -- I guess you know where. He has been translated in Spanish too. I think he is in relations with the services of the Syrian state, where he gets most of his insider's infos. And he is very well informed. Anyway, keep an eye on voltairenet.org, where Manlio Dinucci also publishes great analysis.

I don't think it's a failure of the education system. I've often heard similar complains in reference to, for example, the failure of the Soviet Union to get its citizens away from religion. As soon as the government fell, everyone went back to their churches, as if those 70 years never happened. But the problem is with people. If you want to educate everyone, in the sense that they may become self determined persons with critical thinking capabilities, you're making two wrong assumptions:

1. That people actually want freedom.
2. That they're something outside the collective.

That's why we're headed toward totalitarian democracies. Because that's what works, and the powers that be, trough trial and error, finally realized that much. You just need the illusion of freedom, which allows you to take away responsibility; something inherent to real freedom and independence, but really inconvenient for most. That's also why people also like (or liked) their religions so much. It's not for the fear of death, which was at their origin, but for the possibility to choose any particular system, that will allow them not to think for themselves. Once they act based on someone else's instead, they no longer have to endure consequences, the fault will always be someone else's.

The other half of the equation is our gregarious nature. We exist in a group, and will try to fit in. Some will migrate to another group, be it by actual, physical migration, or simply by accepting some foreign culture, joining a cult... but very few will stand alone. Notice how you can find examples of both people migrating physically but still remaining in their original group, as well as those who won't ever move from where they were born, but completely adopting another group's culture. And with that we've reached the end of the road. With the rise of social media and neighboring technologies, globalization can finally happen locally. They even want you home for work. First the pandemic, now the need to cut on oil being wasted. Just stay home, be safe, interact with others over the phone and follow your cue (MSM/influencer). Don't think, we know you don't like it.

Don't worry, you're doing fine.

About your first point. General wisdom compels me to agree, but recent discoveries seem to indicate that Neolithic societies, as opposed to hunter-gatherer ones, saw the men staying where their lands happened to be. The women on the other hand, had less value when it came to protect then, so they became more itinerant. How much of this may actually be just to explain the plights of women and their "true" value, I don't know.

Yes, what's typically been called passive-aggressive behavior, which is now used by predominant groups to shut down conversations. As I outlined earlier, anonymity disincentives the categorical imperative, so people don't have to look at themselves very hard. This is the key point, IMO, because "honor" implies another form of peer-pressure (a masculine one). I'm actually against either of them.