New daring

 "Ridiculous (expensive) branded clothes and accessories"

For capitalism to work, there always needs to be a sucker;

A misfit is not the same as a sick person;

The cowardly "right", but also any kind of very soft opposition, sugarcoats the pill so much to criticize the "left", that it ends up swallowing the pill

Since the conservative "right" lost its cultural hegemony to the identitarian-bourgeois "left" in the Western world, "right-wing wimps" have become increasingly common, types that come to partially endorse the predominant beliefs and thoughts (which turn into behaviors) typical of the other side, as a reflection of ideological submission to the current holders of power, via culture//morality, in turn induced by a more deep-rooted impetus, of this group, to adapt to the environment. Some examples: "defending a country (Israel) and a people (Jews) in a completely uncritical manner, that is, the same "people" (without generalizing) that have led the structural destitution of conservatism in the core of Western culture...; endorsing so-called "progressive" beliefs, such as denying the existence of human races and, along with that, endorsing "anti-racist fallacies" ("whites cannot suffer racism"; "blacks are always the victims"; "being in favor of preserving human races and ethnicities is racism"...)

The cowardice of the "left": talking about "white racism", "white supremacy" or "Nazism", today (2025), disregarding the real "Nazism" perpetrated against the Palestinian people. Because doing so is the same as "kicking a dead dog"...

It seems that the "left" is not "holding the Palestinian hand" enough...

The most literal aspect of emotional maturity is the ability to recognize one's own limits and mistakes, and to seek to improve or, at least, not worsen in what is lacking

When a massacre occurs against an innocent people (like the Palestinians) and the "world" remains silent (or is silenced by those who took it over), it is inevitable to reach the conclusion that nothing or very little has changed morally in human society since the first civilizations...

Political corruption is, first and foremost, political, and not economic or financial. Therefore, it is, first and foremost, ideological and moral. Its clearest example is the imposition of an ideological indoctrination (always based on lies) as a political method

It is common for there to be a big difference between thinking and being

About a big difference between the most rational and the most emotional:

The most rational can separate their personal life from the objective and impartial truths that they accumulate and absorb, while the most emotional tends to confuse them

As a result, a truth can become offensive and therefore falsifiable to the latter, while the former learns to control his most primitive impulse of wanting to adulterate his perception of reality so that it fits his emotional demands

Irrational people tend to literalize what is abstract. Religion itself is exactly about this literalization. Of treating as real what is not seen, not known, in fact...

Of despicable people

Spirits of pigs: superficial, selfish creatures, ignorant of everything that matters most in life, a more traditional type of pervert, of course it is the "right" that is most full

Of the most perverse...

...are those who use kindness to achieve shady goals

It is the feeling that the belief one adopts is false that also contributes to reinforcing the belief itself

If Christians were mostly kind, every country with a Christian majority would be the materialization of paradise on earth. But...

Perfection, in in its pure state, does not exist. Harmony is the only possible perfection

Certain defeatists typically believe that the systematic and political application of reason is an absolute impossibility, also because they are only projecting their own prevailing irrationalities, that is, justifying themselves in advance

But it may also be because they have adopted a mistaken, excessively idealistic concept of reason

In this case, the realism of knowing that the full application of reason is a probable practical impossibility is no better than the idealism of believing, even with all the evidence corroborating the most realistic and pessimistic scenario, because it helps to not abandon reason as a guide for life, even though it is also recommended to be realistic

Belief is what one believes in and which may or may not be a fact

It is not prejudice, when it is correlativism

It is not prejudice, often, it is stupidophobia

The correlation between toxic masculinity and limited intelligence is not a parallel correlate. Toxic masculinity, as a specific expression of narcissism, is also an expression of irrationality or stupidity in its most qualitative aspect

"Scientists cannot have an ideological bias"

But every serious scientist should have a philosophical bias (which leads/to a scientific bias)

The academy should select based on two criteria: technical or specific competence and philosophical or the ability to understand and adhere to the principles or values ​​of science, such as objectivity and impartiality

Idealism is more a question of distance than perfectionism

The weight of others may be an entirely personal issue, but it is also entirely a health issue

About that classic comparison between a random Nigerian individual and a Norwegian as an argument for the denial of the existence of human races: "a pure-race black Nigerian may be more genetically similar to a pure-race white Norwegian than to another Nigerian of the same racial status..."

A type of fallacy?? Of biased or biased comparison??

Like comparing, genetically, two individuals based on traits or aspects that are not relevant for a certain comparison, to convey a relativist idea of ​​insufficient difference??

The identitarian "left" is a combination of the morality of the Care Bears (in the belief that evil is fought with love) and Power Rangers (in which they take the lead in the fight against evil, in which they treat all their opponents as monsters and in which they have an obsessive belief in "representation"). 

Why does civilization cause intellectual dysgeny? 

And how can it be solved? It is not necessarily or only the relative comfort of a civilized society that reduces the selective pressure for intelligence, in its purest state, of the search for knowledge and its systematic application, but also because, in an environment that does not offer immediate dangers to life, this selection becomes more optional or is diverted to functions more secondarily related to intelligence, such as social adaptation. So, if the more complex a society becomes, the less directly necessary intelligence becomes in its purest state, as a solution to this problem, it would be necessary to create artificial means to promote the fertility of the most (genuinely) rational individuals. However, the problem of negative selection of rational intelligence in complex societies seems much deeper or more difficult to fully combat and resolve, given the enormous power of human irrationality throughout our history...

Human beings are the only animals that have evolved their intelligence to its purest state, of factual perception or the search for knowledge, considering it as an end in itself and not only or solely as a means to an end.

Rational intelligence is basically the application of emotional intelligence to intellectual matters

Naivety is a very undervalued type of stupidity

Anyone who sincerely or deeply believes in the current "identity activism" of the "left" suffers from a pathological naivety (a type of stupidity)

This seems to be the case for many white people

And then there are those who tacitly adopt this belief system for completely personal reasons, for social favoritism and also as an emotional crutch that ratifies their narcissistic tendencies

This seems to be the case for many black people

... Because, if the "leftist" doctrine preaches self-flagellation in the first group, it preaches the opposite for the second

The ease and historical and practical constancy with which a majority of "white" people are convinced or indoctrinated about fallacies and lies is literal proof that the so-called white supremacy has been limited to a minority of European Caucasians. From the belief in talking snakes to the dogma of absolute human equality...

"Self-knowledge is always wonderful"

Those who really don't know what self-knowledge means say: understanding one's own limits or knowing how limited one really is...

Even more directly: on the antagonistic relationship between capitalism and meritocracy

Ideal merit: each person is rewarded for how much they contribute to a society (except for individuals who cannot contribute for some health reason).

Current impediment: capitalism, because, in this socioeconomic system, most of those who are most rewarded are not, individually and proportionally, those who contribute the most to society.

For, according to ideal merit, the existence of super-rich and super-poor would not be possible, because most people, individually and proportionally, contribute in a more modest way to the society or community in which they live. Even individuals who are exceptionally proactive, who delegate a disproportionate amount of positive contributions (in a true or objective-impartial/rational sense), would still not be rewarded to the same extreme level as the ultra-rich of the past and of our era. So, what makes this false "mathematics" of greatly exaggerated proportions possible is monetary fiction, in which, through its fantasy, it "becomes possible" to multiply (imaginary) gains to the stratosphere. If, through proportional mathematics, rooted in the "world of realities", an ideally meritocratic society would come closer to the ideal of a socialist or communist society, at least in relation to its emphasis on social equality. In conclusion, it would not be wrong to think that monetary fiction has been used as the most important means of exponential accumulation of power, even as a way of imposing an ideology, structured in a hierarchy of symbols, in which ordinary individuals are indoctrinated to accept their condition of subordination and to treat as a concrete reality this distance forged between them and the top of the social pyramid, as if it were physically unattainable. Therefore, the capitalist system seems to maximize this very human tendency to treat symbols as concrete elements or real dimensions.

Sabedorias anti-capitalistas/Anti-capitalist wisdom

 Será que é sempre preciso dizer para muita gente que a vida não se resume a dinheiro, trabalho... E que se está resumida, não é por alguma força da natureza?!?

O animalismo é a característica mais primária do capitalismo, de mentalidade de cadeia alimentar, por desprezar a perspectiva existencialista, de igualdade em essência e finitude de todo ser, que apenas o ser humano pode entender, um dos marcos que o distingue das outras espécies. Pois é por essa alienação que o capitalismo previne muitos de entender e aceitar que o mundo é muito maior que as ficções que criamos para organizar o "nosso'... 

Não existem bilionários tal como existem pássaros. Enquanto as sociedades humanas continuarem se firmando em castelos de cartas, continuarão existindo como ambientes que oprimem e exploram, ao invés de se constituírem como oásis que nos protegem contra a imensidão que existe lá fora

O "liberal" da economia, quando é o mais interessado, não gosta do estado porque quer liberdade para explorar seus empregados sem qualquer intermediação ou mesmo barreira... Quer que a (sua) mão invisível tenha poder total... Capisce??

"O empresário merece enriquecer mais que os outros"

Então, o resto não merece enriquecer também?? Ou muito menos que eles??

"Porque ele sacrifica seu patrimônio para isso"

Todo ganancioso é ousado. 

Tratar a economia como uma disciplina auto suficiente, que não precisa de interdisciplinaridade, não é diferente do que fazer o mesmo com a sociologia e desprezar o papel da biologia no comportamento humano. E ao fazê-lo, se pode desprezar qualquer implicação negativa quanto ao bem estar social, tratando como um mal necessário, da exploração econômica às desigualdades extremas 

Não é apenas sobre economia. Na verdade, é sobre tudo e mais um pouco: solidariedade, empatia, lógica básica, existencialismo, enfim, filosofia, que a maioria dos liberais da economia não quer colocar em discussão...

Eu sei que o sistema capitalista induz, por suas próprias estruturas, à exploração compulsória de uma classe sobre a outra. Mas ao invés de, ao menos, admitir essa situação, a maioria do empresariado defende o sistema que também o explora 

É comum que um empresário se queixe dos altos salários da "elite" do funcionalismo público. Mas não critica pela injustiça dos altos salários em si, mas pensando que seus impostos também são para pagá-los. Como sempre, uma questão pessoal e não uma questão coletiva 

O eufemismo é a alma da propaganda capitalista. Precisa distorcer o sentido das palavras, se não revela o que realmente é ou resulta 

Made in Brazil 

Não há classe mais sem vergonha do que o empresariado brasileiro, salvando honrosas exceções. Especialmente os mais abonados, continuam a tratar o seu próprio país como plataforma de exportação dos seus produtos, como colônia de exploração. Um exemplo notável da perversidade empresarial brasileira é a contradição do Brasil ser o maior produtor de café do mundo, mas exportar o melhor de sua produção e deixar o resto para o povo, sem deixar de falar que também o vende para nós a um preço abusivo

Boa parte das reivindicações trabalhistas se resume à luta do trabalhador comum para conseguir os mesmos privilégios sociais que o seu patrão, de ter a mesma vida que ele tem 

Is it always necessary to tell many people that life is not just about money, work... And if it is, it is not due to some force of nature?!?

Animalism is the most basic characteristic of capitalism, of a food chain mentality, for disregarding the existentialist perspective, of equality in essence and finitude of all beings, which only human beings can understand, one of the marks that distinguishes them from other species. Because of this alienation, capitalism prevents many from understanding and accepting that the world is much bigger than the fictions we create to organize "ours"...

There are no billionaires just as there are birds. As long as human societies continue to build themselves into houses of cards, they will continue to exist as environments that oppress and exploit, instead of being oases that protect us from the immensity that exists out there.

The "liberal" of the economy, when he is the most interested, does not like the state because he wants the freedom to exploit his employees without any intermediation or even barrier... He wants his invisible hand to have total power... Capisce??

"The businessman deserves to get richer than the others"

So, don't the rest deserve to get rich too?? Or much less than them??

"Because he sacrifices his assets for this"

Every greedy person is bold.

Treating economics as a self-sufficient discipline, which does not need interdisciplinarity, is no different from that we should do the same with sociology and disregard the role of biology in human behavior. And by doing so, we can disregard any negative implications regarding social well-being, treating everything from economic exploitation to extreme inequalities as a necessary evil.

It is not just about economics. In fact, it is about everything and more: solidarity, empathy, basic logic, existentialism, in short, philosophy, which most economic liberals do not want to discuss...

I know that the capitalist system induces, by its very structures, the compulsory exploitation of one class over another. But instead of at least admitting this situation, most businesspeople defend the system that also exploits them.

It is common for a businessperson to complain about the high salaries of the "elite" of public servants. But they do not criticize the injustice of the high salaries themselves, but rather thinking that their taxes are also to pay for them. As always, a personal issue and not a collective issue.

Euphemism is the soul of capitalist propaganda. You need to distort the meaning of words, if you don't reveal what it really is or results in

Made in Brazil

There is no class more shameless than the Brazilian business community, with a few honorable exceptions. Especially the wealthiest, continue to treat their own country as a platform for exporting their products, as a colony of exploitation. A notable example of Brazilian business perversity is the contradiction of Brazil being the largest coffee producer in the world, but exporting the best of its production and leaving the rest for the people, without forgetting to mention that it also sells it to us at an abusive price

A large part of the labor demands come down to the struggle of the common worker to obtain the same social privileges as his boss, to have the same life as him

O Brasil é muito ruim com duas evidências: café e viagens, e uma causa/Brazil is very bad with two evidences: coffee and travel, and one cause

O que adianta ser o maior produtor de café do mundo, se o melhor da produção vai para os mercados estrangeiros e os restos ficam com a própria população?? 

E esse escândalo normalizado não se limita ao café...

E o que adianta ser um dos maiores países do mundo em extensão territorial se é caro viajar dentro do próprio país até entre duas cidades próximas?? 

Mas o que essas duas situações têm em comum?? 

Um mesmo agente causador: empresários brasileiros e suas tendências para uma ganância sem qualquer limite de vergonha...

What's the point of being the world's largest coffee producer if the best of the production goes to foreign markets and the rest goes to the population itself??

And this normalized scandal is not limited to coffee...

And what's the point of being one of the largest countries in the world in terms of territorial extension if it's expensive to travel within the country even between two nearby cities??

But what do these two situations have in common??

The same causative agent: Brazilian businessmen and their tendencies towards shameless greed...

Um exemplo de falácia de "lugar de fala" que conservadores de direita adoram usar.../An example of the "place of speech" fallacy that right-wing conservatives love to use...

 "Você não pode criticar o capitalismo se você não trabalha ou se é economicamente dependente de alguém. Por isso que só eu, que sou um trabalhador, que posso falar sobre o capitalismo"

Uma falácia de lugar de fala consiste na imposição da vivência ou experiência pessoal como condição necessária para falar ou compreender sobre certa perspectiva ou realidade. Um exemplo absurdo: de que uma pessoa só pode compreender ou falar sobre uma doença se passar pela experiência de adoecer dela. Um exemplo comum: de que uma pessoa só pode compreender ou falar sobre uma perspectiva legítima de opressão se estiver nessa mesma perspectiva. Mas isso vai literalmente contra valores básicos da ciência, da filosofia, enfim, do conhecimento, que é a capacidade de observar, analisar e julgar com objetividade e imparcialidade, isto é, com racionalidade. 

"You can't criticize capitalism if you don't work or if you are economically dependent on someone. That's why only I, a worker, can talk about capitalism"

A place of speech fallacy consists of the imposition of personal experience as a necessary condition to speak or understand a certain perspective or reality. An absurd example: that a person can only understand or talk about a disease if he experience falling ill from it. A common example: that a person can only understand or talk about a legitimate perspective of oppression if he is in that same perspective. But this literally goes against basic values ​​of science, philosophy, in short, knowledge, which is the ability to observe, analyze and judge with objectivity and impartiality, that is, with rationality.

"É a falta de religião a principal causa para as baixas taxas de fecundidade"/"The lack of religion is the main cause of low fertility rates"

 É verdade que o problema também é cultural, além de também ser econômico (custo de vida alto, insegurança financeira, falta de recursos para sustentar uma família...). Também é verdade que a crença religiosa se correlaciona com maior natalidade. Mas a atual crise demográfica não está unicamente relacionada com a falta de religião, ainda que também possa ou pareça estar tendo um efeito, porque outros fatores, como o domínio de uma ideologia muito individualista e materialista*, também tem contribuído para inibir iniciativas natalistas em larga escala, afinal, são muitos os que estão mais preocupados em acumular bens materiais e preservar ou aumentar o status social do que ter filhos biológicos.

* Uma ideologia associada ao materialismo e ao individualismo "modernos" é o feminismo, com o diferencial de estar diretamente direcionado às mulheres, pelo qual acontece um incentivo praticamente unilateral a um modo de vida "independente" ou "não-tradicional", cuja máxima satisfação estabelecida é a realização profissional e pessoal, não incluindo a constituição familiar, o matrimônio e/ou a maternidade, enquanto que seria mais adequado se fosse primariamente enfatizado como feminismo o direito de escolha da mulher, inclusive por um modo de vida mais "tradicional" ou ao menos sem associá-lo ao oposto de autonomia ou independência feminina. 

It is true that the problem is also cultural, in addition to being economic (high cost of living, financial insecurity, lack of resources to support a family...). It is also true that religious belief correlates with higher birth rates. But the current demographic crisis is not solely related to the lack of religion, although it may or appears to be having an effect, because other factors, such as the dominance of a very individualistic and materialistic* ideology, have also contributed to inhibiting natalist initiatives in large scale,after all, there are many who are more concerned with accumulating material goods and preserving or increasing their social status than having biological children.

* An ideology associated with "modern" materialism and individualism is feminism, with the difference of being directly aimed at women, through which there is a practically unilateral encouragement of an "independent" or "non-traditional" way of life, whose biggest established satisfaction is professional and personal fulfillment, not including family formation, marriage and/or motherhood, whereas it would be more appropriate if women's right to choose, including a more "traditional" way of life, were primarily emphasized as feminism. " or at least without associating it with the opposite of female autonomy or independence.

More voluntary provocations

 Kindness without rationality is not only stupidity but also insanity

The essence of kindness is still not being polite, as many seem to think, but being fair

Still, the kindest is the one who is the most altruistic and, at the same time, most fair. A rarity...

The rotten essence of capitalism is that anything goes for money

Conservatives love to blame the lack of religion in the Western world today for what they call "moral degeneration." But many of these cultural changes are the fault of capitalist ideological influence, particularly the greed to profit from any opportunity, including those considered the most "immoral"

Moral degeneration is not exclusive to the “left”. Centuries of traditionalist or conservative cultural hegemony, poverty, social inequalities, unfair prejudices, insane dominant ideologies and many wars do not let us lie

Are conservatives, on average, false collectivists?

If it is easy to say you are in favor of a society when its culture mirrors its way of thinking and living

The problem with living with people with low cognitive abilities is that they also tend to have low emotional intelligence.

And the problem with living with more intelligent people is that they also tend to have lower emotional intelligence compared to their cognitive abilities, but they are more implicit in this expression of disability than those with lower abilities, or more concealed.

Who defends an evildoer (objectively determined):

- Do you think you could be in the same situation as him, that you would act the same way (pure speculation)

- Thinks that we are all literally or absolutely equal and that he deserves to have the same rights (even after proving otherwise)

- And/or is equal to him

Much of the current policies of the so-called Western left are based on cheap emotional blackmail

Typically, the leftist looks for complex explanations for what is simpler, while the rightist looks for simple explanations for what is more complex.

Around every tyrant leader, there is a crowd of mercenaries and idiots

A typical way of relativizing basic concepts, such as truth and knowledge, is to produce unrealistic or extreme examples, such as "Sophie's Choice" situations.

Many understand emotional intelligence with empathy, control and charisma. But, emotional intelligence is also feeling sadness, anger or shyness at appropriate times or circumstances, sometimes long term or indefinitely.

Emotional intelligence can also be the option of distance

The most irrational tends to become more "nice" when they realize they are oppressed and the opposite when they realize they are more "empowered"

The most rational tends to become more fierce when they realize that they are objectively oppressed, but more moderate when they are in power (which, in adaptive terms, seems to be less logical)

Parents do not tend to like a child more because he appears to be more 'problematic' than the others, but just because they like him more, without having an explanation beyond that.

Parents who do not set adequate limits on their children are just as problematic as those who set too many limits.

Parents who do not notice conflicts between their children, especially conflicts that generate unfair treatment from one party to the other, are also not demonstrating excellence in this role.

In relation to knowledge about the most basic, true philosophy is sufficient, as it does not need science and its specialization of logic, its generalization is enough. For example, regarding religious belief, a legitimate philosopher does not need the scientific method to doubt its veracity.

The difference between the wisest and the most intelligent is such that it is comparable to the difference between two different species.

It is almost certain to say that the majority of self-declared philosophers are a combination of a failed artist (writer or poet) and a failed scientist, that is, they fail to be one or the other, in a genuine way, and end up becoming neither of the two. the two, rather than seeking to be exactly like a philosopher, a balanced combination between the emotional artist or the existentialist and the analytical scientist or the realist

When you write very well, you are capable, but also very likely to fill a large part of your writing with your disguised ego.

The belief that France is a great philosophical center is a likely symptom of pseudo-intellectualism

Cultural relativism and egalitarianism attract the most naive to the most perverse. But, generally, the most common type is a combination between the two, because every true fanatic is like this

As despicable as fanatics are false moderates

Self-declared left-wing or social justice individuals want to end all privileges, supposedly... But the only way to do so would be through the establishment of a fully meritocratic society, or an intellectocracy.

(my ideal way of society, the government of the wisest)

An exemplary profile of extreme irrationality is that of an individual who believes in God, Marx and Lamarck at the same time.

Believing that capitalism is an ideal model of meritocracy is another symptom

Ideological indoctrination (as opposed to education/philosophy) is a systematization of the fallacy of suppressed evidence

If collectivism is the sacrifice of the individual for the "good of society", is individualism the sacrifice of society for the "good of the individual"?

I have already said in other texts or thoughts that religion, like ideology, is a more intuitive form of self-therapy. However, I can also say that this self-therapy is a type of masking of the disorder that should be correctly treated. Such as, instead of telling a person with a psychotic disorder that their delusional thoughts are delusional, to agree with reality or part of reality that they have decided to distort to accommodate their personal issues divorced from the facts

More sinful thoughts

  Cruelty is generally a combination of cowardice and injustice

There are two types of cowards, the one who always runs away from situations and the one who always confronts with violence those who are less strong than him or does so dishonestly, for example, in a gang.

However, it is the first type that tends to be most morally condemned

The other would be the most conceptually cowardly, if prudence is relative to personal and circumstantial contexts and, therefore, is not always synonymous with cowardice, while acting violently towards those who are weaker or doing so in groups against only a person is always a coward

That "tramp" who doesn't work is still not directly exploited by "capitalist society", more or less like a thief who robs a thief

The most rational opinion is often the most unpopular

Rationality is more like an ability to control oneself over one's will or the need to interpret facts according to one's own feelings, that is, control over one's own self-projection.

The most direct way to analyze an individual's intelligence is to find out how rational they are. The application of a battery of cognitive tests is a much more indirect way, because, while everyone who is highly rational is very intelligent, in rational terms, there is a greater diversity of intellectual performance in the real world in terms of those who score higher on IQ tests.

The highly rational individual is also the most self-aware and therefore the most realistic, the one who least filters objective reality

Right-wing contradictions

1.

"'Bullying' reinforces character"

Same person, outraged

"Look at that white person being beaten by a black man for no apparent reason"

two.

"I never said capitalism is perfect"

Same person

Generally incapable of criticizing capitalism, of perceiving its inconsistencies

"No matter the era, nostalgia is always the same subjective feeling that the past was better than the current present"

Not really, not least because of the great irregularities that have characterized the flow of human history. For example, a person who lived his youth fully in the 20s of the 20th century, especially if it was in the USA or Western Europe, and saw the crisis of 29 and the rise of Nazifascism, certainly had more reason to feel nostalgic about that time than someone who lived her entire life without experiencing major social turmoil. Just like today, in the year 2024 in which I write this thought, older generations and even young people who were born in the last two decades of the 20th century, have more logical reasons to regret the present, much more turbulent time, than who lived their entire life without experiencing any civilizational decline

The most self-aware are the most consciously contradictory

An extreme intolerance to differences of opinion may be because you think you are more right about everything you care/interest about or because you really are

Tip: most of the time it is the guess of the first option

It may also reflect a great (undeclared) insecurity about one's own opinion or the level of understanding one has about it and associated with a desire to preserve it at all costs.

One of the most typical expressions of irrationality is ethnocentrism or extreme and/or uncritical nationalism, another classic manifestation of anti-intellectualism, of suspension of logical-rational thinking in favor of ideological indoctrination.

Ex-atheists exist, just like ex-religious people. But there are also individual variations of disbelief and religious belief, and it is possible to wonder if the majority of ex-atheists were not among the most convinced and the same logic for ex-religious people, that they were not among the most religious or believers. I have already commented that those who come to identify as atheists or agnostics mainly for moral/emotional motivation are more likely to return to religion than those who do so for intellectual motivation. For in relation to religious people, I believe the pattern is the opposite, if the level of intensity of religious conviction is mediated by the emotive illogic of faith-based belief, which is only fully possible through the suspension of logical thought.

Those who cry out most for social justice also tend to be the most culturally or socially maladjusted, who also tend to be more genetically mutant than the most adjusted. This is also why they tend to adopt excessively unrealistic ideologies, paradoxically based on their own personal realism of misfit, the historical realism of normalized injustices, but also the unrealism of wanting to alter reality and then societies to reflect their minoritary natures and /or more dysfunctional

Controversial logic

Money dominates the world. "Jews' dominates the money. Jews dominate the world (??)

Most human beings are socially conformists, as they appear to have evolved, like nominal individuals of all social species, such as ants, to obey a superior hierarchical command and contribute to the community in which they reside according to their physical-behavioral characteristics. Because, basically, every human social organization functions as an organism and the individuals that constitute it as cells of its internal systems. So, it is possible to say that there are specialized types, that some types are more like white cells, that detect invaders from outside the organism (groups of potentially problematic immigrants??) as well as "sick" or "defective" cells, and others that are like red blood cells (which help repair damage to the body).

I still think that political extremes can be metaphorically associated with pathological states. For example, the extreme right, when in power, can act like an autoimmune disease, which attacks the body itself, based on a disproportionate defense to healthy cells, in addition to the increased risk of attacking other organisms. Now the left in power can also act as a disease that weakens the immune system, such as AIDS, causing less healthy cells and invasive elements to multiply...

In terms of types, some human beings would be more like brain cells, such as neurons, others more like specialized cells of other systems, such as the digestive and excretory systems. And, to represent the most rational and most naturally non-conformist to dysfunctional contexts or those that fall short of a fully balanced social organization, I think of neurons located in areas specialized in self-awareness, self-knowledge, objective perception of the world and mirror genes, related to empathy

With mass immigration, dysgenics, hegemony of ideologies that deny intrinsic differences in intellect and behavior, and anti-meritocracy, stupid "progressives" are making the possibility of using eugenic practices not only viable but necessary.

In fact, they are also justifying the possibility of the return of right-wing dictatorships in the West

For, perhaps, most people, generalist or collectivist discourses are much easier to internalize than discourses with more nuances, details and perspectives because they may even contradict each other, apparently, but they do not support Manichaean narratives.

Natural selection is more about maximizing survival than fertility, if the former is its ultimate goal and the latter is a means. But generally fertility is equivalent to the survival of a species at a collective level, means and ends indistinguishable.

What every self-declared left-wing progressive should learn

That no one is forced to like anything

No one is forced to like what they like

No one is obliged to tolerate the presence of another if it is not by mutual consent and if they have the power to choose

Finally, learn the basics of socializing

A relativist person: art, like personal taste, is relative and subjective.

A "left-wing" and relativist person: "art, like personal taste, is relative and subjective, but... (I think) that film is (objectively) excellent..." "I don't understand why there is people who can't like this or that film..."

A relativist is identical to an absolutist. Both reduce the complexity of cultural contexts to all or nothing

Academics versus scientists

Not every scientist is an academic. Not every academic is a scientist

An academic is someone who, a priori, works within a university, usually as a professor

A scientist is someone who ideally dedicates himself to science, to the systematization of logical-rational thinking in theory and practice, generally within a university. But you can also do it outside, by yourself

In fact, there are many academics who, in addition to not being a legitimate scientist, behave like a legitimate pseudoscientist

The greater the demographic profile, the fewer the number of good people

Good people exist more as individuals than as groups

A structural and basic definition for mental disorder is a stable instability, which is the opposite of but still the same as life itself, which expresses itself as an unstable stability

One of the greatest social injustices is the difference in access to financial stability between individuals from different social classes, caused mainly by the difference in family support, for example, the payment of private university tuition, in contrast to the absence and effectiveness of this same aid due to of the characteristic and intergenerational penury of many of the less privileged classes.

But, with the class struggle being robbed of protagonism by that of identities within the hierarchy of priorities of the so-called left, the focus on structural classism was diverted to structural racism, supposedly intact and more important...

The typical progressive believes that abstractions,such as "society" or "structural racism", directly influence people's behavior, that is, it reverses the order of factors in which, here, it makes a lot of difference, if it is the same as putting the cart before the horse, after all, People behave primarily according to their psychological and cognitive tendencies. Yes, context influences. Yes, but the context does not determine

I have already commented that morality is not only human, as it also has a universal nature, as a synonym for indispensability based on the adaptive and evolutionary contexts of individuals of a species. But morality is also a human fiction, as it is an abstract word, if the word itself is already,an abstraction, an individualized symbolization of elements, phenomena, derivations and fictions...

There has never been a need to replace old musical styles with new ones. One of the reasons for this replacement and consequent loss of cultural wealth has been economic transformations, even more so from the hegemony of capitalism, a system based on profit or the short term.

Brazilian popular culture was completely obliterated by capitalist popular culture

Being bisexual is not like being ambidextrous, equally left-handed and right-handed, but like being ambiverted, extroverted and introverted, more dependent on context and more fluid in its expression.

The immaturity of the past was to believe that there was an all-powerful father watching over all human beings

The immaturity of the present is to believe that there are no limits or duties, only potentials and rights

To be quite frank, and coming from a homo(bi)sexual, homosexuality is a hormonal disorder, but a mild one, not necessarily a disease. And this is also why human society should tolerate it, to a certain extent, encouraging healthy behaviors and this does not include promiscuity, also because of the intrinsic imperfection of life.