These “Mtv.” losers just debate for attention. They don’t actually care for any constructiveness. They’re mentality is “you might as well try it,” so they go into the arena with the completely wrong understanding that it’s some kind of vanity thing. I used to be infected by these types of idiots. They love to create a subtle little vanity contest, so they follow & emulate & do things with their own little renditions of what others do. ¶ I was basically pressured into this stupid “Mtv.” thing, whatever you wish to call it, because I was subsidizing for less due to a desperate desire for social connections. I didn’t want to be a part of it. I like music, but I don’t believe in orienting a lifestyle around that sort of thing, & I don’t believe in wasting money on alcohol, etc., just to lower my settings to speak to people of lesser intelligence. When I try to articulate this, it’s met with some sarcastic reply of “yea, cuz it’s like a gateway drug, right”. People value the stupidest things – an immature, toddler-like inability to put the “Beetle’s track” on pause. They’re much too addicted to lamer forms of entertainment, so they don’t even know how to experiment properly. This culture offers basically nothing healthy for intelligent males. I have my own standards & my own goals, but the culture prioritizes this other unproductive thing, which then causes the projection that I’m “suffering” from failing to be like them. The only thing I’m suffering from is that I have to sometimes deal with them & their influence & that I have wasted some time with it. So then they think it’s “shy”. No, it’s internalized conclusions. That’s how this stupid “Mtv.” culture is; they have delusions of being important & competent just because it’s comfortable to believe that by making their renditions of poses, & then when they’re given the reality, they deflect with “I feel sorry for you”.
If you’re familiar with Barbarossa’s, not to flatter, but to make a good reference point, stated it perfectly in his: ‘Survivalist Rhetoric: The Alpha Male Primitive.’ Because these “spunky”, hipster/hippy idiots is just another version of the machismo facade, just different approach. ¶ Being “cool” is just an excuse to be comfortably stupid. ¶ In fact, the word hipster is a derivative of “hippy”, as the sociologist Norman Mailor explained, but they – themselves – would just give you some diluted context of the word because they have a tendency to try to “defeat” contexts by diluting much context. They’re highly, highly anti-science. Worse than the p.u.a.s. They only think in two simplistic terms; good-beer-vs.-bad-beer, either you’re hip-or-square fun-vs-boring. ¶ most of them can’t really create anything original for themselves, so they emulate & follow, often by mockery, then they always have the convenient guarding of “it’s just irony.” ¶ The “Mtv.” lifestyle is nothing more than another rendition of “sports fans”, etc.;making their feuds, propping their egos based on un-important, stupid matters, & then also maintaining a limited understanding of reality based on casual observations & the fake kind of control that females have created of oblivious confidence. ¶ As Esthir Vilar said: “& so the world will go on, sinking deeper & deeper into this morass of kitsch, barbarism, & inanity called femininity.” – from ‘The Manipulated Man’, pg.: 155, [Pinter & Martin edt.] by Esthir Vilar. Great book, especially as applicable for the appropriate communication level. She had less concern with fanaticism of language – no technicalities, just quick, no vagueness, just straight truth.
The postmodern attitude is that “there is no truth, or that we can’t find it anyway.” If you want to argue that realism is “vague” – that it’s not worth it, too theoretical, & too challenging, then you undermine your argumentation because it stops you from verifying. You might as well not even argue. It’s “mysterious” because they just can’t understand it, & then they also think that one is just trying hard to seem mysterious. ¶ The female marketer of the pick up artist thing named Kezia Noble will tell you: “It’s not what you do or say, it’s how you say or do it,” & these idiots abide by that female demand. ¶ Here’s just an excerpt of one good point PAINFULLY delivered. It’s not supposed to be “stimulating”. It’s supposed to be informative, objective.: ¶ Today postmodernism is all the rage. Around the 1960s, we entered an era characterized by a new style of life, art, & identity. While the modern world was shaped by the industrial revolution & productivity, the postmodern era is shaped by the information revolution – entertainment, the ethic of meaningless consumption, fast-changing styles, &, with that, a lack of commitment to any solid perspectives. “Postmodernism is completely indifferent to the questions of consistency & continuity. It splices genres, attitudes, styles. It relishes the blurring of juxtaposition of forms (fiction-non), stances (straight-ironic), moods (violent-comic), cultural levels (high-low) to no actual meaning. It neither embraces nor criticizes, but beholds the world blankly, with knowingness that dissolves & with a commitment to irony. It takes pleasure in the play of surfaces, & that is mostly what is known, & derides the search for depth as “sensitive”, or something stupid. ¶ Postmodern man is no longer trying to discipline a willpower. He has discarded a quest for a single identity. His stance is ironic. How convenient. Postmodern man is the concupiscent consumer. Whole lives just formed by fashion. He changes shape at will. Lives revolving around taste, not right-or-wrong; aesthetic rather than moral. Kierkegaard called him Don Juan earlier – a fucking pointless “gypsy loser with a fucking banjo”. He avoids consistency by keeping himself satiated with a thousand facades. Don’t think “straights” are excempt. That’s just another version with only a difference of surface. Consumerism is a catharsis.
With the emergence of postmodern man, we have a point of reasoning being reduced. Taste replaces what should be done. ¶ Don’t buy the book – really bad book. It’s a “castrated” attempt of trying to be a little bit insightful with only one good definition on postmodernity found within the entire book, literally only 1 page of quality. Just confirm the source by google search. Just search Sam Keen On Postmodern Man. ¶ Sources: “Fire In The Belly’ by Sam Keen, pgs. 110 & 111.