Hearts minds and will of the people

The US government operates on a three part system

theoretically equal in the distribution of powers and responsibility

practically useless

I’ve had many discussions with my wife about the current power struggles within thai land as well as Hong Kong and the self imposed exile of Prince Harry.

I think I’ve detected a common thread.

The Heart of the People.

In order to effectively govern you need at least three things

A people’s Will.

Typically portrayed as violence. But will is simply the ability to exert force by the direction of the body. An army imposing it’s kings will for the desire of resources will conquer lands foreign and domestic, pressing people into service.

A people’s Mind

Without the rational actors on the side of the government, you’ll find yourself without mercenaries, overseers, middle-managers and most importantly bureaucrats whose function is to obfuscate how power and resources are distributed, preventing upheaval by maintaining status quo.

A people’s Heart

This is the least defined. The prince describes Ecclesiastes driven principalities as areas that neither require rule and are resistant to interference. For much of history the Church has functioned as the Heart bestowing a check upon the King’s Will.

I recently read that Viking kings had a council of women who had the veto power over his decisions in much the same way.

In England the Queen, while massive in her financial power, is constrained in her Will and Mind by the Parliament as well as other financial powers.

What she does hold is the Heart of the People. Something that is detectable in all her actions as a motive.

The Heart is emotional it can change with the wind if a leader isn’t careful. That is why if there is no codified singular religion – state sponsored. It becomes even more of a problem.

In America

The purpose of the Judiciary is to actually serve as the heart of the nation. Which wasn’t such a big issue until the will/minds of the plutocrats became misaligned with the will/minds of the populace.

I think nation wide that a solution will not be reached until these two parties align once again as to who deserves what…

Now I think that the best way for a Judge to do their Job of being able to keep the other two branches in check would be as it is currently structured with a single low level judge preceding not based on the size of a population but based on the case load of disputes. So as not to tax any individual judge too much and to not appoint any unnecessary judges.

I think that the position of Judge should not have the authority of a Jury as well as the power of a Censor.

But in order to remove external pressures from a Judge. A Judge should be a position for life, where except for rank among judges, something that should be self-selecting by piers without the vote of superiors. In order to have a proper appellate court.

The only except should be that if a judge loses the heart of the people. They can be removed from office.

I am unsure as how to structure such a removal at this time. But it should be preferable that they retire but it shouldn’t be impossible for a majority be able to remove a Judge that does not share the values of the median.

IMO The Thousand Cock Stare

The Thousand Cock Stare is a term in the Manosphere referring to the look of a woman who has not only hit the wall but has ridden the cock carousel so much that she has destroyed her ability to pair-bond and be satisfied with any partner for long.

Hot Take:

The premise is flawed.

Imagine your mind is a boat on a wide open ocean…

The older you get the more cargo you take on, the bigger that ship gets.

The bigger that ship is the harder it is for it to turn course.

The problem is that the manosphere says that pair bonding can occur after the age of 22 if only she has kept her partner count low.

The flaw in this premise is that if the ship at 30 is an oil tanker

the manosphere believes that at age 22 the ship can still easily right it’s sails

but by that point in a persons experience their ship is the size of a cruise ship,

It’s course is largely set and changing direction is easily and faster than that of the tanker,

But the capacity for pair bonding has already been determined.

15

is when the Seinfeld began grooming his bride

15

is largely when romantic and partner experience start to enter a person’s cargo hold

UNDERSTAND I am not advocating grooming or pedophile.

So 18 then so this all legal and well

at this age an adult woman will have had 3 years of experience in relationships and much less baggage.

This isn’t a question of pair-bonding because by and large I don’t think pair-bonding is a given trait. Since many cultures exist just fine without strict pair-bonding relationship and our society at least the working class portion will see it dissolve into either religious based pairs and secular open relations.

This is a matter of learned and repetitive behavior.

If you’ve read the Art of Seduction by Robert Greene,

or your familiar what to do after the honeymoon fades.

Then you should understand that after the initial attraction has faded their are steps to take that reignite lost flames and introduce excitement where and when appropriate. In order to keep things fresh for you and your partner.

It doesn’t matter whether or not a 30 or even 40 something took a good long ride on the cock carousel.

If her life experience is well adjusted to being alone, she will be unable to “pair-bond” just the same.

Because her life and experience consists largely without you and even with 30 more years of a successful marriage, this won’t prevent divorce because as people age and start to fall into routines the some of many experiences are blend into few and their cargo space is reduced.

You know how the days are long but the weeks are short and the years fly by.

The whole time she will remember the many highlights of varied experience from her 20 years before you came and unless you provide equally varied and memorable experiences than you are the one causing jeopardy in your relationship.

The number of cocks doesn’t matter

Its the number of experiences.

I’ll be honest those experiences increase the cost of maintaining a long term relationship, whether or not she was a rider or not. The Honeymoon phase gives you a hormonal boost to meet her cost expenditure. It’s not that you stop giving the same it’s that the hedonistic treadmill will mean that unless you’ve adopted a healthy abuse spiral, then your Honeymoon bonus goes away and now you have to expend more effort. Simply for her to adjust to that effort and demand more.

This isn’t a result of the stare, or the wall. This is just the way it is.

If you want a long term relationship with a single woman. You can’t front load all your effort in the relationship and expect to just coast.

You must intentional go through periods of drought and willful deprive, so that you can spin out of that and back into the romance closer to when you first started.

Pair-bonding, the stare, and the wall

are preached by the divorced casualties and the red pill ragers

to those who start this rabbit hole after their first clash with reality.

In summary read the Art of Seduction by Robert Greene

and understand now more than ever it’s on men to decide when and how long to engage with a partner.

Be informed and

Thanks for reading, I hope this was of value.

I’ll be streaming from stage one develop to finished product a 4-player card game on twitch every Friday 3pm-5pm EST

give a follow

or feel free @ me on Discord

Want more Ravenclaw over analysis

enjoy this article.

Send an E-mail to

here

Or Follow me on Twitter for retweets of cute Kirby pictures

@HppoTweeter

With Love,

HngyHngyHppo

Pair bonding and peer bonding

This is a thought and therefore it is to be taken solely as opinion on the author at the time of writing. I reserve to be wrong and alter this thought at any point in the future or the past.

It’s been a frequent conjecture in the red pill sphere that a woman’s ability to form a lasting pair bond is diminished with the number of sexual partners.

But that a man’s ability to pair bond is unaffected by his count of sexual partners.

Whether a double standard or a biological difference.

I can not say nor do I much care.

These are conjectures based on the summaries of my observations.

It is my current belief that women practice both pair bonding and peer bonding.

While men either practice peer bonding or pair bonding.

Peer bonding isn’t discussed when men talk about a women’s ability to pair bond.

It is without a doubt a foreign concept to most men.

Most men do not form new lasting friendships past the age of 25. And so the opportunity to create new and lasting peer bonds among men is diminished. So it is simply not thought about.

Women however can and do form lasting peer bonds throughout their life.

It is my current thought that men either practice peer bonding or pair bonding,

Whereas women can practice both at the same time.

The men who focus on peer bonding tend to put

“Bro’s before Hoes”

They tend to be the HVM (high value male), as their concerns for social status and allows them to climb the corporate ladder as well as become the “lifted” Alpha male of their friend circle.

But these men rarely settle down and if they do they often step out.

As their emotional needs (or need of sexual validation) tends to be more than a single partner can provide.

Where as I see the average Delta and Bravo,

Able to settle down but their pair bond takes priority over their social status.

As well as their economic status.

The drive to climb either ladder seems diminished

as long as things are well at home.

NOW

Here are my observations of women,

I have seen girls with high partner counts settle down into lasting marriages

the difference

A first I thought it was religion….

But whether Born Again Christian, Mormon, Wiccan, or Agnostic

religions where the package but the truth was

that these provide ready and open peer groups for the women

women who’ve taken up a regular social hobby with other women of “good” moral character

I see the same shift in them as well.

She can be the atheist or satanist in a knitting circle but the reinforcement of values through a stable peer group is the difference.

I think that women fill the first two levels of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs with a strong pair bond but only half of the third tier.

The other half of the third tier of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs as well as the fourth tier is reserved for influences beyond the home.

Whereas men for the most part seek to fill the part two tiers from society and the top two tiers from pair bonding. Men don’t need to peer bond with their coworkers or even hold to religious tenets and practices to satisfy the first two tiers and in most cases the Delta can rest content upon the third tier of Maslow’s hierarchy while filling the need for esteem through self isolating hobbies (video games, model trains, stamp collecting)

If you think I’m wrong about this FIGHT ME!

Thanks for reading, I hope this was of value.

I’ll be streaming from stage one develop to finished product a 4-player card game on twitch every Friday 3pm-5pm EST

give a follow

or feel free @ me on Discord

Want more Ravenclaw over analysis

enjoy this article.

Send an E-mail to

here

Or Follow me on Twitter for retweets of cute Kirby pictures

@HppoTweeter

With Love,

HngyHngyHppo