Are loners more sane and authentic than popular people?

[Winston]

Is there such a thing?

The concept of "introfinity" takes aloneness and lonerism to a whole new level.

Introfinity: A transcendent state of being beyond the need for the illusion of 'other'.

http://introfinity.wordpress.com/

This makes sense:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthre ... 908&page=7

Loners certainly think clear than popular people. Because generally, the popular people and all their follwers are westernized (conformed), celebrity captivated drones.

They follow what the person does in front. While a loner doesn't follow anybody but themselves, they think for themselves and form their own opinons.

Those that follow, follow trends and opinons, they're desire and goal in life is to fit and and be accepted.

So, yes....I would certainly say most loners are saner and thinking more clearly than the popular folks. No doubt about it.

Its cos we're all slaves. Those who remember are ousted for not going along with the illusion. Those who choose to be voluntarily brainwashed into forgetting are hoisted up as an example of social success.
Create as much waste as possible, getinto as much debt as possible, breed as many companies (children) as possible, then spend the rest of your life wondering what the hell you've just put yourself through. Everything is possible in hindsight.

Im a loner btw

[Winston]

Question: I've lived in Russia and the Philippines for a long time. How come there aren't any real loners there? Have you all noticed that? It's mostly the US, Canada, and maybe the UK where you find loners.

It seems that the more fake a society is, the more loners there are who withdraw from others. But the more genuine a social culture is, the less loners there are.

If you go to passionate open inclusive cultures, you will not find loners. Examples - Russia, Ukraine, Latin America, Philippines, Holland, Spain, etc.

People act more authentic without fake smiles and act the way they feel.

Take a look at this comparison chart I created. If you were in a social culture with the features of the right column, would you need to be a loner?

http://www.happierabroad.com/comparison.htm

[Shokkers]

I was thinking, could it be that people who are "loners" in the western world are not people with no social skills at all, but in fact genuinely sane people who will not (or cannot) act with the fakeness required to fit into groups? Could it be that they have found a deep inner authenticity inside that they don't want to compromise because they are on such a different frequency, that for them to conform to bullshit and "go through the motions" that it takes to get along in groups and crowds is too taxing?

Could that be the truth? What do you think?

Also, have you ever met a popular person with many friends among mainstream people, who told the truth like it is with no BS, no political correctness and no fakeness?

Let's HOPE the loners are able to hold out like that. A lot of loners suffer from what I call "emotional corrosion" which can lead to antisocial or criminal behavior. Scratch the surface of any serial killers and you often find they were 'loners'.

[wuxi]

As a loner I get energized by being alone. I dumped all of the women I've ever dated because they couldn't give me enough space. Although, I quite enjoy chatting with filipina women for some reason. My dad died of a heart attack three weeks ago but I don't miss him because I never get lonely. Most of my friends are dogs.

I think the population of loner men in north america is increasing as a result of feminsim, divorce and increasing narcissism etc.... Almost every guy on this forum will be able to relate to being a loner at sometime in there lives if there from a western country. In the end its up you to decide how lonely is too lonely.

[Enishi]

I have a number of decent female friends in America, but they are pretty much all taken. :\ Even with those I have slept with, they have numerous issues which prevent either them or me from wanting to go any further.

I tend to be a loner myself, but I DO really enjoy being around people who I can have interesting conversations with and feel a connection to. I like intense vibrant conversations with a small group of like-minded individuals in a decent setting (not clubs or bars, lol).

[momopi]

For those interested in the Christian monastery experience:

http://www.abbeyguesthouse.org/

http://www.pecosmonastery.org/poustinia/poustinia.html

http://www.monks.org/retreats.html


"For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me," -- Matthew 25:35

Disclaimer: hospitality provided at $40-$65/day, lunch and dinner not included.

[Jackal]

How do you pretend to be something that you're not though?

It's like being a spy. I've heard a spy once say on an internet video that "you get really good at lying if you do it everyday from the moment you wake up til the moment you go to sleep."

Basically, very social people become expert liers and expert fakes because they've spent years practicing. Whereas more intellectual people like ourselves who actually have a conscience just think, "I don't want to lie all the time," and then we are considered naive and foolish by the masses.

But in my opinion, ethics always remain important. Some people in the world do value honesty and trustworthiness.

[Benj]

All I know is that I had to be investigated by the FBI to see if I was a reliable witness to an incident. After a very thorough search and interrogation, I was found to be in the upper 1% of all sane people. I'm one of the sanest, if not sanest people anyone is likely to meet. However, I cannot find a decent or very intelligent friend in the US if my life depended on it.

[polya]

...

[NorthAmericanguy]

During the Victoria era, only a small % of the population were upper middle class and upper class, who could afford the leisure of parties. There were specific etiquettes that had to be followed. The topics of discussion were limited to prevent people from getting into heated debates in public (on politics, people do not agree to disagree) that might end in a sword or pistol duel on the lawn. The upper class gentry must maintain his gentlement image in public and act reserved. More serious discussions occured when men retired to the privacy of a cigar room, where they could disagree over a variety of topics without losing face in public.

In America, we tried to imitate the Europeans of the time, but on a much smaller budget. One example is the homes built with false fronts. Victorian architecture were elaborate, romantic, and rich. Houses were large, the bigger the better to show off your estate's wealth. Americans were poor-er and didn't have the European "old money", so our pretenders built homes with false (fake) fronts to make it look like we're richer than we really are. Instead of a real mansion, we built McMansions with impressive looking fronts and grand entrances, but the house itself had small dingy rooms. Furniture were for looks and not function. This was an age of conspicuous consumption, like US in 2002-2006. Look at recently built homes in the US with faux Tuscan architecture and fake fire place.

For the upper class, girls were raised to be virgins and sexually ignorant. "Pretty, young, and innocent" was the desirable image. Girls were also raised to not have an opinion in public. She may be well educated, but at parties where she is meeting potential suitors, she must refrain from expressing strong opinions on most subjects. Being unrestrained and speaking your mind was considered uneducated low-class boorish behavior, on same level as speaking while you're eating or rudely interrupting someone while they're speaking. Heck, if I didn't think before I speak, and someone wanted to discuss Somalia, I'd probably reply "napalm the f*ckers".

Anyways, after the Victorian era upper class girl is married, she did not work and had maids, nannies, and a governess to look after household choirs and child raising. In public she is expected to be her husband's perfect accessory, expressing no opinions of her own except in support of her husband. If she had disagreements with him, she would only speak of it to him in private.

At this point, I'd like to point out that this Victorian polite behavior was for a small % of the society as a whole. The vast majority of the people were lower class and did not attend parties or lived in mansions, or even fake mansions, unless if they were servants. Lower class women worked on farms, in domestic service, textile industry, seamstresses, shoe factories, washing/laundry, and so on. Wages were low and upper mobility is very limited. Those who can't make ends meet sold their bodies in prostitution in the cities, much like Thai girls from Isan today. The low class people in Victorian era were boorish, less reserved, spoke their mind ("I want this"), rude, and their virginity was de-valued.

Much of our social etiquette today at formal parties follow the expectations from Victorian era. You're expected to keep your topics of discussions lite and non-offensive. Serious, in-depth discussions are reserved for when the men retired to the wine cellar, or in less-affluent McMansions, the loft "man cave' with pool table furnishing or home theater. People who want to engage in serious, in-depth discussions on initial meeting is acceptable only in specific settings, otherwise it's considered socially inept as many people are simply not interested in whatever you're advocating. i.e. if 2 vegetarians go out on their first date and wish to discuss vegan vitamines, that's perfectly acceptable. But to do so at a party full of non-vegetarians is dumb.

People have all kinds of hobbies and interests. Your own hobby and areas of interest is only a small area in the wide spectrum. To expect everyone at a party to be interested in your own narrow area of interests is unrealistic. If I attend a party today and want to discuss the latest manga that I'm reading, I wouldn't expect most of the people to be manga fans to begin with. And if you wish to discuss socio-political issues, you must get invited to the cigar room (or equivalent, or in a relevant sub-group) first. If you wish to run against established etiquette, you won't be invited to the next party.

While you may find loud and rude alpha-male wanna be's and bitches at parties today, it's also recognized that these people are obnoxious and conduct themselves poorly.

Ok, you must be an avid historian. Nice post!

[NorthAmericanguy]

... I'm one of the sanest, if not sanest people anyone is likely to meet. However, I cannot find a decent or very intelligent friend in the US if my life depended on it.

The reason why you are ALONE is because you are SANE! The more sane you are, the more alone you are!! Its been my experience too (being alone that is, I don't know how sane I am). You gave me a bright idea!!
I was sad to hear about the school girl who was alone everyday - especially at lunch-hour. If she was a guy, NO-ONE at all would have talked to her because guys won't support other guys (from what I've seen).

100% Agree.


They say women care about children and other women. And men care about women and children, but nobody cares about men. I find this to be true.

[Winston]

For those interested in the Christian monastery experience:

http://www.abbeyguesthouse.org/

http://www.pecosmonastery.org/poustinia/poustinia.html

http://www.monks.org/retreats.html


"For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me," -- Matthew 25:35

Disclaimer: hospitality provided at $40-$65/day, lunch and dinner not included.

Why do you advocate this? What is the benefit of them?

If you want a spiritual getaway for meditation and quiet contemplation, there's a Buddhist retreat place that I've been to several times in Arizona called the Garchen Institute that's on top of a mountain. You can sleep there in the temple with a sleeping bag for only $15 a night. It's very nice and has wonderful spiritual vibes there. Even my parents felt them when they were there, and they aren't that sensitive to vibes. More info and pictures:

http://www.garchen.net/about.html#building
http://www.garchen.net/eventguide.html#lodging

[Winston]

... I'm one of the sanest, if not sanest people anyone is likely to meet. However, I cannot find a decent or very intelligent friend in the US if my life depended on it.

The reason why you are ALONE is because you are SANE! The more sane you are, the more alone you are!! Its been my experience too (being alone that is, I don't know how sane I am). You gave me a bright idea!!
I was sad to hear about the school girl who was alone everyday - especially at lunch-hour. If she was a guy, NO-ONE at all would have talked to her because guys won't support other guys (from what I've seen).

100% Agree.


They say women care about children and other women. And men care about women and children, but nobody cares about men. I find this to be true.

That may be generally true. There are loner women though, but they tend to be either really nerdy, or fat angry women with serious issues.

Btw, I just had a thought. It does seem that the more time you spend around people, the more you sort of "lose yourself". I mean you lose the sense of your true self, cause when you are around others, you sort of conform to what they expect you to be. You are no longer a freethinking individual. For example, if you live with a bunch of marines in the military, or in a fraternity or sorority house, you will start to have a "collective groupthink" type of mind and personality, as well as identity, rather than think for yourself. Any of you notice that?

On the other hand, if you spend too much time alone, you start to become alienated and dissociated from others, as well as "too unique". So the solution is to have a healthy balance, with not too much time alone and not too much time around others. But of course, it depends on what you want in life.

Jackal, you made a good point. When you refuse to play mind games and politics, a lot of people call you "childish or naive". I've been called that many times simply because I don't like to play those fakery games and prefer simple direct truth and logic. I never understood what "office politics" were about or how to play the game in them. Growing up as a misfit, my escape and world was in Star Trek, so I learned to see the world in terms of logical vs. illogical. lol

[Winston]

Wow check out this comment in the David Icke forum in the thread I started there about this same topic. It's so true huh?

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthre ... 1059435723

Does anyone else ever get the feeling of, you hate being alone and crave social contact, but when you finally do have it, you wonder what all the fuss was in craving it so much?

I'm not suggesting at all that socializing is a bad thing but this is something that I have experienced multiple times.

You should check out the posts in my thread there about loners vs. popular people, which is now 16 pages long. They are very interesting.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthre ... 08&page=15

[Winston]

Something else I realized. When one is "awake" one will find that spending too much time around people who are "unawake" will compromise their "wakefulness" and drag them down. It will contract them rather than expand them, unless they are among similar folks who are also awake. Thus the awakened must spend more time alone in order to maintain the clarity of their mental/spiritual state, lest he/she be dragged down by the unawakened.