The Venerdi Podcast – Episode #87

In this Episode of “The Venerdi Podcast,” I give you an update on my 1000 Words Challenge and rant on why you shouldn’t trust those who completely shit on their hometowns.

Listen below at the following links:
YouTube
Soundcloud

Music Credits
Intro: “Il Canto degli Italiani” (Goffreddo Mameli/Michele Novaro)
Outro: “Giuseppe” (Antonio Zimmerman)

An Interesting Comment

I recently got an interesting comment on my podcast review of Aaron Clarey’s “The Curse of the High IQ”:

Clarey got the night owl / intelligence correlation from the evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa. In and of itself being a night owl is regrettable because the rest of the world is on a day schedule. Ideally, someone would be intelligent and not a night owl, but unusual traits tend to evolve together. Both traits are unusual and thus correlated. As you say it’s not a one for one relation and many creatures of the night are not all intelligent, but it’s still an interesting relation. It shows intelligence is unusual, often similarly misunderstood, and thus such persons are somewhat persecuted or at least stifled by the will of the masses. Also, if you like Clarey then why not let people spend money on his stuff, even the stuff you don’t like? The money will all go to him, and how can you guarantee that whatever else they would spend their money on would be made by people more worthy of the money? A Clarey in the hand is better than whoever else is in the bush. Also, I agree that Clarey needs an editor for his books. He deserves to present himself better. I also agree that the ability to relate to normies is necessary to carry on with life, but for most intelligent people it is not pleasant or is at best ordinary. Interesting though that you say he doesn’t have enough patience. Perhaps patience involves holding back the inner intellectual beast at times, with restraint taking precedence over intellectual indulgence. A beast to control another beast.

While kind of ramble-ly (paragraphs!), I have three points of contention with it.

It shows intelligence is unusual, often similarly misunderstood, and thus such persons are somewhat persecuted or at least stifled by the will of the masses.

One, if you think you’re “persecuted” or “stifled” by others due to being smart/intelligent, you have more pressing and internally focused problems to deal with instead of the “will of the masses”. By the literal definition, you’re focusing and trying to change an uncontrollable external, which is the quickest way to despair and anger. That isn’t a way to live one’s life.

I also agree that the ability to relate to normies is necessary to carry on with life, but for most intelligent people it is not pleasant or is at best ordinary. […] Perhaps patience involves holding back the inner intellectual beast at times, with restraint taking precedence over intellectual indulgence. A beast to control another beast.

Two, this is more of a continuance from my first point. Is it sometimes difficult to deal with those who are less smart than you are? Absolutely. However, you still have to have the maturity and develop the necessary social graces to be able to go out in the world and live life. Sitting down and crying “Woe is me! The world is unfair to intelligent people like myself!” is a dodge and a transfer of responsibility to an external (“It’s not my fault!”).

In my own personal experience, the more arrogantly intelligent (and I’ve known a few!) are usually much more difficult to deal with than the so-called “dumb-dumb normies”.

As for the second part of this, there’s a reason why the saying “Patience is a virtue” exists. Not everything will go the way you want it to, and other people will do things that will make you want to tear your hair out and scream in frustration. That’s life. You have to learn deal with it and be patient with others. It’s of no use to yourself or to others to be petulant and sulk in the corner because people aren’t celebrating your brilliance at every turn.

Also, if you like Clarey then why not let people spend money on his stuff, even the stuff you don’t like? The money will all go to him, and how can you guarantee that whatever else they would spend their money on would be made by people more worthy of the money? A Clarey in the hand is better than whoever else is in the bush.

Three, when you’re commenting on something and being honest, you call a spade a spade. You don’t intentionally say “Well, it’s bad, but you should buy it anyways (because I’ll get a commission from it).”

If I review something, I review it based on its standalone merits. Not the author’s previous works. Not his prior prestige. My own personal opinion of the work. If it’s good, I say it’s good; but when it’s bad, I damn well say it’s bad, regardless of who it is.

If something is bad, you say why and then support that with your reasoning. The same goes for when you’re praising something.

I’m no sycophant of anyone, I form my own opinions regardless of whether it’s the “cool” or “popular” thing to believe.

Plus, I’m a Stoic. So why would I be concerned that much with what others think of me when I know for a fact that I have absolutely no control over that? Honesty may make you more enemies, but those who appreciate your candor will respect you more for it, possibly gaining a friend or a colleague in the process.

P.S. If you enjoyed this post why not try out for yourself the challenge I’m currently doing

1000 Words Per Day Challenge

As yet another personal challenge, I am going to try to write 1000 words each day. Basically, I open a Word document and then type until I pass 1004. The extra four words are to compensate for the date and day at the beginning.

Here are the basic rules I will be following:
– Once per day open a blank Microsoft Word document and type about anything to get to 1000 words
– Any sentences/thoughts need to be finished even if above the 1000 word goal
– Be descriptive
– No “Scientific Passive” voice
– See how long you can go before “breaking the chain”

Once I do “break the chain” or have a month’s worth of documents (30), whichever comes first, I’ll begin posting them here to my blog in edited form.

The first one, yesterday, took about 1 hour to write and I’m expecting future ones to be the same. Let’s see if I can keep this one up.

Predictions for the DNC

Considering I made some tentative predictions about the RNC this past week that came to be true, here’s my tentative predictions for the DNC:

– A minimum of one violent street brawl between different protesting groups (both Leftist)
– BLM will cause or nearly cause a minimum of one riot
All the DNC’s rhetoric will be purely reactionary about how Trump is an evil, white, bigoted Nazi
– The Dems will once again boo God
– They’ll also boo the traditional family
– They’ll boo the cops and law enforcement providing security
– You’ll hear an interview where someone will say: “America was never great!” before the Media can cut away from it
– They’ll overplay the race, woman, and gay cards to point where even the Media will have a “WTF?” moment
Sanders supporters will show up in force to protest (violently)
– A minimum of one shooting in the vicinity of the covention
– Someone will do the “Black Power” raised fist on stage to cheers
While Hillary will get the nod, the energy surrounding it will be very low and subdued
Some very angry Bernie delegates will walk out in protest

Any other predictions? Leave them in the comments!

EDIT: If any of these predictions come true, I’ll bold the text.