I would suggest being a bit more calculating, by saying you're "not" interested in any sort of monetary compensation and stress that your blog is simply a place where like-minded politically conscious folks can share info and commiserste over untoward COVID experiences.
Then when you establish a following, demurely declare that your followers are all saying that someone like yourself who's merely financially subsisting, but works so hard on publishing articles should ask for donations.
Hesitate for a moment and act like you're reticent about wanting cash. And then after awhile say it wouldn't be fair to those who are contributing to allow those who are not to post comments. Don't cut followers off right away wait a week or two to see if others contribute.
Finally turn your site into one in which "only" those who pay can see all the stuff and react to it.
And finally, start selling merch. Again, by saying your subscribers want to buy some type of momento, like a tee shirt expressing a catchy phrase, possibly one denoting that you and your followers are heroes. And before you know it a successful enterprise is underway.🤑
Thanks for the advice. I would have preferred $5, but hey, at least you're not just ignoring me, like most of you dipshits reading this.
We have merch. No one has bought any. It's available at nevermore.media.
Listen, I'm fully aware that money will come with time. There's also a lot of people who owe me favours and I could basically just demand money from them. But Ive chosen to go this route because I think the world needs to think about how undervalued journalism is.
Listen, I'm an impatient, aggressive person. I have the personality type of a warrior. I hate to break it to you peace-loving hippies who don't like it when people rock the boat, but any revolutionary movement needs people like me or its not getting anywhere.
The readers of Substack seem not to get that what I'm doing is a full-time job, and that it's akin to busking. If you walk away with putting some change in the hat, you're a prick. It's as simple as that.
I would kindly ask the cheapskates who don't think I deserve to have a roof over my head to please stop reading my work. You're rainbow freeloaders, and you're part of the problem. It's annoying that you think that you're part of the solution because you have the right opinions. Fuck off.
I don't understand why people don't get it. There's a lot massive NGO-industrial complex where people give money to pay the minions of sleazeballs like Tzeporah Berman.
People are throwing cash into a pit all the time, and they want a gala to stroke their egos.
Then again, some of us lost most of our income on account of being anti-vaxxer scum. Canada is not kind to us. Do you have bitcoin - lightning please because almost no fees. I could swing a bit to you.
And I'll try to get my head together to talk about heroes. I loved two of them - the classical kind - and per the trope they both died far too young. Heroes ALWAYS deny it, will engage in loutish behaviour if you push it. Cultural - one American, one Welsh.
I have an unerring ability to spot them. But after all that, I swore off men, I knew I couldn't go through that again.
But I agree with you, there are different kinds of heroes - and I'm glad they're still around.
Do you think that's why people aren't donating? Because they think that someone like me, who lives a live of constant adventure, is already receiving all the reward they deserve?
If you're cunning and your intent is to acquire "empathetic" paying subscribers you'd regularly describe your modest existent which doesn’t require much except the most basic things in life, as you're not materialistic at all. You might even say that you're volunteering considerable time at some vegetable cooperative which became a bit of an oasis in your economically distressed neighborhood. 😉
I don't think it will work though. I think my audience dislikes me and wants me to live in poverty because the fact that I do whatever I want all the time annoys them.
Also, I've been volunteering for years for all kinds of worthy causes. That's not a business plan. If I did what you're suggesting, people would accuse me of virtue signalling. People don't want me to be successful because they hate me. Why do they hate me? You tell me.
Plus, kissing asses isn't my strong suit.
If I can't make money doing this, I'm going to have to do something else.
It is what it is. Maybe when I'm gone people will miss me and decide maybe $5/month wasn't such an outrageous demand.
My theory is that if I can get enough people to hate me, the people that hate the people that hate me will like me.
So, am I worried that I'll attract MAGA-types?
Um, no. I want people to read my work. I don't care what their background is. Any MAGA-heads out there, if you're into NEVERMORE, I'm happy you found your way here.
I for one was amongst the most diehard Trump haters back in 2020 and I still hate Trump and everything he represents!
If former Trump supporters have lost faith in the electoral system because of the massive disappointment of the Trump years and the rigged election, those people are potential future anarchists.
To any Leftists reading this and feeling uncomfortable, we're talking about mostly working class people who have more clout in the real world that middle-class punks on welfare.
Don't like me thinking this way? Guess what? You gotta think this way if you want to organize a successful movement. Politics is about bargaining power. If you want to have a general strike, for instance, you kinda need the working class on board.
Arguably, the smart move from a business perspective would be to pander to this demographic, but NEVERMORE isn't really about business - it's about doing the Pied Piper thing.
I actually like Trump, always have. I'm also painfully aware of his faults. Ditto RFKjr. And they're the only plausible candidates. Except the Powers that Be won't let either of them near the White House.
I fear we're in for more...interesting times. Currently living in Canada, my life kinda got a little too exciting after I became a government whistleblower in the US. So...
But it may be worse here. Article a friend just posted, you probably ought to read it. All Canadians probably should, cos this is where we are now :
Hero is a very subjective term, one that Hero's don't want to be called.
When called a hero, my uncle, a WWII Bomber pilot said, "I'm no hero, I had a job to do and did it."
Marines who have won the Medal of Honor don't consider themselves Heros. "That bunker, I just knew I had to take it out, and I did."
Medical specialists who saved people could be called heroes, and they have said, "Me, a hero? Hell no, I just didn't want my squadmates to die."
EMT's and firemen have been called heroes and have said, "I'm no hero, that person just needed help."
But those who don't do anything worthwhile accept the hero title without reservation; the politician and ... and athletes? They aren't heroes, they just got paid to carry a ball.
Thanks for your kind words and encouragement. It appreciate it. The reason I recommend your Substack is your ability to write thought provoking posts that prick the social apathy that is contributing towards us being led into increasing state slavery. Once again, you have made me think.
Let's consider the Cambridge English dictionary definition of "hero":
"a person who is admired for having done something very brave or having achieved something great."
Under this definition Whitney Webb is a hero. She is brave, as her books on the Epstein Network, One Nation Under Blackmail I & II, demonstrate. She has also achieved something great. For example, she is one of the tiny minority of writers in the so-called "alt media" space to have broken into the mainstream, as her appearances with Russel Brand and Jimmy Dore attest.
Some will say this doesn't matter. I disagree. I can't speak for Whitney, but I know that my aim is to get the information that the MSM buries out to as many people as possible. Whitney has perhaps done more than anyone to advance that cause.
In my opinion, however, it is the depth and accuracy of her research, studied and referenced by many others, myself included, that makes her a champion of the truth. Truly great, you might say.
But I do not consider Whitney Webb to be a "hero." I value Whitney but I would feel I had besmirched her reputation if I defined her a "hero."
Lets consider the Cambridge dictionary listed synonyms for "hero":
"Icon, idol, role model"
Turning to myself, an iconaclast who rejects authority and seeks to undermine the idolisation that stupefies the people, how can I possibly accept the label of "hero?" Not only have I not done anything brave---I am a devout coward---I haven't achieved anything great either. But more than that, I am opposed to the very notion of heroes.
Whitney is an amazing writer, journalist and author, both brave and great, but I don't agree with everything she says, nor she with me. I can recognise all of her admirable qualities without ascribing to her some separate status as a "thought leader."
I retain my own critical thinking. I think the world would be a better place if we all did.
Much of my work is about promoting the idea that we must be the change that we want to see in the world. We cannot rely upon others, or be led by others, to achieve the revolution you speak of, in my view. If we still want to believe in heroes then we must all become our own heroes. I argue we already are, we just don't know it.
Is the struggling single parent, working two jobs on minimum wage to feed and clothe her or his children---fostering new life---not achieving something great? Are they not heroes? Should they not be admired?
Are your actions as an activist not great or brave? Then you are a hero too. We are all heroes but there is nothing "special" about any of us. No one is "better" than anyone else.
We all have different strengths and weaknesses, we are not all "equal." But we are all part of the whole.
We are one, not "other." Not to any extent. Even those who cause harm, perhaps on an enormous scale, are not other. We make them "other" by believing in their status, their claimed authority, in our millions.
Without that belief they would not be able to cause the degree of harm they do. And so it is the belief itself that we must attack. The revolution you want, that I want, is first a revolution of the mind.
"Hero" more than recognises exceptionalism, it venerates it. This is why heroes are found in nearly all mythology. It perpetuates the power of the "leader" and ultimately the state. If only we followed the right hero, everything would be better! It is the cause of evil. As Jeremy Locke wrote in The End of All Evil, we must reject this culture. It is enslaving us and it always has.
We can't carry on with this lunacy. Look where it is taking us. We must all be heroes, thereby eradicating the notion of the exceptional hero.
This is not to undervalue the achievements of others nor to reject leadership. We might need to devolve our authority on, as Larken Rose put it, a contractual basis. But we must never relinquish our sovereign authority and should only follow leaders while we are equally engaged in the single endeavour they lead.
The leader who claims sovereignty over our sovereign authority is a liar, asserting they can achieve the impossible. We must stop falling for this mythology. Obedience is not a virtue.
With all due respect, I am not a hero and I do not want to be considered one by anyone. If I am then that is a reflection upon my own failure. Because, evidently, it means that I have not achieved that which I hope to achieve.
Thank you so much for your thoughtful response! I'll be honest, I went back and forth before posting it, and opted to tone down parts of it. It was even more over the top before.
After unintentionally burning my bridge with CJ Hopkins after writing a piece aggressively defending him from bogus charges of anti-semitism, I hesitated before publishing something that centred on you, but I read it over a few times and decided I felt confident that my words would well-received.
I suppose my sense of humour is not everyone's cup of tea... Some people like being challenged and some people don't. If we're seriously trying to get advance the cause of the paradigm shift, though, I think that it is kind of necessary that someone forces certain topics that people like to dance around and avoid...
My goal is to force debate on uncomfortable subject by... (drum roll) - making people uncomfortable!
This isn't the only way to force debate, but it is the fastest, and given that the fact that I've made enemies of the B'nai Brith, Anti-Defamation League, JDL, trans ideologues, and so forth, I think it's fair to assume that the odds aren't exactly in favour when it comes to making it to old age.
I figure everyone will love me when I'm dead, and I guess that's better than nothing.
I assume that you are more familiar with my work than CJ is. At the risk of sounding like Derrida, when people don't like what I have to say, I tend to assume that they just don't get it. NEVERMORE is meant to challenge the reader, and I can tell that you understand what it is I'm doing.
Case in point: "The reason I recommend your Substack is your ability to write thought provoking posts that prick the social apathy that is contributing towards us being led into increasing state slavery. Once again, you have made me think."
That is indeed the point of Nevermore - to make people think. I'm not trying to get everyone to think like me. I'm just trying to get people to think.
I imagine that people like more fastidious researchers would be frustrated by the lack of rigour in my work... For instance, I don't cite sources because I don't expect anyone to take what I have to say at face value. If my readers are reading me online, it means they have access to the internet, and can look up what I'm saying.
If I was getting paid, I'd aim to deliver a more professional product, but I figure you get what you pay for. If I express something once, I can always express it again in a clearer, better way in the future. For now, I'm just trying to crank out as much as I can.
My strategy was partly inspired by UK Column (who I only discovered thanks to you, by the way).
On the ABOUT tab on their website, you will find this:
"Why should I trust the UK Column?
Put simply, you shouldn't.
The question of whether or not to trust a news organisation is a false choice.
Making such a choice is promoted by government, the old media, and two new organisation types: the fact checker and the trust provider. It disenfranchises readers, viewers and listeners. It is based on the principle that if you trust the media organisation you are visiting, there is no need for you to check the information they present.
So we ask you not to trust us. Instead, view everything published here with a critical eye. Where possible, primary source material is made available for everything we publish: check it; make up your own mind."
Basically, this is why I make so many absurd claims in my writing. It's not just to be entertaining, or because I'm crazy. It's also to keep people on their toes. I am highly influenced by Alan Watts, and he explains that Zen Buddhism was developed to trick people into achieving enlightenment. In my own way, I'm doing the same thing.
The fact of the matter is that because people create reality with their beliefs, the very fact of believing that something is hard makes it more difficult.
This is point that that Allen Carr makes in his classic book on how to stop smoking.
Are you familiar with the work of Emile Coue? He was a great French hypnotherapist. Most of the best pop psychology, like Napoleon Hill for instance, derives from Coue's ideas, especially the Law of Reverse Effect. I think that was what Bukowski was getting at when he chose the words Don't Try to adorn his headstone.
So anyway, thank you for getting it!
You've given me a lot to think about and I plan to respond to your comment in more detail tomorrow.
I would suggest being a bit more calculating, by saying you're "not" interested in any sort of monetary compensation and stress that your blog is simply a place where like-minded politically conscious folks can share info and commiserste over untoward COVID experiences.
Then when you establish a following, demurely declare that your followers are all saying that someone like yourself who's merely financially subsisting, but works so hard on publishing articles should ask for donations.
Hesitate for a moment and act like you're reticent about wanting cash. And then after awhile say it wouldn't be fair to those who are contributing to allow those who are not to post comments. Don't cut followers off right away wait a week or two to see if others contribute.
Finally turn your site into one in which "only" those who pay can see all the stuff and react to it.
And finally, start selling merch. Again, by saying your subscribers want to buy some type of momento, like a tee shirt expressing a catchy phrase, possibly one denoting that you and your followers are heroes. And before you know it a successful enterprise is underway.🤑
Thanks for the advice. I would have preferred $5, but hey, at least you're not just ignoring me, like most of you dipshits reading this.
We have merch. No one has bought any. It's available at nevermore.media.
Listen, I'm fully aware that money will come with time. There's also a lot of people who owe me favours and I could basically just demand money from them. But Ive chosen to go this route because I think the world needs to think about how undervalued journalism is.
Listen, I'm an impatient, aggressive person. I have the personality type of a warrior. I hate to break it to you peace-loving hippies who don't like it when people rock the boat, but any revolutionary movement needs people like me or its not getting anywhere.
The readers of Substack seem not to get that what I'm doing is a full-time job, and that it's akin to busking. If you walk away with putting some change in the hat, you're a prick. It's as simple as that.
I would kindly ask the cheapskates who don't think I deserve to have a roof over my head to please stop reading my work. You're rainbow freeloaders, and you're part of the problem. It's annoying that you think that you're part of the solution because you have the right opinions. Fuck off.
I don't understand why people don't get it. There's a lot massive NGO-industrial complex where people give money to pay the minions of sleazeballs like Tzeporah Berman.
People are throwing cash into a pit all the time, and they want a gala to stroke their egos.
I'm sick of it.
Then again, some of us lost most of our income on account of being anti-vaxxer scum. Canada is not kind to us. Do you have bitcoin - lightning please because almost no fees. I could swing a bit to you.
And I'll try to get my head together to talk about heroes. I loved two of them - the classical kind - and per the trope they both died far too young. Heroes ALWAYS deny it, will engage in loutish behaviour if you push it. Cultural - one American, one Welsh.
I have an unerring ability to spot them. But after all that, I swore off men, I knew I couldn't go through that again.
But I agree with you, there are different kinds of heroes - and I'm glad they're still around.
Look at the bright side of being a starving artist as there are many who are equally broke without possessing any creative ability.😁
Do you think that's why people aren't donating? Because they think that someone like me, who lives a live of constant adventure, is already receiving all the reward they deserve?
Aha. That's it, isn't it?
Is it?
If you're cunning and your intent is to acquire "empathetic" paying subscribers you'd regularly describe your modest existent which doesn’t require much except the most basic things in life, as you're not materialistic at all. You might even say that you're volunteering considerable time at some vegetable cooperative which became a bit of an oasis in your economically distressed neighborhood. 😉
Way ahead of you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrovMIDJvfo
I don't think it will work though. I think my audience dislikes me and wants me to live in poverty because the fact that I do whatever I want all the time annoys them.
Also, I've been volunteering for years for all kinds of worthy causes. That's not a business plan. If I did what you're suggesting, people would accuse me of virtue signalling. People don't want me to be successful because they hate me. Why do they hate me? You tell me.
Plus, kissing asses isn't my strong suit.
If I can't make money doing this, I'm going to have to do something else.
It is what it is. Maybe when I'm gone people will miss me and decide maybe $5/month wasn't such an outrageous demand.
Maybe...😁
I honestly think that part of it is that women love me, and no one feels sorry for the guy who's got women all over him.
But I don't want people to feel sorry for me. I want them to give me money. There's a difference.
Perhaps they'll give you money BECAUSE they feel bad for you?
My theory is that if I can get enough people to hate me, the people that hate the people that hate me will like me.
So, am I worried that I'll attract MAGA-types?
Um, no. I want people to read my work. I don't care what their background is. Any MAGA-heads out there, if you're into NEVERMORE, I'm happy you found your way here.
I for one was amongst the most diehard Trump haters back in 2020 and I still hate Trump and everything he represents!
If former Trump supporters have lost faith in the electoral system because of the massive disappointment of the Trump years and the rigged election, those people are potential future anarchists.
To any Leftists reading this and feeling uncomfortable, we're talking about mostly working class people who have more clout in the real world that middle-class punks on welfare.
Don't like me thinking this way? Guess what? You gotta think this way if you want to organize a successful movement. Politics is about bargaining power. If you want to have a general strike, for instance, you kinda need the working class on board.
Arguably, the smart move from a business perspective would be to pander to this demographic, but NEVERMORE isn't really about business - it's about doing the Pied Piper thing.
I actually like Trump, always have. I'm also painfully aware of his faults. Ditto RFKjr. And they're the only plausible candidates. Except the Powers that Be won't let either of them near the White House.
I fear we're in for more...interesting times. Currently living in Canada, my life kinda got a little too exciting after I became a government whistleblower in the US. So...
But it may be worse here. Article a friend just posted, you probably ought to read it. All Canadians probably should, cos this is where we are now :
https://mathewaldred.substack.com/p/jamie-sarkonak-teacher-commits-suicide
PS: I don't give a toss about people's politics, either - so long as it doesn't lead them to things like the above.
Hero is a very subjective term, one that Hero's don't want to be called.
When called a hero, my uncle, a WWII Bomber pilot said, "I'm no hero, I had a job to do and did it."
Marines who have won the Medal of Honor don't consider themselves Heros. "That bunker, I just knew I had to take it out, and I did."
Medical specialists who saved people could be called heroes, and they have said, "Me, a hero? Hell no, I just didn't want my squadmates to die."
EMT's and firemen have been called heroes and have said, "I'm no hero, that person just needed help."
But those who don't do anything worthwhile accept the hero title without reservation; the politician and ... and athletes? They aren't heroes, they just got paid to carry a ball.
Thanks for your kind words and encouragement. It appreciate it. The reason I recommend your Substack is your ability to write thought provoking posts that prick the social apathy that is contributing towards us being led into increasing state slavery. Once again, you have made me think.
Let's consider the Cambridge English dictionary definition of "hero":
"a person who is admired for having done something very brave or having achieved something great."
Under this definition Whitney Webb is a hero. She is brave, as her books on the Epstein Network, One Nation Under Blackmail I & II, demonstrate. She has also achieved something great. For example, she is one of the tiny minority of writers in the so-called "alt media" space to have broken into the mainstream, as her appearances with Russel Brand and Jimmy Dore attest.
Some will say this doesn't matter. I disagree. I can't speak for Whitney, but I know that my aim is to get the information that the MSM buries out to as many people as possible. Whitney has perhaps done more than anyone to advance that cause.
In my opinion, however, it is the depth and accuracy of her research, studied and referenced by many others, myself included, that makes her a champion of the truth. Truly great, you might say.
But I do not consider Whitney Webb to be a "hero." I value Whitney but I would feel I had besmirched her reputation if I defined her a "hero."
Lets consider the Cambridge dictionary listed synonyms for "hero":
"Icon, idol, role model"
Turning to myself, an iconaclast who rejects authority and seeks to undermine the idolisation that stupefies the people, how can I possibly accept the label of "hero?" Not only have I not done anything brave---I am a devout coward---I haven't achieved anything great either. But more than that, I am opposed to the very notion of heroes.
Whitney is an amazing writer, journalist and author, both brave and great, but I don't agree with everything she says, nor she with me. I can recognise all of her admirable qualities without ascribing to her some separate status as a "thought leader."
I retain my own critical thinking. I think the world would be a better place if we all did.
Much of my work is about promoting the idea that we must be the change that we want to see in the world. We cannot rely upon others, or be led by others, to achieve the revolution you speak of, in my view. If we still want to believe in heroes then we must all become our own heroes. I argue we already are, we just don't know it.
Is the struggling single parent, working two jobs on minimum wage to feed and clothe her or his children---fostering new life---not achieving something great? Are they not heroes? Should they not be admired?
Are your actions as an activist not great or brave? Then you are a hero too. We are all heroes but there is nothing "special" about any of us. No one is "better" than anyone else.
We all have different strengths and weaknesses, we are not all "equal." But we are all part of the whole.
We are one, not "other." Not to any extent. Even those who cause harm, perhaps on an enormous scale, are not other. We make them "other" by believing in their status, their claimed authority, in our millions.
Without that belief they would not be able to cause the degree of harm they do. And so it is the belief itself that we must attack. The revolution you want, that I want, is first a revolution of the mind.
"Hero" more than recognises exceptionalism, it venerates it. This is why heroes are found in nearly all mythology. It perpetuates the power of the "leader" and ultimately the state. If only we followed the right hero, everything would be better! It is the cause of evil. As Jeremy Locke wrote in The End of All Evil, we must reject this culture. It is enslaving us and it always has.
We can't carry on with this lunacy. Look where it is taking us. We must all be heroes, thereby eradicating the notion of the exceptional hero.
This is not to undervalue the achievements of others nor to reject leadership. We might need to devolve our authority on, as Larken Rose put it, a contractual basis. But we must never relinquish our sovereign authority and should only follow leaders while we are equally engaged in the single endeavour they lead.
The leader who claims sovereignty over our sovereign authority is a liar, asserting they can achieve the impossible. We must stop falling for this mythology. Obedience is not a virtue.
With all due respect, I am not a hero and I do not want to be considered one by anyone. If I am then that is a reflection upon my own failure. Because, evidently, it means that I have not achieved that which I hope to achieve.
Thank you so much for your thoughtful response! I'll be honest, I went back and forth before posting it, and opted to tone down parts of it. It was even more over the top before.
After unintentionally burning my bridge with CJ Hopkins after writing a piece aggressively defending him from bogus charges of anti-semitism, I hesitated before publishing something that centred on you, but I read it over a few times and decided I felt confident that my words would well-received.
I suppose my sense of humour is not everyone's cup of tea... Some people like being challenged and some people don't. If we're seriously trying to get advance the cause of the paradigm shift, though, I think that it is kind of necessary that someone forces certain topics that people like to dance around and avoid...
My goal is to force debate on uncomfortable subject by... (drum roll) - making people uncomfortable!
This isn't the only way to force debate, but it is the fastest, and given that the fact that I've made enemies of the B'nai Brith, Anti-Defamation League, JDL, trans ideologues, and so forth, I think it's fair to assume that the odds aren't exactly in favour when it comes to making it to old age.
I figure everyone will love me when I'm dead, and I guess that's better than nothing.
I assume that you are more familiar with my work than CJ is. At the risk of sounding like Derrida, when people don't like what I have to say, I tend to assume that they just don't get it. NEVERMORE is meant to challenge the reader, and I can tell that you understand what it is I'm doing.
Case in point: "The reason I recommend your Substack is your ability to write thought provoking posts that prick the social apathy that is contributing towards us being led into increasing state slavery. Once again, you have made me think."
That is indeed the point of Nevermore - to make people think. I'm not trying to get everyone to think like me. I'm just trying to get people to think.
I imagine that people like more fastidious researchers would be frustrated by the lack of rigour in my work... For instance, I don't cite sources because I don't expect anyone to take what I have to say at face value. If my readers are reading me online, it means they have access to the internet, and can look up what I'm saying.
If I was getting paid, I'd aim to deliver a more professional product, but I figure you get what you pay for. If I express something once, I can always express it again in a clearer, better way in the future. For now, I'm just trying to crank out as much as I can.
My strategy was partly inspired by UK Column (who I only discovered thanks to you, by the way).
On the ABOUT tab on their website, you will find this:
"Why should I trust the UK Column?
Put simply, you shouldn't.
The question of whether or not to trust a news organisation is a false choice.
Making such a choice is promoted by government, the old media, and two new organisation types: the fact checker and the trust provider. It disenfranchises readers, viewers and listeners. It is based on the principle that if you trust the media organisation you are visiting, there is no need for you to check the information they present.
So we ask you not to trust us. Instead, view everything published here with a critical eye. Where possible, primary source material is made available for everything we publish: check it; make up your own mind."
Basically, this is why I make so many absurd claims in my writing. It's not just to be entertaining, or because I'm crazy. It's also to keep people on their toes. I am highly influenced by Alan Watts, and he explains that Zen Buddhism was developed to trick people into achieving enlightenment. In my own way, I'm doing the same thing.
The fact of the matter is that because people create reality with their beliefs, the very fact of believing that something is hard makes it more difficult.
This is point that that Allen Carr makes in his classic book on how to stop smoking.
Are you familiar with the work of Emile Coue? He was a great French hypnotherapist. Most of the best pop psychology, like Napoleon Hill for instance, derives from Coue's ideas, especially the Law of Reverse Effect. I think that was what Bukowski was getting at when he chose the words Don't Try to adorn his headstone.
So anyway, thank you for getting it!
You've given me a lot to think about and I plan to respond to your comment in more detail tomorrow.
Thank you for giving me the time of day!
I know you are but what am I?
Just kidding... This is probably an appropriate time to say ALL PRAISE IS DUE TO ALLAH.
Exactly! Being a hero to your niece and nephew is a great place to start!
Then you can move on to being your own hero.