@thegap same answers you received in this thread a couple of years ago.

As far as applying useful stuff to your life, that's mostly determined by you, what jives with your experience, and what your goals are (and you're allowed to change your mind).

In other words: just start trying and applying stuff. Mindful application. Observe, orient, decide, act. Then back to observe again, and continue the OODA loop.

As for some of the links not working, can you tell us the specific titles? Some of us who remember what to look for might be able to dig it back up. Caveat: we all have lives, careers, etc and don't do this shit for a living, so don't expect instantaneous results (or even a response every time).

What really sucks is the internet as it used to be is kind of dying, and a lot of good shit is getting lost. The entire internet is turning into about a half-dozen social media sites posting screenshots of shit from the other sites, and AI-generated garbage.

Where should I start with TRP? Looking for a proper roadmap without all the bullshit

Hello everyone I'm 18 years old, turning 19 soon, and I'm interested in learning more about TRP.

Tbh I kind of understand what TRP is about, or at least I think I do but I still want to get the basics right and properly understand everything. I've come across a lot of posts and articles but I'm honestly pretty confused about where to start and what I should actually focus on.

I also don't want to become one of those guys who just reads about this stuff endlessly like a retard without actually applying anything to his life. I'm into self-improvement, and I want to improve myself, get better with girls, become more confident, and have that playboy type of lifestyle lowkey lol. I don't want to get overly attached to girls or end up hung up on one person for years.

There's also this one girl from years ago (my unicorn, if you know what I mean) that I still want to move on from completely. I want to get to a point where I'm not emotionally stuck on someone from my past and can move forward with my life.

So I'm looking for something practical and structured, not just a bunch of random posts to read.

Is there a proper roadmap or guide for learning TRP from the basics and actually applying the useful parts to your life? Should I start with the sidebar, a particular reading list, or something else entirely? A lot of the sidebar links don't seem to work anymore.

I'd really appreciate recommendations on where to start, what to focus on first, and what I can do in practice rather than spending months just consuming content.

I'm looking for the actual useful stuff without all the unnecessary bullshit, so any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks!

@mattyanon Quite agree. I was not giving them a pass but doing the very opposite. I was saying that it is a fairly normal condition, suffered by millions of woman, so a normal condition caused by natural hormone changes can't possibly be an excuse for utterly aberrant behaviour. It's not normal to go and kill your family because you got depressed by the natural process of having a family. Millions of women do not do this when they get PND, so to argue its an excuse is nonsense.

The millions of men who are depressed don't kill their families either. A similar thing would be to say "Got depressed when wife left me, so killed kids".

What is being attempted by her defence team is "because vagina, so pussy pass" Only women get Post natal depression (men just get depressed when the new mother makes their life hell, has mood swings, blames it on them and then ignores them except for treating them as a home appliance). Because only women get this common medical condition, its a feminist issue.

The logic of "because vagina", so pussy pass" is never good. The terrible implications of this nonsense should be stood up to and made an example of.

Violence as the Collapse of Power: Arendt, Mao, and the Limits of the Gun

Taken, dir. Pierre Morel (EuropaCorp, 2008), promotional poster. The film encapsulates the assertion that coercive organizations mistake the capacity for violence for power, but a trained adversary fighting from genuine human connection — a father, a daughter, a relationship no threat can replicate — will dismantle them every time. As Arendt writes, “violence appears where power is in jeopardy.” The traffickers were always in jeopardy.

Why Kidnapping Your Enemy’s Daughter Is Almost Always a Bad Plan

There is a scene early in Taken, the 2008 action thriller starring Liam Neeson, that most viewers experience as pure setup: bad guys take the girl, good guy goes to get her back. Simple. Satisfying. Pass the popcorn.

But watch it again through the Arendtian lens, and something more interesting emerges. The Albanian trafficking network that abducts Kim Mills does not just make a moral error. It makes a structural one — a mistake so fundamental that their defeat is essentially guaranteed from the moment they take her. They confuse violence for power. And if Hannah Arendt, one of the twentieth century’s most important political thinkers, were watching from the couch beside you, she would nod slowly and say: of course they lost. Snub out her cigarette: They never had power to begin with.

This essay uses Taken (2008) as a window into one of the most important, and most consistently misunderstood, distinctions in political philosophy: the difference between power and violence. Along the way, we will reckon with Mao Zedong’s famous insistence that political power stems from the barrel of a gun, draw on what communication studies tells us about why threats only work until they don’t, and arrive at a conclusion that is both philosophically serious and, frankly, useful the next time someone tries to hold something over you.

What the Traffickers Actually Built

Let’s start with the villains, because Arendt would.

The Albanian trafficking network in Taken is, on the surface, formidable. It operates across international borders. It has corrupted French law enforcement. It moves human beings through layers of intermediaries , scouts at the airport, handlers in apartments, buyers at auctions, with apparent efficiency. It has money, reach, and a demonstrated willingness to kill. By any conventional measure, this looks like an organization with power.

But look more carefully at what holds it together. Every relationship within the network is coercive. The women it traffics are held by force. The low-level operatives comply out of fear or financial desperation. The corrupt police offer their cooperation because they have been bought or threatened. There is not a single person in the entire structure who is there because they believe in something, who would show up if the money stopped or the threat was removed, who has any genuine stake in the organization’s survival beyond their own immediate self-interest.

This is not a minor detail. It is the entire ballgame.

Hannah Arendt, in her 1970 work On Violence, draws a distinction that cuts right to the heart of what we are watching. Power, she argues, is not the ability to compel. It is the ability to act collectively, “the human ability not just to act but to act in concert.” Real power belongs to a group and exists only as long as that group genuinely coheres. It is built from shared belief, mutual investment, and willing participation. Violence, by contrast, is what you use when you do not have any of that. It can produce compliance. It cannot produce cohesion. And compliance without cohesion is a house of cards.

The trafficking network is a house of cards. Bryan Mills is the wind...

Article continues here: e-schomann.medium.com/violence-as-the-collapse-of-power-arendt-mao-and-the-limits-of-the-gun-3380c4c1f884

#2026 #Medium #ErikSchomann #Article #2008 #Film #Taken #LiamNeeson #LucBesson #World #US #America #Europe #Ireland #France #Military #Intelligence #History #Warfare #Vehicles #Transportation #Weapons #Crime #Trafficking #Firearms #PsychologicalWarfare #SpiritualWarfare #BiologicalWarfare #CultureWar #EconomicWar #BureaucraticWarfare #KineticWarfare #UnrestrictedWarfare

@Vermillion-Rx One thing I would say is that women paying this evil woman money is a sign of the mercenary nature of many women. It is strongly to their benefit to be able to claim victimhood when performing their only unique selling point -motherhood. So they want to back her. She makes them all look good. If she gets away with it, it gives them all license to be worse.

Because men can't be mothers, women get away with claiming motherhood is a terrible suffering. When I was a single parent working full time for a few months it was bliss. I have no idea where all the suffering comes in. My mother always told me how she hated women who were saying they dreaded the summer holidays and were happy when children went back to school. My mother always said "why have children if you are going to be such a bad mother. I love it when my kids are home." I always told my kids the same thing. "I like having you around"

Granted some women do get post natal depression but you know millions of people get depression. Millions of women post natal depression. Its what you do about it that counts. Many women like the idea they get it. Most mothers like to flirt with the idea they have it because it might give them more leeway, get them more help.

It is a bit like Briffault's law. Women have a relationship with this witch and give her money because they see it being to their advantage. They should be urging making a large bonfire to put her on top of but they donate money. The bonfire would remind them of duty that must not be failed. However, if she wins, she will make them all look good.